Clearly not the same thing, be gone with your strawman arguments.
5 Likes
Why isn’t this all over the national press?
From personal experience, the biggest problem is finding anyone with a comprehensive overview of all the medications and treatments who is qualified to do a thorough review. At a certain level of complexity, you need an experienced consultant who’s humble enough to go round the houses to piece together all the info and history. As soon as you move to another area, you may well have to start from scratch…
On top of that, plenty of patients are themselves desperate to stop taking so much. Think methotrexate and other nasty stuff. So review always tries to cut unnecessary stuff, which inevitably means a risk of cutting too much or the wrong thing if you misjudge.
Like a lot of things in Scotland the government doesn’t really want you to be aware of it so it never really gets any press. Current ScotGov are basically immune
1 Like
Ah, I see. But with the greatest respect, it doesn’t work that way.
1 Like
Defining something as civil arbitrarily is definitely the same thing
Anyone who isn’t needs to relook at their biases
Part of the world has decided that healthcare should be state ran and that is civil, the majority have decided that the private sector should run it and that’s civil
Are you saying I can now go and conquer the uncivilised? Because they do something you don’t agree with 
That’s because the populace are deluded and convinced by “grass is greener on the other side where we have even less control”, devolution of healthcare (if not entirely) was a mistake