> The NHS does worse in treating cancer than other countries, but many of those countries (Germany, France, etc) have public health care also. It's not clear t

> The NHS does worse in treating cancer than other countries, but many of those countries (Germany, France, etc) have public health care also. It's not clear that the difference in performance is because of public, vs privately, funded medicine. Right, I'm saying that the difference isn't simply a matter of private vs. public funds, the way OP claims. You can really trivially create a private system that has the same bad incentives with respect to costs and care as the NHS does. You can also trivially create a public system that has the same bad incentives with respect to costs and care as the US does. That said, Germany and France aren't really publicly-funded as well the way people think. Both rely on a private network for care delivery (unlike the NHS), so it's a bit of a stretch to say that they're "public health care" systems. Even if you're looking at funding, in those two countries, taxpayer funds only cover 75% and 70% of expenses, respectively.