Two questions:
1.) The different GFCI trip currents are:
UL: 5mA nominal, 6mA maximum
IEC: 30mA maximum
(Higher ratings, mainly for fire protection, are available under both standards too.)
The IEC normally requires 30mA protection, which is a full five times higher than the UL standard!
Does this mean that the UL standard provides a higher level of safety? Yes
Does it mean that it provides a much higher level of safety? Not necessarily
Before they settled on 30mA, the IEC did check what people died of. They found that the current had in most cases been above 30mA, enough to give the poor soul immediate heart problems. A 30mA GFCI for the whole loadcenter was thought to be the cheapest and simplest way to prevent most but not all electrocutions.
UL seem to have to have approached to problem from the other angle: How much current do you need to kill someone? About 10mA, if I have understood this correctly, is what is needed in a worst case. Half of that is 5mA. The catch is that you can't put such a sensitive device on the whole loadcenter as it will cause nuisance trips. Instead North America relies on GFCIs integrated into the receptacles or the branch circuit breakers.
As I understand it, load centers where all branch circuit breakers had an integrated 10mA GFCI would offer excellent protection against electrocution with minimal risk of nuisance trips.
2.) The risk of electrical problems killing you in the hospital is far less than the hospital staff giving you the wrong treatment.
The US has more lawyers than e.g. Europe or China. I think that could explain the "Hospital Grade" plugs and cords.
