my point was on the fact that the NHS doesn't keep a national register of bone marrow donors, instead it is run by a charity which seemed to be odd when they have all the needed equiptment to test donor suitability at blood donor sessions and it could be done alongside the register of blood donors. And the point of this topic is about the availability of donors, admittedly organs after death.
The actual operation for transplant and the following recouperation treatment would be done by the NHS (no charge to the patient) but the donor would be sought from the register run by the charity.
The NHS isn't perfect, it does have problems and it could be run much more efficiently than it is at present. As to if it would work in the USA.....well with our profit above all else thinking we could do it a lot more efficiently, however there is and always will be too many influecial people making a nice penny or two out of the status quo to make it viably realistic.
Edit: i have read a lot of arguements about the best way with healthcare. Many say a social system is the only way to go, others say that private healthcare is best as it offers choice. My view is that with the amount of wealth in a country such as ours we should not be having discussions about people that can't afford healthcare, because it's immoral that we have such a problem. So i probably side with a social system but run with a private sense of efficiency.
Bookmarks