Is the NHS useless?

[Cyclone]

Had MT never heard of sovereign wealth funds?

[JFKvsNixon]

Go to a dentist or collect prescription from a pharmacy.

It's not free at the point of delivery. At least for people who already pay for it in taxes. So we get charged double.

 

Very often you're not paying the market rate with your prescriptions or dental treatment though are you. So you're not really being charged double.

[Orzel]

Very often you're not paying the market rate with your prescriptions or dental treatment though are you. So you're not really being charged double.

 

Oh no, you are paying way more most of the time.

Quite often private prescription that you pay market value of medicines are cheaper then NHS one.

If you have any drugs that are available OTC on your prescription you will pay very often minimum charge OTC(like 1.5£, varies depending on pharmacy) versus prescription charge(8.2£).

Only reason to have them on prescription is if you are exempt.

And if you pay you already have been charged for it through taxes.

Dentists are so poor value for money I am surprised that anyone who pays wants to use NHS ones. I prefer to pay more and have everything done on short notice. And it is not a massive difference.

NHS is not free for working people.

It is not free at point of delivery.

It is free at point of delivery of some services.

I am not saying its wrong, I am just stating the fact that it is not free.

[onewheeldave]

They are a preventative measure to improve public health, enacted due to medical advice.

You're trying to split hairs in order for your assertion to be correct, but it isn't.

Could you stop accusing me of being disingenious/a liar please?

 

I'm not 'splitting hairs'- I'm distinguishing between bans and health campaigns. they are not identical and there's a world of difference between, say, a 'five-a-day' information campaign, and, a ban on smoking in public places.

 

I'm aware of the fact that high functioning autistics can often see fine logical distinctions that many NTs cannot, but I refuse to believe that you are unable to differentiate between the two.

 

---------- Post added 03-11-2015 at 16:00 ----------

 

 

Your opinion isn't evidence, in my opinion.

You can't ban eating badly. You can ban advertising. Advertising is already restricted, and personally I doubt that a ban on advertising for food will have a large effect.

Equally, your opinion (or doubt, in this case) is not evidence.

 

I believe a ban on advertising harmfull foods would help immensely, just as it did for smoking.

 

What's your reason for believing that a ban on advertising harmfull foods would not have the same level of success as the ban on smoking?

[unbeliever]

Oh no, you are paying way more most of the time.

Quite often private prescription that you pay market value of medicines are cheaper then NHS one.

If you have any drugs that are available OTC on your prescription you will pay very often minimum charge OTC(like 1.5£, varies depending on pharmacy) versus prescription charge(8.2£).

Only reason to have them on prescription is if you are exempt.

And if you pay you already have been charged for it through taxes.

Dentists are so poor value for money I am surprised that anyone who pays wants to use NHS ones. I prefer to pay more and have everything done on short notice. And it is not a massive difference.

NHS is not free for working people.

It is not free at point of delivery.

It is free at point of delivery of some services.

I am not saying its wrong, I am just stating the fact that it is not free.

 

 

Quite so.

There are many ways to express support for and to defend the NHS.

It's not necessary to perpetuate the lie that it's "free". It is not, by any definition of the word "free". It's paid for by a combination of money confiscated from working people without their consent (taxes) and fees applied selectively to those judged able to double-pay.

It's is ridiculous to describe it as "free".

[onewheeldave]

Advertising of food to children is already tightly regulated.

And when did you last see an advert on TV for a burger or a takeaway?

I'm not after regulation- I want it banned.

 

TV? What about cinema, magazines, billboards, online advertising. What about harmfull foods other than burgers that are advertised on TV?

 

---------- Post added 03-11-2015 at 16:05 ----------

 

[/color]

Can you run through the process for me where a child gets 'tricked' by marketing and therefore effect their diet?

 

Anyone with a bit of patience who can help this individual understand that advertising works?

 

---------- Post added 03-11-2015 at 16:09 ----------

 

And adults we recognise should be given personal freedom to make decisions.

.

We've banned smoking adverts full stop. What applies to promotion of toxic and addictive inhaled tobacco products should equally apply to harmful foods, especially as damage from 'foods' is now thought to exceed damage from tobacco. Edited November 3, 2015 by onewheeldave

[truman]

 

And when did you last see an advert on TV for a burger or a takeaway?

 

Don't McDonald's and KFC count then? Haven't you seen the "Just Eat" ads?.

[tinfoilhat]

Don't McDonald's and KFC count then? Haven't you seen the "Just Eat" ads?.

 

Or dominos or papa johns. Or Pizza Hut.

[onewheeldave]

Don't McDonald's and KFC count then? Haven't you seen the "Just Eat" ads?.

 

Or dominos or papa johns. Or Pizza Hut.

Thanks for those- I've not watched actual tv for several years and assumed that cyclone was on the ball with his claim that they don't advertise burgers and fast food on tv. It looks like maybe he wasn't?

[JFKvsNixon]

Isn't there currently a ban at targeting junk food adverts towards children?