Health System Analysis- Mexico and the United States

Andrew Nelson
IAFS4500
5/3/2014
Final Paper
Health System Analysis: Mexico and the United States
Given Mexico’s proximity to the United States and strong relationship with regards to
trade and foreign investment, one could assume that Mexico’s economic development would
be similar to that of the United States, however, Mexico remains a relatively poor country
characterized by huge disparities in wealth and large sectors of the population living in poverty.
Economic differences between the United States and Mexico can be attributed to the very
different political and economic institutions that exist in the two countries. While the political
and economic challenges facing each country are inherently different, they share a similar
challenge of dealing with a population who continues to pack on the pounds with each
successive generation. According to the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), Mexico
is now the most obese heavily populated country in the world, surpassing the United States.
While some may attribute these respective obesity epidemics to separate factors in each
country, there is no denying the interconnectedness of these epidemics, given the large
number of Mexican immigrants living in the United States, and the high consumption rate of
US-based fast food in Mexico. Given the intersected nature of these obesity epidemics it is
important to understand the similarities and differences in how each country’s health system
combats obesity. Internalized stereotypes on the part of US citizens characterize Mexico as
corrupt, dangerous, unsanitary, impoverished, and medically outdated. However, as one begins
to delve deeper into the facts, it is clear that the respective health systems in each country
share many similarities. The purpose of this paper is to compare and contrast the US health

system with that of Mexico, specifically focusing on the opportunities and challenges facing
each country with regards to controlling obesity. This paper will analyze and evaluate the health
systems of each country, and will conclude with my own recommendations on how Mexico and
the United States can learn from each other’s experiences, and improve their individual health
systems with regards to controlling obesity. Engaging in a comprehensive cross-cultural analysis
such as this requires an accurate representation of the present health systems on both sides of
the US-Mexico border, and relevant perspectives from those who have experienced both health
systems first hand.
In recent years, the number of people along the US-Mexico border seeking cross-border
medical care has increased significantly. Contrary to popular perceptions, this cross-border
medical care movement is not flowing north from Mexico into the United States, but rather,
South from the US into Mexicoi. Mexico is marketed to many seasonal tourists and border
residents as a practical solution to the growing costs of medical care and limited access to
insurance in the United States, while offering shorter waiting times, international accreditation,
and unique office amenities, such as massaging chairsii. Although the Mexican medical system
offers unique advantages that are not available in the United States, the general American
perception of Mexican society, as unable to provide modern services to its citizens, is also
applied to their medical system. In order to overcome these perceptions, the Mexican medical
system has made a concerted effort to replicate certain aspects of the US medical systemthat
American patients perceive as suggestive of a high quality medical experience, such as
international accreditation, using the English language, and modern technologyiii. According to
a 2010 study titled, US-Mexico: Imports and Exports Health services, an estimated 19.9% of US-

Mexico border residents have sought medical care in Mexico, and 29.4% have purchased
pharmaceuticals in Mexico, with an annual expenditure between 194 and 388 million dollarsiv.
These statistics clearly show an American demand for Mexican health services, but now the
question becomes: What are the factors influencing this large scale cross-border medical care
movement?
In 1983, under duress from the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank,
Mexico’s healthcare system began implementing decentralization and privatization efforts,
resulting in an underfunded and understaffed public healthcare system, while the private
healthcare system benefitted from proper funding, better doctors, newer facilities, and a higher
concentration of US patients who generally paid more than Mexican patientsv. This shift to a
more decentralized and privatized healthcare system in Mexico has promoted the
establishment of medical border towns, which according to Alex Oberle and Daniel Arreola, can
be defined as an area that facilitates access to and profits from foreign consumption of its
medical services. These medical border towns provide cheap, easy access to health services,
and cater to the specific needs of their predominantly American clientele. This means providing
a blend of good care and good services, which equates to modern biomedical care that is not
altered by local cultural valuesvi. Often times US patients who cross the Mexican border in
search of medical care associate high quality institutions with those that are similar to the
healthcare institutions that are found in the United States. Thus, by incorporating aspects
similar to US medical providers into their practices, Mexican practitioners reassure US patients
that the medical experience they are receiving is similar to what they will find on the other side
of the border. The article titled, Shadowing Modernity: The Art of Providing Mexican

Healthcare for Americans, offers several firsthand accounts of US medical patients seeking
medical care in Mexico. Bud and Paula, a retired couple from Iowa prefer to travel to Mexico
for many of their healthcare needs because according to them, “the healthcare is less
expensive and the same as is the US.” Upon receiving treatment for fibromyalgia at a Mexican
medical facility, Paula, a retired nurse stated that, “the doctor who treated her was trained in
Europe, published in journals, and spoke good English”, all of which encouraged her to claim
that the care she received was similar to what she would have received in the US for half of the
pricevii. This passage shows that the increasing demand for Mexican healthcare services by US
patients is undeniable, begging the question: what is it about the US health system that makes
people want to travel to Mexico in order to receive medical care? In order to answer this
question one must have a better understanding of the US health systemas a whole.
Healthcare in the United States can be defined as an intricate mixture of private and
public care, in which the government runs military and veteran healthcare systems, the Indian
health service, and several programs for vulnerable populations, such as Medicare and
Medicaidviii. Medicaid covers the impoverished population, while Medicare covers the elderly
and certain disabled low-income populationsix. With regards to private healthcare, private
insurance is usually provided by an employer or purchased by individualsx. While healthcare in
the United States is wide-ranging, it is also extremely expensive, exemplified by the fact that in
2008, according to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), 16%
of the US’s GDP was spent on healthcare, compared to the OECD average of about 9%xi.
However, according to the World Health Organization, in comparison to other industrialized
countries the US ranks 37th with regards to health outcomesxii. While the US government

spends a great deal of money each year on healthcare, the healthcare systemcontinues to
suffer from unequal access, overcrowded medical facilities, and relatively high deductibles,
premiums, and co-paysxiii. In the United States, health insurance is treated as a market good
and, thus, its quality is connected to its price, leading to various levels of access and carexiv. But
what happens to those people who do not fall under the various federal programs such as
Medicare and Medicaid, or do not have access to health insurance because they cannot afford
it, or it is not provided by the company they work for? Are they simply left to die in the streets?
There exists a number of social safety nets in the United States for those lacking
individual insurance, work-related insurance, or do not adhere to the specific categories that
are required to gain access to federal programs. For example, hospitals, clinics, and private
practitioners can be compensated for treating those lacking health insurance if these people
are citizens or long-term residents and fall under certain categories such as, being disabled,
very old, very young, or very poorxv. A number of states and counties around the US have
expanded these social safety nets to include programs that do not require proof of citizenship
or a legal permanent address in order to receive carexvi. Those who utilize these expanded
social safety nets often receive care that is variable in quality and often find themselves being
treated and released in a quick manor. While emergency rooms are legally obligated to provide
care to those in need, the bills and charges associated with these services can be financially
disastrous, especially to poor patients, leading many people to avoid these services even when
they are in desperate need of carexvii. Although the network of clinics that deliver care to those
who are uninsured provide basic medical services, some assistance with chronic conditions, and
programs centered on preventing the spread of infectious diseases, such as AIDS, patients in

need of long-term intensive care, such as diabetics, face extreme barriers and long waiting
periods, in which the fate of their health is largely left up to chancexviii. According to an estimate
by the Urban Institute, about 27,000 preventable deaths occur each year in the United States
due to lack of health insurance (as cited in Krugman, 2008). This statistic is staggering
considering the relatively large amount of money the United States spends on healthcare each
year, however, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act seeks to address the underlying
problems contributing to the large number of preventable deaths due to lack of health
insurance in the United States.
On March 23rd, 2010, President Barack Obama signed into law the Patient Protection
and Affordable Care Act, commonly referred to as Obamacare, in an effort to ensure better
access to health care for many Americans through expanded public and private insurance
coverage, which includes basic preventative care, minimum standards for health insurance
policies, health insurance exchanges, and the establishment of a same rate offer regardless of
pre-existing conditions or sexxix. The Affordable Care Act requires most Americans to secure a
private insurance policy that meets federal standards or pay a penalty, which is known as the
“Shared Responsibility Payment”, and in 2016 the penalty will be greater than 2.5% of
household income, or $2,085 for a family, which is still less than the insurance paymentxx. While
the Affordable Care Act seeks to reduce the costs associated with healthcare for individuals and
the government, and expand both public and private insurance coverage, increased access to
health insurance does not guarantee better health outcomes, especially considering the fact
that more than 85 cents of every dollar spent on health in the US are spent on the treatment
and management of chronic diseases, such as those caused by preventable conditions related

to tobacco use and obesityxxi. Although health spending on the treatment of chronic diseases
associated with preventable conditions such as obesity is extremely high in the United States,
there exists a great deal of confusion as to who is responsible for controlling obesity, and how
these obesity control mechanisms relate to the US health system. According to J.M. McGinnis,
more than 60% of a person’s health is determined by lifestyle, behavior, and environmental and
social factors, and not by what happens in the healthcare provider’s officexxii. Primary
prevention techniques, or policy and systemchanges that reduce exposure and risk factors, are
extremely effective at keeping disease and injury from happening in the first place and lead to
reductions in healthcare and social costs of treating and managing disease and injury after they
occur (as cited in Frieden, 2010)xxiii. One of the most important impacts of the Affordable Care
Act is that it opens the door to transform the US health system to ensure that primary
prevention is implanted within the health system, benefitting patients, providers, and
communitiesxxiv.
Currently, the primary obesity control mechanism that is incorporated into the United
States health system is the use of the Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set
(HEDIS). HEDIS is a widely used set of performance measures that are intended to reduce the
costs of healthcare and improve the overall quality of care. HEDIS measures health plan
performances regarding the measurement of body mass index for adolescents, children, and
adults, and also for the nutrition and physical activity counseling of children and adolescentsxxv.
In medicine, “what gets measured gets done”, thus, the new obesity-related measures are
intended to improve healthcare providers’ attention to obesity care, treatment, and
preventionxxvi. In July 2004, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid revised obesity’s status as

not being considered a disease in order to permit Medicare to consider covering payments for
obesity-related treatments (as cited in CMS, 2004)xxvii. Although Medicaid is managed at the
state level, the Medicare ruling enabled some states to broaden their Medicaid programs,
increasing the coverage of services for the prevention and treatment of obesity, for example,
West Virginia and Tennessee offer both partial and full reimbursement for participation in
Weight Watchers programs (as cited in Unicare, 2007, and Tenncare, 2005)xxviii. By mid-2008 it
was estimated that 11 states exhibited strong evidence that they provided reimbursement for
behavioral and nutritional therapy to overweight and obese children in Medicaid programs,
while in 8 states, Medicaid programs covered 3 types of obesity treatment: drug therapy,
bariatric surgery, and assessment and consultationxxix. Although the US health system
incentivizes obesity prevention and control mechanisms, these mechanisms are not widely
incorporated and are largely determined and implemented to varying degrees on a state to
state basis. Thus, there exists a great opportunity to increase the use of obesity prevention and
control mechanisms in the US health system because the practice of healthcare is licensed and
regulated, whereas the weight loss industry is notxxx.
So far, this paper has outlined the US health systemand has shown the underdeveloped
status of obesity prevention and control mechanisms within this system. The focus of this paper
now transitions to the Mexican health system and the various obesity prevention and control
mechanisms that exist within this system.
Healthcare in Mexico is predominantly public with some unregulated private institutions
that operate on the ability of patients to pay for these services. Social security organizations in
Mexico are funded by the government, the employer, and the employee, and cover many

workers, whereas the Ministry of Health, the State Health Services, and the IMSS-
Oportunidades Program provide care to those without insurancexxxi. The Mexican healthcare
system is considered to be highly fragmented because there exists a number of disconnected
social insurance providers for employees in the salaried labor market, whereas those who are
not covered under the social security systemare left with few optionsxxxii. Access to social
security institutions in Mexico continues to be based on employment status, and although
these institutions are framed as social insurance, each one functions as a miniature health
service, in which there is no guaranteed package of services, and affiliates must go to clinics
operated by their insurance fund, suggesting that there is very little competition among
providersxxxiii. The Ministry of Health, which is responsible for providing healthcare services to
the population uninsured by social security, has decentralized the supply of care for these
groups, in which states now operate individual health service systems of public hospitals and
clinics that vary in quality and the amount of expendable resources they have. According to the
Lancet article titled, Assessing the effect of the 2001-06 Mexican health reform, in 2001, nearly
half of the total Mexican population was uninsured. In response to this problem the Mexican
government created the Seguro popular, a voluntary health insurance program that is funded
through financial resources contributed by the federal and state governments for each newly
affiliated family, who pay a small premium each yearxxxiv. The Seguro Popular expands health
insurance coverage for a package of essential interventions to uninsured people, increases
public spending on health, and creates a fund to protect families from catastrophic health
expendituresxxxv. One of the most interesting aspects of the Mexican healthcare reforms and
the Seguro Popular is that resources flow to the State Ministries of Health as a function of

affiliation, in which the State Ministries of Health must insure that affiliates are satisfied with
service delivery in order re-affiliate each yearxxxvi. This systemprovides incentives, in the form
of securing annual affiliations, for states to provide high quality care and increased coverage.
According to the Lancet article titled, Assessing the effect of the 2001-06 Mexican health reform,
Mexican healthcare reforms and the Seguro Popular have had a positive effect on Mexico’s
health system in that healthcare inequalities have been reduced, effective coverage is
increasing, and catastrophic spending has fallen. Although the Mexican healthcare reforms and
the Seguro Popular have had a positive effect on the Mexican health system, the effectiveness
of these reforms have been inhibited by structural inefficiencies and premium payment issues.
Currently, the Mexican health systemis characterized by weak infrastructure and insufficient
human resources which continues to limit the ability of the Seguro Popular to provide
guaranteed servicesxxxvii. Another problem that Mexican authorities are currently dealing with is
the fact that many individuals are not willing to pay for this insurance program. In an effort to
meet affiliation targets, states purposefully misclassified those whose incomes were high
enough to afford the premium as poor, enabling them to receive care without paying for itxxxviii.
Although the Mexican government has classified 93-97% of Seguro Popular affiliates as poor
since the program began in 2004, independent analysts have found that only 46% of affiliates
were properly classified as poor (as cited in Scott 2006)xxxix. This premium payment issue is
particularly important to the financial sustainability of the Seguro Popular because this program
requires contributions from the non-poor in order to function properly, which so far, has not
materialized. While universal health coverage has been achieved in Mexico, it remains to be
seen as to whether or not the Mexican health systemwill be able to sustain itself in the future.

The financial instability of the Mexican health system is particularly unsettling given the
fact that the main causes of healthcare utilization in Mexico stem from diabetes and
cardiovascular disease, accounting for 9.5% of care for the uninsured and 13.5% among the
insured (as cited in Arredondo, 2005)xl. According to the Mexican Secretary of Health, in 2008,
the direct costs associated with treating weight-related NCDs was about $ US 3.2 million,
representing 33.2% of the total healthcare expenditurexli. These non-communicable diseases
are directly associated with preventable risk factors such as physical inactivity, improper diet,
and obesity. Although the growth in the prevalence of obesity and weight-related NCDs costs
the Mexican health system millions of dollars each year, the Mexican government has done
very little to promote obesity prevention programs. With the prevalence of obesity, weight-
related diseases, and the associated economic burden in Mexico expected to drastically
increase in the coming years, the question remains: What is the Mexican health systemdoing in
order to prevent and control obesity?
In Mexico, about 73.5% of the current heath budget is going towards treatment, with
about 2.7% of this budget going towards prevention and public healthxlii. Given this information,
it is clear that the Mexican health system should reallocate its budget to invest more in obesity
prevention. In 2001, the Mexican Social Security Institute (IMSS) created a preventative care
program (PrevenIMSS) that provides health education, nutritional information, disease
prevention techniques, and screening for weight-related diseases, including type 2 diabetes and
hypertensionxliii. PrevenMISS also provides support groups with the aim of improving lifestyle
practices through education about exercise and diet to people who are overweight or obesexliv.
This program was able to spread its message of the importance of preventative care to the

Mexican population through a significant investment in media advertisements, including both
television and radio adsxlv. Although the PrevenMISS program achieved wide reaching
recognition from the Mexican population, investing in a unified national campaign that included
the three main health systems would have produced more noticeable and sustainable resultsxlvi.
In response to the increased consumption of sugary beverages among the Mexican population,
in 2008, the Ministry of Health established an expert panel to develop recommendations on
beverage intake for a healthy life, developing a graphic representation known as the “healthy
beverage pitcher” which outlines the recommended consumption levels of certain beveragesxlvii.
This graphic representation was widely distributed through social networks and media outlets,
eventually becoming part of the curriculum of the national primary education systemin which
this graphic is displayed within multiple textbooksxlviii. After years of collecting data and
reviewing experiences, the Mexican Ministry of Health, with help from international experts
and stakeholders, developed the National Agreement for Healthy Nutrition (ANSA) which
identified ten objectives for a national policy aimed at preventing obesity and weight-related
diseasesxlix. The agreement was signed by 15 government agencies from the fields of health,
education, economics, agriculture, labor, social welfare, social development, along with NGOS,
and the food and beverage industry, which agreed to work together to implement this national
strategyl. Many of these obesity control objectives are based on the modification of
environments and the transformation of individual habits outside of the health system and thus
require harmonization between industry interests and public health objectives, which has
proved to be particularly challenging in Mexicoli.

So far, this paper has outlined both the US health system and the Mexican Health
system, and has identified the challenges and opportunities that each country faces with
regards to obesity control and prevention. Although both Mexico and the United States have
exhibited a concerted effort to combat obesity, it is clear that there is room for improvement,
especially within their respective health systems.
The primary focus of most obesity control and prevention strategies is the management
of the risk environment, which is critical for any country’s approach to reducing the incidence of
obesity and weight-related NCDs. However, this paper does not focus specifically on the obesity
control and prevention mechanisms within the risk environment, but rather, obesity control
and prevention mechanisms within the health system. Although in order to run a successful
obesity prevention campaign, overlap between these two realms is certainly necessary, the
next paragraph will focus specifically on recommendations for improving both the US and the
Mexican health systems with regards to preventing and controlling obesity.
Leading health experts overwhelmingly agree that prevention is more effective than
treatment alone in reducing obesity and should be addressed as a priority in the public health
sectorlii. Health systems in Mexico and the United States must identify the determining factors
for obesity and use these factors to develop a large scale, long-term strategy to combat obesity.
In Mexico, the preventative care program known as PrevenMISS must be expanded to include
all of the health systems rather than just the Mexican Social Security Institute. The expansion of
this program will include a mandatory consultation for every Mexican citizen on proper exercise
and diet practices upon receiving their annual checkup, with the continuation of these
consultations with each successive visit to a medical facility. The Mexican Health system should

also utilize the US strategy of incentivizing participation in weight loss programs, such as weight
watchers, by having healthcare providers compensate all citizens who participate in these
programs. In compensating those who participate in weight loss programs, Mexican healthcare
providers will spend less money on treating weight-related NCDs, and will also receive
increased funding from the Mexican government based on the number of people who
participate in weight loss programs. Currently, the primary challenge facing the Mexican health
system with regards to preventing obesity is the fact that behavioral and lifestyle changes are
largely left up to the individual to initiate outside of the health system, requiring the
harmonization between industry interests and public health objectives. In order to circumvent
these harmonization efforts the Mexican Health systemshould implement a universal payment
premium reduction strategy, in which individuals who lose weight will incur a reduced premium
payment according to the amount of weight that they lose. Another aspect of the US health
system that can be incorporated into the Mexican health system with regards to obesity control
is the use of the Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS). By incorporating
the HEDIS into their health system Mexican healthcare providers will be able to improve
performances regarding the measurement of body mass index for adolescents, children, and
adults, as well as for the nutrition and physical activity counseling of children and adolescents.
These enhanced measurements will allow Mexican healthcare providers to better identify areas
of improvement regarding obesity prevention and control. The primary challenge facing the
United States with regards to implementing obesity prevention and control mechanisms, is that
these mechanisms are not widely incorporated and are largely determined and implemented to
varying degrees on a state to state basis. Thus, the US health system should implement a large

scale strategy across all 50 states to increase coverage for obesity related treatments, and
reimburse individuals who participate in behavioral and nutritional therapy programs. The US
health system should also incorporate the Mexican strategy of implementing preventative care
programs similar to PrevenMISS. These programs will include the identification of overweight
and obese individuals through proper measurements and will provide free mandatory exercise
and diet consultations upon each visit to a medical facility. Another strategy that the US health
system can borrow from Mexico is the development of healthy food and beverage consumption
graphics similar to the “healthy beverage pitcher”. These graphic representations should be
expanded to include both food and beverage intake recommendations that are specific to
individuals body composition and lifestyle practices. For example, upon each yearly checkup an
individual’s doctor will create a graphic representation of the healthy food and beverage
consumption levels specific to the individual’s lifestyle and body composition. Through these
practices, patient and doctor relationships will be strengthened which will allow for a more
personal medical experience, similar to what is experienced by the many US health tourists who
cross the border into Mexico in order to receive medical care.
While these recommendations are quite broad, it is important to recognize the need for
such large-scale interventions regarding the prevention and control of obesity given the highly
fragmented implementation status of obesity prevention and control mechanisms in Mexico
and the United States. In order to continue to prevent and control obesity, Mexico and the
United States must identify the multiple settings in which obesity prevention and control
mechanisms can be implemented, and should promote a combined strategy that seeks to

influence both the risk environment and the health system with regards to preventing and
controlling obesity.
i
Dalstrom, Matthew. "Shadowing Modernity:The Art of ProvidingMexicanHealthcare for Americans." Ethnos 78.1 (2013):75-
98. Print.
ii
98. Print.
iii
98. Print.
iv
98. Print.
v
98. Print.
vi
98. Print.
vii
98. Print.
viii
Baldwin, Sarah. "Healthcare Systems AroundThe World." Global Health (1937-514X) 4.1 (2011): 1-13. Academic Search
Premier. Web. 30 Apr. 2014.
ix
x
xi
xii
O'Connor, JeanC., et al. "Paying For Prevention:A CriticalOpportunityFor Public Health." Journal Of Law, Medicine &
Ethics 41.(2013): 69-72.Academic Search Premier. Web. 1 May2014.
xiii
xiv Portes, Alejandro, DonaldLight, and Patricia Fernández-Kelly. "The U.S. HealthSystemandImmigration:An Institutional
Interpretation." Sociological Forum 24.3 (2009):487-514. Print
xv Portes, Alejandro, DonaldLight, and Patricia Fernández-Kelly. "The U.S. HealthSystemandImmigration:An Institutional
xvi Portes, Alejandro, DonaldLight, and Patricia Fernández-Kelly. "The U.S. HealthSystemandImmigration:An Institutional
xvii Portes, Alejandro, DonaldLight, and Patricia Fernández-Kelly. "The U.S. HealthSystemandImmigration:An Institutional
xviii Portes, Alejandro, DonaldLight, and Patricia Fernández-Kelly. "The U.S. HealthSystemandImmigration:An Institutional
xix
xx
HOFF, JOAN S. "Obamacare." Independent Review 18.1 (2013):5-20.Business Source Complete. Web. 1 May2014.

xxi
O'Connor, JeanC., et al. "Paying For Prevention:A CriticalOpportunity For Public Health." Journal Of Law, Medicine &
xxii
xxiii
xxiv
xxv
Dietz, William H., Donald E. Benken, and AliciaS. Hunter. "Public Health Law andthe PreventionandControl of
Obesity." MilbankQuarterly 87.1 (2009): 215-27. Print.
xxvi
xxvii
xxviii
xxix Monroe, Judith A., Janet L. Collins, Pamela S. Maier, ThomasMerrill, Georges C. Benjamin, andAnthonyD. Moulton. "Legal
Preparedness for ObesityPrevention and Control:A Framework for Action." The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 37 (2009):
15-23. Print
xxx
xxxi
xxxii
"OECD Reviews of HealthSystems Mexico." OECD, 2005. Web. 02 May2014.
xxxiii
Lakin, JasonM. "The EndOf Insurance?Mexico's Seguro Popular, 2001 - 2007." Journal Of Health Politics, Policy & Law 35.3
(2010): 313-352. Business Source Complete. Web. 30 Apr. 2014.
xxxiv
xxxv
xxxvi
Gakidou, Emmanuela, Rafael Lozano, Eduardo González-Pier, Jesse Abbott-Klafter, JeremyT. Barofsky, Chloe Bryson-Cahn,
DennisM. Feehan, Diana K. Lee, Hector Hernández-Llamas, andChristopher Jl Murray. "Assessing the Effect of the 2001–06
MexicanHealthReform:An Interim Report Card." The Lancet 368.9550 (2006):1920-935. Print..
xxxvii
Lakin, JasonM. "The EndOf Insurance?Mexico's Seguro Popular, 2001 - 2007." Journal Of Health Politics, Policy &
Law 35.3 (2010):313-352. Business Source Complete. Web. 30 Apr. 2014.
xxxviii
Lakin, JasonM. "The EndOf Insurance?Mexico's Seguro Popular, 2001 - 2007." Journal Of Health Politics, Policy &
Law 35.3 (2010):313-352. Business Source Complete. Web. 30 Apr. 2014.
xxxix
Lakin, JasonM. "The EndOf Insurance?Mexico's Seguro Popular, 2001 - 2007." Journal Of Health Politics, Policy & Law 35.3
(2010): 313-352. Business Source Complete. Web. 30 Apr. 2014.

xl
Méndez-Hernández, Pablo, et al. "A Workplace Physical ActivityProgram At A Public UniversityInMexico Can Reduce Medical
Costs AssociatedWithType 2 Diabetes AndHypertension." Salud Pública De México 54.1 (2012):20-27. Business Source
Complete. Web. 30 Apr. 2014.
xli
Rtveladze, Ketevan, Tim Marsh, SimonBarquera, Luz Maria Sanchez Romero, David Levy, GuillermoMelendez, Laura Webber,
FannyKilpi, Klim Mcpherson, andMartinBrown. "ObesityPrevalence in Mexico:Impact onHealthandEconomic
Burden."Public Health Nutrition 17.01 (2014): 233-39. Print.
xlii
Rtveladze, Ketevan, Tim Marsh, Simon Barquera, Luz Maria Sanchez Romero, David Levy, Guillermo Melendez, Laura Webber,
FannyKilpi, Klim Mcpherson, andMartinBrown. "ObesityPrevalence in Mexico:Impact onHealthandEconomic
Burden."Public Health Nutrition 17.01 (2014):233-39. Print.
xliii
Castro-Rios, A., S. V. Doubova, S. Martinez-Valverde, I. Coria-Soto, andR. Perez-Cuevas. "PotentialSavings InMexico From
Screening AndPreventionFor EarlyDiabetesAnd Hypertension." Health Affairs 29.12 (2010):2171-179. Print.
xliv
Castro-Rios, A., S. V. Doubova, S. Martinez-Valverde, I. Coria-Soto, andR. Perez-Cuevas. "PotentialSavings InMexico From
Screening AndPreventionFor EarlyDiabetesAnd Hypertension." Health Affairs 29.12 (2010):2171-179. Print.
xlv
Barquera, S., I. Campos, andJ. A. Rivera. "MexicoAttempts to Tackle Obesity:The Process, Results, Push Backs andFuture
Challenges."ObesityReviews 14 (2013):69-78. Print.
xlvi
xlvii
xlviii
xlix Barquera, S., I. Campos, andJ. A. Rivera. "Mexico Attempts to Tackle Obesity:The Process, Results, PushBacks and Future
Challenges."ObesityReviews 14 (2013):69-78. Print
l
Latinovic, L., and L. Rodriguez Cabrera. "Public HealthStrategyagainst Overweight and ObesityinMexico’s National
Agreement for Nutritional Health." International Journal of Obesity 37.12 (2013):1616. Print.
li Barquera, S., I. Campos, andJ. A. Rivera. "Mexico Attempts to Tackle Obesity:The Process, Results, PushBacks and Future
lii
Aranceta, Javier, et al. "PreventionOf Overweight AndObesityFrom A Public HealthPerspective." Nutrition
Reviews 67.(2009):S83-S88.Academic Search Premier. Web. 1 May2014.

Health System Analysis- Mexico and the United States

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (19)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to Health System Analysis- Mexico and the United States

Similar to Health System Analysis- Mexico and the United States (15)

Health System Analysis- Mexico and the United States