Health-Breast Cancer treatment-Any truth to the rumors about NHS stoppping trea

My sister had just said the in the UK they just recently passed a law stating that the NHS will not treat women with stage three breast cancer.
This sounds crazy to me and not  at all the type of behavior I witnessed While in the UK.
Is there any truth to this , or is this just more right wing propaganda aimed at shooting down Obama's health care plan?

i have no idea if it's true, but anti-obama commercials in the US are definitely claiming this.  i just did a quick google search but couldn't find the info i was looking for... hopefully someone else will know. 

That is quite simply not true.

Vicky

Thanks.
I thought so.
I just do not understand where people get their information from.

It seems that whenever the topic of a national healthcare plan comes up, everyone becomes an expert on how things are run in other countries without having any  actual knowledge or first hand experience.

A favorite tactic of my sister and father (hard core republicans and opponents of any national care) is to bring up how the NHS does not work and there are long waiting times for procedures and that care is not up to par.etc. etc.

They always seems to have an arsenal of false facts at the ready to use as "proof" of the failing systems throughout the world. 

I am all for a national health care plan here in the States 

Just curious then.....For users of this site who have experienced both the health care under the NHS and the privatised system in the States, which do you prefer, or simply what are your experiences ?

Thanks

I am lucky that I haven't had to have too much medical treatment either in the UK or the USA.  I will say, however, that my parents, both of whom are now retired and not getting any sort of health plan through a pension, etc., are currently paying $10,000 a year for very basic coverage.  This doesn't include prescriptions and neither had any sort of pre-existing condition.

There was recently a study in the press by Harvard Medical School that said nearly 60% of personal bankruptcies are a result of medical costs and that anyone in the states (insured or not) are currently one serious illness/incident away from big-time costs.

I appreciate I don't have a horror story or a good story for private/nationalised but I'm currently pregnant in the UK and still find it amazing that I can just walk in and get the care that I need. My back was bothering me and I saw a physio in less than a week.  I appreciate the NHS isn't free (we all pay for it!) but I appreciate knowing that I can get care no matter my state of employment, etc. It's one of the things I worry about when I go back to the USA (if we ever do.)

Katie

Just curious then.....For users of this site who have experienced both the health care under the NHS and the privatised system in the States, which do you prefer, or simply what are your experiences ?

As a girl from a lower middle class family, who for the most of her life did not have health insurance, I am completely for nationalized healthcare in the US. I think the rich doctors are afraid of pay cuts. Get over it.

Honestly, I haven't experienced much here in the way of healthcare yet. But I do know, that I was able to get my BC, even though it just came out here and no one is very familiar with it... I know that my doctor here diagnosed an infection in my nose that I have had since December, and prescribed a gel that has already worked after only 3 days: pretty much completely healed... I know that I did not get it checked out until I moved to the UK, because it would have cost my life savings to go to the doctor...

I know that our doctors in the US thought that they knew everything, and pedalled expensive drugs because they have shady connections with drug companies. (This was confirmed to my mom's friend via a slip up from her nurse, about why she was being prescribed the more expensive drug.)

As for my mother, who has anxiety problems, they refused to give her her medication, because it is addictive (even though she would make a 3 month prescription last an entire year), and put her on loads of different anti-depression drugs which made her depressed! Because she wasn't depressed to begin with. And then they put her on another one that made her anxiety 10x worse. Then the doctor told her that she was crazy and needed to seek mental therapy... Even though the drugs she prescribed made her that way, and they were all needlessly expensive as well. What she was on previously was affordable and worked very well...

I have lots of hang-ups with the US healthcare system, and could go on. I definitely prefer the UK system, even if it IS slower to get an appointment/procedure. Here it is a right rather than a priveledge, and I think it should be that way in every so-called civilized society.

*end rant*

really glad to hear the breast cancer rumor isn't true.

i couldn't find the commercial that references it, but here's one from the same group:



what an awful example of scare tactics

I think the rich doctors are afraid of pay cuts. Get over it.

This wouldn't surprise me, but I find it ironic.  Both my parents are doctors, and they work for the state/government.  They both make very comfortable salaries, and lead a pretty good life.  They're not millionaires by any stretch of the imagination, and sure, they could probably make more if they'd gone for private practice instead of research, but they can afford what they want in life.  I can only imagine that if they were being paid by the government to practice medicine full-time rather than do research full-time, their salaries would increase, as they wouldn't be reliant on grant money to fund their research.

I imagine drug companies are also rather panicked by the thought of government-run health-care, as well, as I doubt the government would be that thrilled with drug reps sending doctors off to the Bahamas, etc.

Well, at my 4th of July party today, I met an american woman who works in Breast Cancer Research. Which was weird b/c I had just read this thread today, and met her through a fellow UKYer.

But anyway...

She told me that the rumor isn't true. HOWEVER, what they ARE doing is refusing to give drugs to lengthen lifespan by a few months to those with terminal cancer. Because apparently it's a drain on the funding, and is "pointless" to them, because they will die anyway.  I think that is very sad logic...

You can still get those drugs through privatized healthcare, but you can't sign up for private health and get the drugs if your condition is pre-existing...

Because apparently it's a drain on the funding, and is "pointless" to them, because they will die anyway.   I think that is very sad logic...

Not breast cancer related but it reminded me of this (meaning draining of funds for sick or elderly).

My MIL in the UK is in very good health for her age (76) yet has had a bad knee for a couple of years and needs a replacement (it keeps popping out of joint) but because there is no pain (thank goodness) the NHS won't give her a knee replacement. She told me last weekend that she recently saw the doctor again and he said "well if there is no pain, then your knee will probably see you out".  

She stated it very calmly  to me like she just accepted it. When I told my husband he was very upset. The NHS can be very scary at times...that said, so can the US Heathcare system. They are be really bad at times in different ways.  

I haven't had any serious illnesses in either country, thank goodness. I had a low-level corporate gig in the US with decent Blue Cross. For routine care, I find that is somewhat superior to the NHS. I don't have any complaints about my doctor here -- I like him and he seems competent -- but I feel like he's often ticking boxes. For absolutely everything we discuss, he prints something out from a government website that he doesn't seem to believe. And there's less routine screening, like mammograms and pap smears and follow-ups.

I have to say, though, the BEST cost-to-service system I've ever lived under was the common American way of doing things thirty years or so ago, before the HMO. Most people bought insurance for catastrophic health problems, like being hit by a bus -- relatively low cost, high deductible -- and paid out of pocket for routine care. Under that sort of scheme, I typically spent less every year on doctor visits than car maintenence, I had complete control of my day-to-day medical care, but I would have been covered if something awful and expensive happened to me.

She told me that the rumor isn't true. HOWEVER, what they ARE doing is refusing to give drugs to lengthen lifespan by a few months to those with terminal cancer.

wow, i see the cost measures they are going for but that is a bit disturbing.  my friend's mother at one point was only given a few months to live but the treatment  they went forward with ended up providing her with another fairly good 10 years, long enough to see her youngest child reach the age of 18. 

Not breast cancer related but it reminded me of this (meaning draining of funds for sick or elderly).

My MIL in the UK is in very good health for her age (76) yet has had a bad knee for a couple of years and needs a replacement (it keeps popping out of joint) but because there is no pain (thank goodness) the NHS won't give her a knee replacement. She told me last weekend that she recently saw the doctor again and he said "well if there is no pain, then your knee will probably see you out".  

She stated it very calmly  to me like she just accepted it. When I told my husband he was very upset. The NHS can be very scary at times...that said, so can the US Heathcare system. They are be really bad at times in different ways.  

Knee replacement is a VERY big operation and needs to be repeated over the long-term.  So, if it's not causing her any pain, I don't see what's so upsetting.

Your sister hasn't been watching Fox News has she? Amazing the mis-information they put out about "socialized healthcare" and how it works in the UK.

I've emailed O'Reilly on a number of occasions.

My MIL in the UK is in very good health for her age (76) yet has had a bad knee for a couple of years and needs a replacement (it keeps popping out of joint) but because there is no pain (thank goodness) the NHS won't give her a knee replacement. She told me last weekend that she recently saw the doctor again and he said "well if there is no pain, then your knee will probably see you out".  

She stated it very calmly  to me like she just accepted it. When I told my husband he was very upset. The NHS can be very scary at times...that said, so can the US Heathcare system. They are be really bad at times in different ways.  

If it's not causing any pain or issues with her mobility it seems that the problem could be solved with a simple knee brace to keep it from dislocating. Hmm...a few thousand £££'s spent on someone with a very limited life expectancy or about £50 on a decent knee brace that will most likely last as long as she'll need it for.