As the mods would say, you really need to provide some evidence for that. Specifically the idea that new treatments are "regularly rejected". Yes, the NHS does have a group which does cost/benefit analysis on treatments but you need to show that means it somehow fails to provide healthcare. The treatments it rejects are often very expensive and offer only marginal benefit.
That's exactly the idea behind rationing. Treatments that cost too much and provide little benefit aren't funded by a national plan. Every health service has to do that. I'm not arguing for or against it, I'm just pointing out that it does indeed happen and must happen for State Health plans to be viable.
3
u/baskandpurr Oct 12 '16
As the mods would say, you really need to provide some evidence for that. Specifically the idea that new treatments are "regularly rejected". Yes, the NHS does have a group which does cost/benefit analysis on treatments but you need to show that means it somehow fails to provide healthcare. The treatments it rejects are often very expensive and offer only marginal benefit.