Health In Britain

[KARL]

Many on here will no doubt be pleased to be able to refer to reliable statistics when discussing the NHS, the government and the UK in general - the OECD has just released a wide reaching comparison report on "Health at a glance 2017" which provide a comparison between countries. Some may be aware of this document but, if not, one might start here http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/social-issues-migration-health/health-at-a-glance-2017_health_glance-2017-en and then navigate to tables, etc. , for example on life expectancy by various categories (UK in "could do better" category) and a host of other information.

[Sqad]

Karl,
These results are no surprise to me and your comment, although improving " UK can do better" is well supported by the data.
However, from a practical point of view very few UK residents are interested in the mediocre performance of the NHS, as they have known no other system, do not want to know any alternate methods of finance and are adverse to change in any way.
The NHS described as "the Envy of the World" is still believed by many and other health systems run by " jolly foreigners" are inferior and not fit for purpose.
Any attempt at criticising the NHS is met with incredulity and an abusive response.
A good post Karl, but will fall on stoney ground.

[Mamyalynne]

Thank you for the information Karl.

[cassa333]

For a good while I've not conformed to the 'NHS is the envy of the world' theory.

There are, without a doubt, plenty of hard working, dedicated and brilliant people who work in it.

But, it has become a leviathan and so cumbersome that it ceases to be as affective as it could be. And because of that it has becomes wasteful and unwieldy.

[campbellking]

At least the NHS provides data, unlike the private health care providers, who have very little responsibility to report things upwards, thus leaving them unable to be adequately monitored.

[KARL]

Sqad, in my opinion you are correct on every point, especially on the denial of and anger over evidence being pointed out (see https://www.theanswerbank.co.uk/Body-and-Soul/Question1578816.html) and the semi-religious belief in the NHS as a totem. Even more than that there is the resistance to change (but that applies to almost everything in the UK). I agree that the likelihood/hope for improvement is indeed small.

campbellking, in a recent post I asked what was happening with the UK's commitment to a campaign aimed at eradicating viral hepatitis. Chris buenchico provided a link where it is explained why the UK is not among the nine countries making notable success - the reason is that the data simply is not there to even trace more than a small percentage of those infected with viral hepatitis, never mind rolling out treatment, are you suggesting this is the fault of private health care facilities ?

[Sqad]

Karl...campbelking does have a point....private health care is well regulated, but does not produce on a regular basis relevant data.

However i would say, on a purely personal level, that i would not trust ant details, studies and data, that emanates from the NHS.
Sweeping statement...yes.

[KARL]

Sqad, re data - in that case it is yet another example of organisational failure at government level since the regulatory framework is theirs and if that does not ensure adequate/reliable data flow then it is a c...-up. Sweep away, reality is likely to still be hidden/protected and treated under the See no evil, ........ principle, enabled by media failing to challenge the apathy.

[KARL]

cassa, I agree with you. The initial objective of free health care equally available for all was laudable but in fact the NHS is becoming (has already become ?) unaffordable. A broken system wastes the resources and talents at its disposal.