People taking steps to improve their health helps reduce the need for further treatment. Not all people will do it but those that do will create a much needed saving.Sephiroth81 wrote:The cost/operation is merely either delayed, or the patient ignores the advice and their condition worsens requiring more time in treatment and potentially administered more drugs etc. Its merely putting off paying for a procedure now.
From where/who? I would say there is a lot of government waste spending that would be better off in the NHS but it's easier said than done. There probably isn't a government head of depeartment anywhere that would say they would welcome a budget decrease. And of course it would be terribly racist and everything else 'ist and 'phobic to even suggest that we could spend less on international welfare to better take care of Britons through the likes of the NHS.Sephiroth81 wrote:Just invest more into the NHS
I don't think convenient and unconditional access to genuinely free healthcare for non-contributors is a sound long term strategy either, as it continously shields the patient from the full consequences of their poor decisions, and so there is less incentive to change. For many people the "safety net" becomes a crutch.
It would be great if people made better health decisions, but I'm not sure what more the government can do with education, you can only lead a horse to water so much.Sephiroth81 wrote: and start educating its citizens a bit better.
When I went to school, the teacher said smoking will make you unfit and give you cancer, and cancer is bad because it kills you, ok you convinced me. It didn't take a multi-million pound media campaign for me to make the determination that smoking was a bad move. Everybody hears this message loud and clear, it's even on the cigarettes themselves now! It wasn't because of a privileged upbringing, I didn't win the IQ lottery, my not smoking was due to the simple informed decision that everyone has, whether to risk cancer or not.