Originally posted by EladarThe British system has its problems, but it's better than the American system where we spend twice has much for (at best) similar results.
[b]
Data released for the first time showed that across large areas of the country, almost no patients above the age of 75 are receiving surgery for breast cancer or routine operations such as gall bladder removal and knee replacements.
The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (Nice), was also criticised for attempting to change its funding cri ...[text shortened]... is a great way for the new class to milk the working class. All on false promises of security.
The problems with NHS is that by putting government in charge of administering the healthcare, you're begging for inefficiency and bureaucracy.
I do like the British systems' idea of bifurcating the system: If you can pay, you can buy what you like; otherwise, we'll give it to you - but with some rationing and caveats.
I'd like to see a hybrid between the Canadian and British system: The Canadian idea of government paying rather than running the system with the British idea of allowing an unregulated private system for those who can pay and do want it. That would also preserve the profit motive and thus the biggest strength of the US system: the strength of the highest level of services that produces most of the world's best hospitals. The problem with total single payer, like Canada, is that, while care is usually good enough, you do have the occasional person who has to run to Buffalo to get an aneurysm removed rather that wait 7 months.
Originally posted by sh76From what I understand private health care is not banned in Canada.
The British system has its problems, but it's better than the American system where we spend twice has much for (at best) similar results.
The problems with NHS is that by putting government in charge of administering the healthcare, you're begging for inefficiency and bureaucracy.
I do like the British systems' idea of bifurcating the system: If you can ...[text shortened]... ccasional person who has to run to Buffalo to get an aneurysm removed rather that wait 7 months.
I think you are correct in assuming a government-run large organisation will tend to be bureaucratic, but you are incorrect in assuming that non-government-run large organisations aren't bureaucratic. Single-payer is more efficient not because the government is involved but because it is simpler and cuts out a middle-man paper pusher who is in charge of billing and assessment of eligibility. Whether or not the government only pays or directly operates health care matters little in practice, as the data also confirms.
Originally posted by sh76Of course it is better than Obamacare. With Obamacare we can expect the same thing in the US.
The British system has its problems, but it's better than the American system where we spend twice has much for (at best) similar results.
The problems with NHS is that by putting government in charge of administering the healthcare, you're begging for inefficiency and bureaucracy.
I do like the British systems' idea of bifurcating the system: If you can ...[text shortened]... ccasional person who has to run to Buffalo to get an aneurysm removed rather that wait 7 months.
Originally posted by EladarClearly you didn't read the article. Here's an abridged version: the UN is bad because they will set up death panels to kill granny [...] blah blah [...] hearsay, blah blah, slippery slope fallacy [...] a whiff of valid concerns coated in a bukkake of sensationalist bullcrap [...] a government spokesman saying the whole story is nonsense.
Yes I did, which is why I pointed out it must suck to be old in the UK. Get too old and you don't get help.
1 edit
So you are saying that the elderly are receiving basic care like knee replacement and other such operations. In other words you are saying the article lies.
Data released for the first time showed that across large areas of the country, almost no patients above the age of 75 are receiving surgery for breast cancer or routine operations such as gall bladder removal and knee replacements.
Originally posted by Rank outsiderI doubt he could even find it on the map.
Have you ever lived in the UK?
I however do live in the UK, and have worked for the NHS; so am happy to report that the claims made are complete nonsense. The NHS is far from perfect, but it's not broken.
Indeed, my uncle had a knee op at the beginning of the year, and he's 82!
Originally posted by Ghost of a DukeJust goes to show your prejudice if you don't think I can find the UK on the map. Yes, I know that Northern Ireland is still part of the UK.
I doubt he could even find it on the map.
I however do live in the UK, and have worked for the NHS; so am happy to report that the claims made are complete nonsense. The NHS is far from perfect, but it's not broken.
Indeed, my uncle had a knee op at the beginning of the year, and he's 82!
Re-read the quote. Do you have empirical data or simply anecdotal?
Originally posted by EladarI have a few anecdotes (my mother) about the NZ system and wait times for things like knee replacements (18 to 24 months). A painful condition that if they can extend the wait time enough literally tortures people into taking the private route even though they've spent a lifetime contributing to the socialist UHC mecca.
Just goes to show your prejudice if you don't think I can find the UK on the map. Yes, I know that Northern Ireland is still part of the UK.
Re-read the quote. Do you have empirical data or simply anecdotal?
They don't really line up with Ghost of Dukes anecdotes but then neither myself or my mother are sucking on the state teet. so the motive is not there to give the goobermint big ups.
Originally posted by WajomaI'm sure a hospital waiting list is preferable to no hospitals at all.
I have a few anecdotes (my mother) about the NZ system and wait times for things like knee replacements (18 to 24 months). A painful condition that if they can extend the wait time enough literally tortures people into taking the private route even though they've spent a lifetime contributing to the socialist UHC mecca.
They don't really line up with Ghos ...[text shortened]... mother are sucking on the state teet. so the motive is not there to give the goobermint big ups.
Originally posted by EladarNo, it just goes to show you have as little comprehension of English sarcasm as you do an understanding of the NHS in the UK.
Just goes to show your prejudice if you don't think I can find the UK on the map. Yes, I know that Northern Ireland is still part of the UK.
Re-read the quote. Do you have empirical data or simply anecdotal?
I'm sure you're an authority on Baseball and obesity, but i think you have ventured into an area you have no direct experience or understanding of. Having worked for the NHS for over a decade my experiences are far from anecdotal. My last position was in a rapid response team where the prime objective was early intervention to keep hospital admissions down. The 'majority' of our patients were the elderly, the most common operation being hip operations. If a patient was well enough to cope with the operation then it went ahead. Age was not a barrier and it was common place for patients over 75 to have such operations and received excellent standards of care.