UK's NHS is a catastrophe

[DivideBYZero]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: Mem

Originally posted by: Skoorb

these are doctors who are licenced to practice medicine in the UK in just the same way an all-english cricket-playing warm-ale-drinking white British doctor is.

If they are fully licensed and credentialed, that clears up the confusion on this point.

Daily mail aside, plenty of other papers have criticisms for then NHS.

Thats how they sell news and newspapers,scandals etc do you believe everything you read or hear?...... I can tell you that its better then what any newspapers have printed ,my grandmother died 2 years ago in hospital (NHS) and the care she got over the 10 days was nothing short of amazing(I was there every day) .

With all due respect, criticisms of daily mail may be fair, but to ask "do you believe everything you read" and in turn make an argument you expect me to believe over a newspaper, even if it's a scandalous one, is somewhat ironic.

Just look at the numbers they are feining shock about:

* 63 births in ambulances and 608 in transit to hospitals;
* 117 births in A&E departments, four in minor injury units and two in medical assessment areas;
* 115 births on other hospital wards and 36 in other unspecified areas including corridors;
* 399 in parts of maternity units other than labour beds, including postnatal and antenatal wards and reception areas.

Women give birth sometimes unexpectedly and sometimes it happens too fast to move them. None of those figures are backed up with the text, 'Because they had no where else to go'. It's not Bethlehem, FFS.

 

[JKing106]

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: BarrySotero
UK'ers will say this is just the Daily Mail being outrageous

It's not like we'd know or anything, is it?

The Daily Mail is the Dave McOwen of Newspapers.

He sure as fuck doesn't.

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: 0marTheZealot
Low risk pregnancies should be mid-wived. Dedicating a hospital room and a doctor is an unnecessary expenditure of resources. Women have been giving birth for millions of years in more risky situations.

on the other hand, if i had been born outside a hospital, i would be dead. :Q


Not that i would have known the difference.

 

[Colt45]

Funny how the UK's deaths per live births rate is lower than the US's, with all these mothers and children being rejected care.

4.9 versus 6.6 per mille, in 2008.

 

[rchiu]

Hey, at least when $hit happens in UK, you have one place to point finger at, straight at the government.

Over here in the US, if some problem is discovered, there will be hundreds of parties you can point finger at and no one hold accountable and nothing gets solved at the end of the day.

 

[Red Irish]

The NHS has its problems: they are severly understaffed and there are long waiting lists for certain procedures. However, I have nothing but the highest praise for any treatment I have received and the manner in which in was administered.

My comments also apply to the Spanish healthcare system.

If I could choose where I become ill, it would certainly be either of these countries.

 

[Moonbeam]

At a time when billions are being spent to shape or destroy this or that aspect of health care, I ignore most everything said about it.

 

[GroundedSailor]

Originally posted by: Confusednewbie1552
as a person that has lived in both england and america i can tell you that the NHS is superior to what we have in america; superior, but, like all things in this world, not perfect. not that anecdotal evidence means anything though.

As someone who has done the same - my daughter still lives in UK - I can endorse the same view. Given a choice I would choose the British system over what we have here - even though I personally have one of those 'gold-plated' plans.

I suggest reading the link posted in Analogsoul post.

Originally posted by: Analogsoul
Let me post this again about an American's experience with the NHS. No system is perfect, but the system in the US really needs to change towards UHC. I'm sure there are issues with the NHS, but I doubt they are any worse that what we have over here.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: CPA

Originally posted by: Slick5150
If you read the comments below the article, it sounds like most people blame the problem on the costs and overcrowding due to migrants coming to the country just to get free health care. Since what Obama is proposing would only provide coverage to citizens, I don't see how the two relate. We already have a lot of emergency room overcrowding because of illegals and others jamming them up now.

most state laws prohibit hospitals from denying care to illegals, so you're argument doesn't wash.

uh, since we're already doing this then why would that be a fault of the system that has yet to be implemented (after all, we're trying to damn the non-plan going through congress with the NHS's problems, aren't we)?

and it's a federal law, EMTALA, that prohibits people from being turned away prior to being stabilized by any hospital that accepts medicare/id.

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: Mem
It's clear you have no real experience with NHS ,my point is I'm talking from real experince ,anyway believe what you want ,I know the truth from my own personal real experience of 40 plus years .

But there are those with real experience who disagree with you.

You also said:

For the record I don't know anybody thats died due to incompetance in NHS or been turned away from medical treatment.

to which I would retort with this link

The Patients Association said the dossier proves that while the scale of the scandal at Mid-Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust - where up to 1,200 people died through failings in urgent care

Oops.

Also in that link

One million NHS patients have been the victims of appalling care in hospitals across Britain, according to a major report released today.

 

[RedChief]

Originally posted by: Atheus

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose

Originally posted by: Atheus

Despite being the model for most world governments, legal systems, etc...

I've had friends and family that experienced the UK's system, they were very impressed.

You Brits should be proud of your system, and I hope we can manage to develop something like it in the US.

Or even better perhaps.

Thank for backing me up. I get a bit defensive of the NHS these days becasue my father was diagnosed with cancer last year. After a series of operations and several rounds of chemo and radiotherapy he is now officially clear. The doctors were amazing.

I understand that in your case, the NHS was fine. But looking at cancer survival rates between the US and the UK, the UK has lagged behind the US in long term survival rates significantly and is is lagging behind most of Europe.

One good experience is like one bad experience. It can't be a example of how the system as a whole is.

 

[CallMeJoe]

Originally posted by: BarrySotero
Keep in mind as the NHS cuts back on care the bureaucracy has grown...

Thank God we don't have a tremendous bureaucracy in insurance companies here in the United States driving up our health care costs at an unsustainable rate!

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: CallMeJoe

Originally posted by: BarrySotero
Keep in mind as the NHS cuts back on care the bureaucracy has grown...

Thank God we don't have a tremendous bureaucracy in insurance companies here in the United States driving up our health care costs at an unsustainable rate!

It is unsustainable in most industrialized nations. This is not a uniquely American problem at all.

 

[Slick5150]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: CPA

Originally posted by: Slick5150
If you read the comments below the article, it sounds like most people blame the problem on the costs and overcrowding due to migrants coming to the country just to get free health care. Since what Obama is proposing would only provide coverage to citizens, I don't see how the two relate. We already have a lot of emergency room overcrowding because of illegals and others jamming them up now.

most state laws prohibit hospitals from denying care to illegals, so you're argument doesn't wash.

uh, since we're already doing this then why would that be a fault of the system that has yet to be implemented (after all, we're trying to damn the non-plan going through congress with the NHS's problems, aren't we)?

and it's a federal law, EMTALA, that prohibits people from being turned away prior to being stabilized by any hospital that accepts medicare/id.

Exactly. If that's the current system, then how does that have anything to do with what Obama is talking about? It sounds like you're (CPA) upset at the current system rather than what Obama is proposing, which, as discussed, specifically denies insurance coverage to illegals

 

[StageLeft]

specifically denies insurance coverage to illegals

I thought one of the big arguments was that they're being paid for anyway via ER visits. If that's so expensive--their lack of preventitive care--how is not including them going to help?

 

[heyheybooboo]

Does it seem to anyone else that we have now recycled through every pro/con talking point 2 or more times now. ?

It's time to pass legislation and get it to conference.

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo
Does it seem to anyone else that we have now recycled through every pro/con talking point 2 or more times now. ?

At least.

It's time to pass legislation and get it to conference.

Hopefully somebody will come up with some worth passing.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

specifically denies insurance coverage to illegals

I thought one of the big arguments was that they're being paid for anyway via ER visits. If that's so expensive--their lack of preventitive care--how is not including them going to help?

It's not. Illegal immigrants make up a small fraction of our overall health care spending each year as they tend to be very small consumers of health care vis a vis the general population, but you could certainly make an argument that including everyone would help.

If we don't include them we probably just won't save as much money as we would otherwise, but that would do absolutely nothing as to whether or not it would save money on the whole.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo
Does it seem to anyone else that we have now recycled through every pro/con talking point 2 or more times now. ?

At least.

It's time to pass legislation and get it to conference.

Hopefully somebody will come up with some worth passing.

I hope so too. Overall the bill looks pretty good, and while it's not single payer I would consider the bill very good so long as it includes a government insurance company. Regardless of whether or not you support that part specifically, overall there are so many good things in this bill that are common between all forms of it that things will be much improved.

Removal of pre-existing conditions as a means to deny coverage, change in how efficiency recommendations are implemented in Medicare, upgrades to medical infrastructure, etc... etc... etc.

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

to which I would retort with this link

The Patients Association said the dossier proves that while the scale of the scandal at Mid-Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust - where up to 1,200 people died through failings in urgent care

In 1999, the Institute of Medicine issued a groundbreaking study, titled To Err is Human, that still haunts health care professionals. It found that up to 98,000 people die of medical errors in American hospitals each year.

I'd lol, but


edit: linked the wrong link.

 

[DivideBYZero]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: Skoorb

to which I would retort with this link

The Patients Association said the dossier proves that while the scale of the scandal at Mid-Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust - where up to 1,200 people died through failings in urgent care

In 1999, the Institute of Medicine issued a groundbreaking study, titled To Err is Human, that still haunts health care professionals. It found that up to 98,000 people die of medical errors in American hospitals each year.

I'd lol, but

Exactly, imagine that. I stated this earlier in the thread, that for every story about the NHS an equal story regarding the current American system can be found, but Skoorb has a clear agenda, "Universal Healthcare free at the point of need is bad.".

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: Skoorb

to which I would retort with this link

The Patients Association said the dossier proves that while the scale of the scandal at Mid-Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust - where up to 1,200 people died through failings in urgent care

In 1999, the Institute of Medicine issued a groundbreaking study, titled To Err is Human, that still haunts health care professionals. It found that up to 98,000 people die of medical errors in American hospitals each year.

I'd lol, but

Exactly, imagine that. I stated this earlier in the thread, that for every story about the NHS an equal story regarding the current American system can be found, but Skoorb has a clear agenda, "Universal Healthcare free at the point of need is bad.".

You don't have an agenda? This thread is about how much NHS sucks. Note I didn't pick on Canada because it's better than England. At the very least Canadians are happier with their healthcare than Britons. Both are happier with their health care than Americans.

In fact, medical errors kill people in every country all the time. I brought up the 1200 to counter a specific argument that was false.

 

[Mem]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: Skoorb

to which I would retort with this link

The Patients Association said the dossier proves that while the scale of the scandal at Mid-Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust - where up to 1,200 people died through failings in urgent care

In 1999, the Institute of Medicine issued a groundbreaking study, titled To Err is Human, that still haunts health care professionals. It found that up to 98,000 people die of medical errors in American hospitals each year.

I'd lol, but

Exactly, imagine that. I stated this earlier in the thread, that for every story about the NHS an equal story regarding the current American system can be found, but Skoorb has a clear agenda, "Universal Healthcare free at the point of need is bad.".

You don't have an agenda? This thread is about how much NHS sucks. Note I didn't pick on Canada because it's better than England. At the very least Canadians are happier with their healthcare than Britons. Both are happier with their health care than Americans.

In fact, medical errors kill people in every country all the time. I brought up the 1200 to counter a specific argument that was false.

No its about how much you think it sucks Skoorb, anyway fortunately a lot of people in the UK are happy with the NHS,end of the day you have to remember no health care in the world can be 100% perfect,you seem to have a hidden agenda ,wonder what it is .

End of the day NHS is doing more good then harm,remember what the NHS is about where everybody can get treatment.

 

[StageLeft]

No its about how much millions of people think it sucks

Fixed.

 

[NeoV]

give it up Skoorb

people here think our healthcare system sucks

people there think there healthcare system sucks

people in Canada think their healthcare system sucks


We can do the same childish excercise for people in those countries that like it.

We get it, you don't like NHS - even though that's not what Obama is talking/trying to implement, but keep on flashing the warning signs