to think that the NHS is really quite shit and that not everyone who works in it is an underpaid hero?

[Adenosine]

There is a strange British preoccupation with the NHS which I think prevents honest public dialogue about its many shortcomings. At the time it was set up it was innovative, but now there are many other universal healthcare systems most of which are better than the NHS and many of which cost less money.

It's ranked low globally and really quite shit yet few people dare criticise or. AIBU to think that we really need to be far more critical?

Even the USA has a (rudimentary) safety net for the unemployed and the elderly (Medicare and Medicaid). It is where people or the children of working age develop chronic conditions that the biggest problems arise.

Being a Brit who’s had medical care in the USA I can tell you now the NHS is better is almost every respect and that we should fight to save the NHS to our dying breaths. It’s needs modernisation and it needs more money but it really is an astonishing achievement and something that every country should be striving for.
Nothing matters more than the health of a nations people.

As one of the richest countries in the world we CAN afford the NHS.

As one of the richest countries in the world we CAN afford the NHS.

Given our level of national debt, we're not one of the richest countries.

But anyway, just how much should we be throwing at the NHS. How much will be enough? Labour trebled spending on the NHS - if that wasn't enough, just what would have been? Should we double it every year? How about tacking the waste and inefficiency instead???

“Can nobody see that things they’re complaining about have been made so much worse since Austerity?”

Yes they’re worse but they weren’t non-existent previously.

One of the main issues I’ve had is down to medical misogyny which is a major issue worldwide not just in Uk.

I have endo, I presented to numerous gps and several a&e medics over a period of decades with textbook symptoms and NOT ONCE was I referred to a gynaecologist by any of them, even after dx I have had to fight for referrals and appropriate treatment when necessary. Around this time last year I started a thread on the issue and the stories were shocking!

Where I was surprised was it was far from just Gynae issues which you would perhaps expect, instead 2 areas where there seem to be major problems with women and girls getting proper dx and treatment is thyroid and gallbladder disease which occur in both sexes but present very differently in each sex.

The difference in how men and women experience heart attacks has received some publicity in recent years too.

As I looked further into things it became really apparent how woeful medical education still is (I had noticed to some degree during my own training) that it still teaches that male presentation of illness is the “correct” presentation.

Men’s and women’s bodies are different in so many ways not just reproductive systems.

But anyway, just how much should we be throwing at the NHS. How much will be enough?

It is very simple to look at how much comparable European countries like France and Germany spend on healthcare, and consider whether the additional money they spend gets them better health provision (answer: on average, it does).

France for example spends about 10-12% more than the U.K. on healthcare, as a proportion of GDP. Some of that extra goes on more expensive admin (the NHS is a very efficient bureaucracy compared to almost all other major country healthcare systems except Japan and Canada). But most of the difference goes on providing better care.

I have been very fortunate with my NHS experience over the years, including a&e visits and a subsequent heart procedure done this year - all treated, diagnosed and surgery in the past few months.. I also have a chronic medical condition and my treatment over the past 7 or 8 years since diagnosis has been fantastic. My previous experience of the NHS for myself has also been very positive.

The medical procedure on my heart alone would have cost around £20k alone, let alone the appointments and a&e visits beforehand.

We have a large medical school here and our hospitals are teaching hospitals and I have always been very happy with the treatment and service I've received. Maybe I have just been lucky.

But I do know that I would dread to think what any form of medical insurance would be costing me now!

Given our level of national debt, we're not one of the richest countries

Ah, we are all in debt due to the economic crisis of 2008/9 combined with wars in the Middle East. That is what causes national debt: wars and economic crises. It’s not spending on healthcare that causes debt. Usually you get a higher GDP due to a less sick and more productive workforce.

When I am treated the medical staff are fantastic. I’m not complaining about them at all. The doctors themselves are desperately worried about the funding and staffing crisis - as are teachers with schools.

I am so grateful to the NHS for looking after me over the last 20 years.

France for example spends about 10-12% more than the U.K. on healthcare, as a proportion of GDP
Indeed, and yet their system is falling apart even quicker than the nhs. Ironically, they see the nhs as a model healthcare to follow.

The French system is not one to aspire to.

*Can nobody see that things they’re complaining about have been made so much worse since Austerity?”

Yes they’re worse but they weren’t non-existent previously.*

Agree. I'm nearly 40 and my mum still talks about the begging letters she used to write to the hospital to bring my childhood operation forward due to insane waiting times.

The French system is not one to aspire to.

Pardon me, but the WHO ranked France as #1 in the world (upthread a poster posted the rankings). A study I found by Fraiser Institute of the US done on all 28 OECD countries with universal systems ranked France #2.

Waiting times were very long in the mid 1990s at the end of the Thatcher/Major administration; they fell significantly during the Blair government, but have since increased again.

The French system is not one to aspire to.

In what way? Better health outcomes, more patient choice, generally better access to care.

On all the threads about different healthcare systems I’m yet to come across a poster who has personally experienced a non nhs system as an “indigent” themselves. Some are able to link to the official information of the support for the poorest in society - who are the ones who usually need the most healthcare! But when I’ve asked they have been unable to say how well or not it works in practice because that just isn’t their experience.

This is a very good point.

I'd be interested in how other systems deal with mental health (my area of work). I have relative in Australia who are social workers, one in mental health, and she doesn't paint the system as this shining bright amazing thing others on here have. Given the fact the majority users of mental health services are often on lower incomes or come from fringes of society I'd like to know how they fair in an Australian/french/german system.

Don't even get me started on a access to specialist care. This is one aspect of the NHS that surely everyone would agree needs an overhaul. Why for example when a woman is having gynae issues does she need to see a GP before being referred to a gynaecologist? It is perfectly clear which body parts require attention in such a case and grown ass adults should be able to make these appointments themselves without getting permission.

I went to A&E the other week and the triage nurse was the most awful rude charmless woman I’ve ever met. It wasn’t even that busy. On the other hand my son needed emergency care in Spain and the general hospital was amazing, nurses were lovely, own room amazing food. IMO the nhs is shit now

Coincidentally I've just seen a post on Facebook about a Senate enquiry in australia looking at low welfare payments and how some recipients have to ration insulin as they cannot afford to pay for it with the level of welfare. Granted buzzfeed isn't the paragon of journalism but if people are talking about it then the Australian system clearly does have issues for those in the poorest sections of society.

Given the fact the majority users of mental health services are often on lower incomes or come from fringes of society I'd like to know how they fair in an Australian/french/german system.

In all healthcare systems, the most vulnerable fall through the cracks. In France (and I would think in Germany too) it's not that vulnerable healthcare users can't access mental healthcare, but that they have less choice and poorer options.

I do actually have some recent personal experience of navigating the French system for people on a very low income (am British living and working in France). My son's girlfriend comes from a deprived background and is not supported by her parents. Our GP referred her to the local free-at-the-point of delivery mental health clinic where she is seeing a psychiatrist and a mental health nurse regularly. It took less than a month from referral to first appointment.

My daughter is a student in Paris and a fellow student self-harmed quite badly last week. She took him to the psychiatric emergency department where he was seen after waiting a few hours, and apparently he is already in the process of a possible bipolar diagnosis.

The people who really fall through the gaps are people with no immigration status (but this is also true in the U.K.).

Given the polls show threats to the NHS are proving costly to the Tories, it’s not surprising Tory supporters are posting anti-NHS threads. Quick comparison with the states in the image.

The NHS isn't the only alternative to the US model (European social insurance schemes also leave no one uninsured). It is one of the best value for money healthcare systems though, and IMO there is a good chance that spending a bit more would make it more efficient.

The picture above is incorrect! There is a proportion of insured vs uninsured in Britain so the Maths is wrong.
It's just that they don't need to be.

Fishing for anti-NHS posters - totally legit! Nothing dodgy here! No sir!

Why for example when a woman is having gynae issues does she need to see a GP before being referred to a gynaecologist?

Well pretty obviously, because a lot of gynae stuff can be managed perfectly well by GPs, and if we are going to send every person with heavy periods, irregular periods or painful periods to hospital to see a gynaecologist, we’re going to have to train a fuck of a lot more gynaecologists (we can’t fill existing posts, it’s a shortage specialty).

OP I think it's a stretch to suggest that the NHS is anything like the very basic care provided for non payers (the poor) in the US healthcare system!

Your anecdotal experience isn't the picture across the country. In my part of London it's annoying having to go online at 8 am to book a same day GP appointment, when the alternative is calling up listening to the countdown for 15 minutes to be given an appointment in three weeks.

The hellish NHS keep reminding me of my smear test by text and my ageing parents of their annual flu jabs. The feckless GP who has little to do and whom I really don't see much because its a massive over-prescribed practice has the audacity to telephone me out of the blue to prompt be to have my smear!

I've visited hospitals that seem run down and that are smelly dark places but also ones that are clean, bright and where staff don't look close to blowing their top through long hard hours.

That's just London. I have family in Colchester, where they think I'm long-suffering!

But then I'm not too ill. I avoid a&e because it's for really sick people.

Sure, healthcare services shouldn't differ town by town, region by region but they do. There should be more local NHS GP practices and healthcare centres specialising in mother & baby, elderly, sexual health, and blood test centres. It shouldn't all rest on Hospitals. Not with the numbers we have in our major cities.