It seems to be quite difficult to find comparative life expectancy measurements for anything other than life expectancy at birth - which is a very problematic and misleading measurement. Have you seen any such studies?
Not sure how useful a life expectancy measurement is. Take something like Glasgow. We've seen reductions in life expectancy in areas, but that reflects numerous social issues beyond the healthcare system. Amenable morality, in contrast, has been used for some time as a means to assess healthcare success (or, in contrast, inefficiency). A recent example is Nolte and McKee (2012, Variations in amenable mortality: a comparison of sixteen high-income countries, Public Health Forum)
Most people in Canada do have added private insurance to fill in the gaps, although I doubt it is cheap. Everything is more expensive here. My car insurance costs 3 times more here in Canada. People on Canadian disability get full coverage. The rich get no special treatment here. Many Canadians go to the USA and other Countries for medical treatment rather than wait many months or years for treatment in Canada.
The average life expectancy in Canada is about 2.6 years more. I guess health care in most places is fine for younger folks. It's when you get old where the discrepancies really stand out.
Could be, but I am not sure. There are probably many reasons for people living longer on average in Canada... like tougher smoking laws in general, alcohol is not as abundant in Canada and it costs way more. Those are just two possibilities I could think of but I bet there are more.
No, socialization requires actual collective control and management over the workplace - everyday workplace democracy. Nationalization retains the capitalist mode of production and so doesn't fit the bill of socialization.
No, the capitalist model requires individual - not government or societal control over the workplace. If the people control the government and the government controls business, the people then control the business, even if indirectly.
This is why, in many situations, it is better for patients to pay out of pocket. When you are the one paying for the treatment, the control over medical decissions is in your hands. When you are heavily taxed to pay for a government run scheme, and you are not the one directly paying for treatment, you have much less control over the medical decissions. The hospital does not have any incentive to keep you content and satisfied, or provide timely treatment.
The capitalist model requires the creation of economic rent through labour underpayment. That can be delivered through private or public ownership. One should also never forget that the key economic agent in capitalism is the government
The Crystal Lab uses robots... Diamond to shine light on infections 17 February 2013 - The UK's national synchrotron facility - the Diamond Light Source near Oxford - is to become a world centre for studying the structure of viruses and bacteria that cause serious disease.
New vaccine for EV71 works... Hand, foot and mouth disease: First vaccine 28 May 2013 - The first vaccine which protects children against hand, foot and mouth disease has been reported by scientists in China.