Are people dropping like flies . . .

I have read quite a few posts about the NHS and some people have very strong opinions about just how bad it is. Just recently someone posted on another thread about how they read that if you were ever to get cancer, you would want to be in the US.

Anyhow, my repsonse to many people here in the states you comment about the healthcare in the UK ( mind that most of these people have never or will never be in the Uk) is that I have read nowhere about the entire British population dropping like flies due to such poor hospitals, doctors, etc.

We are obviously not in the decision making process as to whether or not to move, seeing as we are packed up and flights booked, but I am still curious as to whether anyone has a site to visit for statistical info on the number of deaths per year in the UK and what those deaths were attributed to. Quite frankly I would love to shut a few people up about the whole healthcare issue. It is a bit exhausting listening to people say how poor the doctors are, how filthy the hospitals are, how outdated treatment methods are, and so on and so on.

I also read here  that there are some treatments that are not covered by the NHS, some diseases. Anyone had any experience with this?

Thanks

It doesn't seem like anyone's dropping like flies here.  But I did wind up having to file for bankrupcy in the US for inability to pay medical debt.  My uncle just had a triple bypass there.  He has cracking insurance from his federal government job - he's been there well over 30 years - and just HIS share of the care cost him about $18,000.  Pretty ridiculous considering how common heart disease is.

I definetly believe that lack of insurance or the inability to pay for medical treatment leads many people in the US into financial trouble. It cannot be good for anyone to not seek treatment when they are sick because of the expense or lack of insurance. Believe me I see the NHS as a beautiful thing. The high cost of medical insurance for our family has caused us many financial headaches, so in turn we just work more to make more money to lose out on precious time with our children. I feel very fortunate to have the opportunity to move to the UK and what we will save in healthcare costs alone should make up for many of the other increased costs of living.

Can't seem to find out any decent statistics for deaths due to NHS treatment (maybe they're too grim to compile LOL),but ones from the US leave a lot to be desired.
http://www.health-care-reform.net/causedeath.htm


Dave

I know that because I didn't have medical insurance and yet I earned too much to qualify for Medicaid, I was forced off of my anti-depressants for 3 years (I'm diagnosed bi-polar for decades) and during that time, I tried to kill myself twice because I couldn't afford the $80+ a month for my prescription.  I'm not in the UK yet, but at least here in Sweden, which also has socialized medicine, I have been able to afford not only my prescription, but to actually go to a doctor before whatever illness got to the point where an emergency room was critical.

Exactly!!!!!!!!!!!!

Great site. I, of course, do not wish for Americans to die due to any healthcare issues. It does, however, illuminate the fact that no system is perfect!

I've been treated for serious conditions in the following:

US Military hospital (Madigan, WA state)
US "University of Washington" medical center
UK Edinburgh Royal Infirmary (prior to the move to a new facility)

I feel that my treatment was equal in all three locations.  However, there were great differences between them (all three places were treating the same life threatening blood disease that I have).  

I felt that the NHS was over-treating me in many cases, and it was difficult to convince my hemotologist to see me one a month, instead of once a week.  They wanted to medicate me straight away, and were very keen to keep me in hospital overnight for transfusions.  

The military hospital wanted to keep me at hospital for a few days, but once I was gone, they only wanted to see me 3-4 times a year.  Medication was at a minimum (though still more than I wanted, because of side effects).

The UW in Seattle was great.  My hemotologist saw me monthly or quarterly, based on the severity of my condition at the last appointment.  They were not happy about my wanting less medication, but with a promise of "being careful" and not falling down any stairs (bleeding disorder and all) they agreed to the bare minimum of drugs.

Overall, I feel confident in the care I recieved from all three.  The NHS, in my opinion, treated me too much, as I really didn't want to be "sick" going to see doctors all the time.  But, as the condition can be deadly, I can understand, and apprciate, thier overzealous manner.

Now, when I was just going to see my GPs in both countries, I can not see a real difference.  Both places make me feel rushed, and I feel as if I am not being given the time and consideration patients should have at an exam.  I feel that is an improvement which both nations need to work on.

I would not hessitate to recieve care from either country.

As far as surgeries and hospitals in general, I think it's a bit of a lottery. I've had one instance where a GP actually picked up a pen from his desk to use as a tongue depressor on a baby. I promptly changed surgeries, and haven't had any compliants. I've birthed two children here, and while the care during birthing felt the same as care I'd gotten for US births, the aftercare in hospital was spread a bit thin and maternity wards are not a restful place to recover as you're in one big room with lots of beds, and I was ready to get out of there in 12 hours because I couldn't stand it. My US experience with a private room and regular attention from nurses for 3 days was more akin to a holiday, lol. I know you didn't ask about births, sorry. It's most of what I've experienced with the NHS.

CIA world fact book statistics put US death rate at 8.25 per 1000, and UK deaths at 10.18 per 1000. However the US infant mortality rate is higher than the UK, and life expectancy is about six months longer on average in the UK. Is the healthcare system a contribution to these any of these statistics?

I think it's easy to think that the NHS is great if you've had poor or no medical insurance in the U.S., and easy to think that it is not that great if you've had good medical insurance and good medical care.  People on this board come from different backgrounds in the U.S. and, I think, have valid reactions to the healthcare in the UK based on their own experiences in the U.S. medical system.  I think this needs to be kept in mind before we judge what people say about the NHS.  Not everyone has had the same experiences.

Um what if you have had good insurance in the USA and still had crap medical care from one of the best hospitals in the USA? The worse care I have had in the USA was as a well paid, fully insured far from being poor person. The best from a Nurse practitioner at my University when I had no insurance and no money.

I have had great doctors in the USA and here...I have also thus far encountered crap doctors in both places. 

See, I would argue that it has more to do with the individual doctors and hospitals more than the system itself.

In the UK you have access to medical care regardless of who you are and how much money you earn. I think it's brilliant that the poor and children don't have to go without insurance/medical treatment. 

You also have access to private medical insurance and private treatment as well.  So if you miss the private rooms and the private doctors you have the option of paying for it just like in the USA. Oh and the new hospitals that still can harbor MRSA just as easily as one that is 150 years old. I mean if you have the 80,000 USD to fork over in the USA I am sure for that same money in the UK you'd get pretty top of the line treatment. 

My father has almost never been in a room by himself even in the USA... then again he is being treated in military hospitals.  In a way their own form of socialized medicine in the USA, because once you serve and are a vet you are entitled to go there no matter how rich or poor you are.

Both the USA and UK need to change things.  Both countries could do with more cleanliness and better trained doctors and nurses.

I hate to tell people this, but doctors and nurses are also human and guess what?  Being the USA does not make you immune from human error either. As Leah said it's a bit of a lottery.

I feel badly for anyone having bad treatment in either country, I don't however think it gives them the right to insinuate that the UK is somehow inferior or even that the USA is.

Most grievances that don't come down to treatment are couched in what we are used to and how we think things should be. 

I don't get why people leave home and expect things to be the same or why they look at differences and put them into little boxes.  What I am used to is good and what I am not is bad.  I just don't get it. 

Sorry rant over.  Can you tell I get way too much of the same attitude from people as the OP?

JessicaAnne,

Completely agree with your point.

Some of the stories I hear or read scare me. In fact, if I am reading the newspaper and there is an article (something negative about the HS), I can't read it....I don't want anymore fear about it.

My husband (Brit) thinks its great....as for me, I don't have any real confidence in it at all, it seems to be hit or miss. The waiting lists, dirty hospitals, staff not properly washing their hands, etc.  

From a personal standpoint I don't have any real trust with my GP. I remember last year having my BP checked a few times (it had been elevated I believed due to work stress of working 90 hrs one week and 50 the following, living between a hotel and an office with some OTT people, I was stressed to the max). Yes, you can work some ungodly hrs outside of the US. Anyway, the reading was something like 210/140 and it almost took my arm off...I was like what the ****?. The GP said, "oh don't worry about it, the monitor isn't very reliable". I was like what ?, if that was for real I should be in the hospital (not that I would want to go there).  Luckily I had a personal monitor in my pocket that I had bought on a recent trip back to the states....I had taken a reading about 15 mins before I arrived at the office (because I wanted to compare with the doctors since I was worried I may have "white coat" syndome) and showed her that it was fine. She then said, oh can you take it again so we can compare to my monitor? I took it and it was 140/95....yes a bit high but probably because of the stress of just seeing another reading through the roof on her monitor.

Needless to say, I haven't been back there since. Luckily my BP is just fine now! I still monitor it on my own. We have private too but its like pulling teeth for our GPs to give us a refferal to go private. That's another story.

Anyway, just my thoughts about the NHS, it is all relative depending on your experiences in the states vs here in the UK. I guess my experiences while minor (thank goodness) have been enough to put me off.

Oh and also let me add that a decision to treat for cancer or for transplant does depend a lot on many factors.  Namely on your age.

In Spain my cousin would have required a liver transplant to save her life.  She also would have had to survived the cancer that had already spread to other parts of her body.  In her mid 70's the decision was made to keep her comfortable and let her leave this world.  Sometimes trying to eek a few more years out of someone is not always the best choice. The liver she would have gotten would not have guaranteed her life and she might have died on the table anyways.

My great aunt has just also passed away in the USA in her 80's.  Again there might have been a slim chance of her living longer had she had a heart transplant.  Then again she might have died during surgery. Again the decision was made not to go through with surgery.

It happens everywhere.

I know three people in the UK personally who have cancer.  One is in their 30's one in their 40's and one in their 50's.

All three are getting excellent care.  Two of them on the NHS.  My two friends on the NHS have had pretty immediate treatment in the form of surgery, chemo and radiation.  They would not have been treated any faster in the USA.

So...having cancer in the UK is not a death sentence either.

If you receive crap care then switch doctors. I did in the USA even with an HMO (which is as akin to hell)...

I have a GP in my practice I refuse to see. 

It really is that simple.

My wife and I had a good plan in the States (Blue Cross/Blue Shield) and her doctor had an office at Brigham and Women's hospital in Boston, a fairly famous hospital that attracts patients from all over the world but getting in to see her doctor was akin to dental surgery, it'd take forever. When she was first diagnosed with breast cancer I contemplated taking her back there for treatment but we went with the NHS here in England because they were right on top of it right away. From a routine mammogram to diagnosis to surgery and follow up treatment they were nothing short of brilliant.  In retrospect I'd hate to think how long we would have waited in the States to get as far in such a short period of time, who knows......I do know however that the NHS breast cancer programs in place are second to none, even America's. In the States I could always use the Veterans hospital but even then you waited months to be seen by a doctor. here I can be seen by my Key-Doc in a matter of days...the last thing anyone wants to hear when theyre feeling ill is the doctor does'nt have any free appointments for 2 months...just my 2 cents on the NHS, they struggle a bit with funding but even in Boston I was paying good monthly premiums and had to resort to walking into the emergency room for such things as bronchial infections, pulled muscles, etc, things of a non-emergency nature but all the same important at the time.

If you receive crap care then switch doctors. I did in the USA even with an HMO (which is as akin to hell)...

I have a GP in my practice I refuse to see. 

It really is that simple.

Very true, VNP.  My father always had brilliant insurance through his job at Royal Dutch Shell, but it took absolute ages to diagnose his hypertension - despite his developing migraines, fainting spells, etc.  And his having a family history of it on his mother's side like a blue streak (he's lost a brother, a niece and a mother to heart attack, in addition to another brother's having had two heart attacks by the age of 42). 

Later, his medication was switched to a generic brand w/o his knowledge - he gets his drugs by post.  He dutifully took them, not knowing they were not working for him.  He visited an opthalmologist - he's had cataracts - when he felt he needed a new prescription.  He didn't.  His blood pressure was so high there was extreme stress on his optic nerve.  The doctor - luckily in a professional building attached to a hospital - phoned for medics to get him to the hospital right away.  It took 4 days to bring his blood pressure back down.  He was inches from a stroke.