2 ms·
> "As a final remark - I bumped into another British expat over here a few weeks ago and he was walking on crutches after a hip replacement operation. When I as
by ZenoArrow 9y ago
> "As a final remark - I bumped into another British expat over here a few weeks ago and he was walking on crutches after a hip replacement operation. When I asked him how he thought it would have played out on the NHS, he said he'd still be waiting to see a consultant!"
I wouldn't read too much into that remark. The NHS has been underfunded for decades. There was a time when the NHS was one of the most cost effective healthcare systems in the world, but it's been seriously undermined by both Labour and Tory governments over the past 25 years. There's no reason it can't be a well-run healthcare system again, but it will take time to undo the damage that's been done.
- caseysoftware 9y agoThe health/economic experts in the article cite the British system for its quality, efficiency, competitiveness, and access. If that's true, it's sounds like it's funded "enough" for the current responsibilities. If it was underfunded - especially for decades - then some of those things would be big problems, right?
- jaggederest 9y agoI think it's more of a credit to the British system that, even underfunded relative to ideal the NHS produces still excellent outcomes. I imagine that, if it were funded with another 1-2% of GDP it would truly excel more like the French system.