3 ms·

Part of running an "efficient" healthcare system is that cost constraints are always a factor. Sure, NHS trusts are legally allowed to offer treatments that are

by makomk 9y ago

Part of running an "efficient" healthcare system is that cost constraints are always a factor. Sure, NHS trusts are legally allowed to offer treatments that aren't approved by NICE, but they have piles of money lying around to do expensive things beyond the basics that are required of them at the best of time, and this isn't the best of times - like many countries the UK has a healthcare funding crisis right now. At best, requiring a treatment rejected by NICE leaves your fate up to a postcode lottery where your location determines whether you have access to it. At worst, nowhere will cover it. Also, cost per QALY is one of the main factors NICE uses, and the ACA means it and similar measures cannot be used as any kind of factor at all in the US.

inopinatus 9y ago
NICE was founded to reduce that postcode lottery by creating a base set of what is nationally achievable. Over time, that set grows. It's grossly unfair to misrepresent it as some kind of net-negative body, or to suggest that doctors won't treat a patient. Indeed one of the effects is to encourage research into more affordable treatments. This is in antithesis to the US system where, for example, the drug companies are incentivized to R&D long-term treatments for symptoms, not cures for diseases. I like the incentives that NICE creates instead. Over time, it's a strong net national benefit. The failure to include such a mechanism in the ACA seems more to do with US politics than any intrinsic characteristic of single-payer systems. The NHS has apparently been under-funded for decades, far too long a period to call it a "crisis". I would maintain it is simply grossly inefficient at spending the money it does receive, due to horrible management. Again, this is not an intrinsic characteristic of such systems.

3 ms·

Part of running an "efficient" healthcare system is that cost constraints are always a factor. Sure, NHS trusts are legally allowed to offer treatments that are

by makomk 9y ago

inopinatus 9y ago
NICE was founded to reduce that postcode lottery by creating a base set of what is nationally achievable. Over time, that set grows. It's grossly unfair to misrepresent it as some kind of net-negative body, or to suggest that doctors won't treat a patient. Indeed one of the effects is to encourage research into more affordable treatments. This is in antithesis to the US system where, for example, the drug companies are incentivized to R&D long-term treatments for symptoms, not cures for diseases. I like the incentives that NICE creates instead. Over time, it's a strong net national benefit. The failure to include such a mechanism in the ACA seems more to do with US politics than any intrinsic characteristic of single-payer systems. The NHS has apparently been under-funded for decades, far too long a period to call it a "crisis". I would maintain it is simply grossly inefficient at spending the money it does receive, due to horrible management. Again, this is not an intrinsic characteristic of such systems.