Life expectancy is not an accurate indicator of health care effectiveness. There are a LOT of other factors. Start with diet. One of the things I applaud about England, is that they banned what was/is termed as Frankenfood. The genetically modified foods, which are grown there for export to the US, are not allowed to be sold, and consumed there. Some of the commercial fertilizers, pesticides, and other chemicals allowed here, are banned there as well. Those differences make a huge impact on longevity, regardless of the quality of healthcare.
Mainstream meat sources, are fed with GMO feeds, and other highly questionable things, so the meat is filling, but the nutritional value, is not optimized. In addition to that, since beef is sold by the pound, when cattle arrive at the stockyards, they are injected with a slow release "pill" that contains a high amount of estrogen. The same way estrogen produces bodily changes in pregnancy, causing increased fat, and weight, this happens to the cattle. This may be good for those selling beef, but it is NOT good for the consumer. Don't even get me started on fast foods. Let's face it, the American diet, which once was enviable, is now seriously lacking. This makes a serious impact on longevity, regardless of healthcare. The good news is, there is more awareness now. More and more we're seeing organic, and/or Non GMO on some of the foods.
Certain industries here, having money, and power, have gotten away with far more ecological damage, mostly to water sources, than they should have. A few movies to watch, Lois Gibbs and the Love Canal, Erin Brockovich, and Dark Waters. While the movies tend to focus on specific areas, where the damage is discovered, it's usually much more widespread, and NOT just limited to the areas the movies focus on. These things affect enough areas of our population that it noticeably impacts our longevity stats, as well.
As I said, life expectancy is not an accurate indicator of health care effectiveness.