The 'respected' financial magazine International Business Weekly (IBW) printed an editorial back in July which stated that if Stephen Hawking lived in the UK he would not have lived for so long, due to the terrible service offered by the UK's "socialist" healthcare system. They are one of the many right-wing US publications, with capitalist interests, which are banging out all sorts of lies relating to the healthcare systems of other western nations, in the hope of staving off any impending healthcare reform which would allow the poorer sections of US society proper access to services which they need. Magazines such as the aforementioned IBW are quick to bang out the rhetoric, and would clearly rather the US government spend tax dollars on propping up banks and industry, than looking after the health of their citizens, but they got it very wrong this time. Stephen Hawking has infact lived in the UK all of his life and has been looked after by the NHS since he developed ALS in the 60's. He has hit back by saying that without the NHS he may now be dead.

THE ORIGINAL DISHONEST INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS WEEKLY ARTICLE

On Monday July the 27th the Investors Business Weekly (IBW) ran an article rubbishing the British healthcare system, the National Health Service (NHS). Amongst other things they used Stephen Hawking as an example of someone who would not be alive if he were living in the UK. The article had been amended, but it now appears to have been deleted totally. The bit that was first removed included this ridiculous dis-information... "The controlling of medical costs in countries such as Britain through rationing, and the health consequences thereof, are legendary. The stories of people dying on a waiting list or being denied altogether read like a horror script… People such as scientist Stephen Hawking wouldn't have a chance in the UK, where the National Health Service would say the life of this brilliant man, because of his physical handicaps, is essentially worthless". Sadly for the IBW, Stephen Hawking has always lived, worked and been treated in the UK, by the NHS. Stephen has hit back by telling the Guardian "I wouldn't be here today if it were not for the NHS. I have received a large amount of high-quality treatment without which I would not have survived".

QUICK FACTS FOR US VISITORS: WHAT THE NHS DOES FOR THE UK POPULATION

I personally believe that the majority of people receive better care in the UK as compared to the US. Apart from being treated like a patient, instead of a customer, the NHS offers such a wide range of services TO ALL. That's right, TO EVERYBODY. Some quick facts for our US visitors... To visit a GP (General Practitioner/Family Doctor) it costs nothing. That is included under the NHS, as are all prescriptions bar a small few. If they deem that you can afford to pay for your medications, then you pay a flat rate of UK£7.20 per item or UK£104 per year for everything which you will need. For some info direct from the NHS, check here for UK prescription costs, plus read FAQs at the bottom of that article for some info about exemptions. Finally, if you stay in hospital, there is no charge whatsoever. That concept is alien to most of the people in the UK, and Ireland too for that matter. The Investors Business Weekly article states that the UK has been praised for keeping it's healthcare cost per capita down to about half that of the US, and the magazine uses this as a stick to beat the NHS with, saying that this amounts to not looking after the people well enough. Guys, that's half the amount spent per person, and the ENTIRE population gets medications at very affordable prices whilst they don't pay for visits to doctors or for hospital stay. And furthermore, they are looked after better.

US PROVIDES BETTER CARE - FOR THE TOP 1% ONLY

When I first heard the original claims by International Business Weekly (IBW), I was astonished, because I have worked in the NHS for almost a decade, and have friends who have worked in the US system for many years too, and we all agree that if you are in the top 1% of the population you may receive better care in the US, but otherwise the UK wins hands down. And when I say better care, I really mean better technology and science for those that can pay top whack, because the best scientists have been brought to the US - or bought by the US, whichever way you want to describe it - and this means that there will always be doctors and consultants who will hold more advanced knowledge than the rest of the world. A lot of drugs, treatments, scanners and some types of medial equipment are also first developed in the US, so the rich-list will often have access to these drugs and treatments before anybody else in the world. This is where American healthcare is ahead - in being able to diagnose and treat people with new technology and intelligence - but only if you can afford to pay for it.

THE NHS TREATS ALL CITIZENS THE SAME

On the other hand my colleagues in the US would say that it feels much more like a business on the normal wards there, and this contributes to a much less personal experience whilst receiving care. As for the NHS, the general idea with that is that everybody gets looked after the same, and although it doesn't always work out that way for some people, it does achieve that most of the time. I looked after three 'Lords' that I can remember and they all stayed in normal 4-6 bed bays on public wards, next to 'Joe the Plumber', and all patients were treated exactly the same. I also looked after some MP's and tv personalities too, and the same story goes for them. There is a sense in the UK that when you enter hospital that you are going in with the same hopes and fears as everybody else, and this binds together the most unlikely groups of people. In some cases I would even say that it brings them down to earth and makes them human again, and this is the great thing about the NHS. It treats everybody the same and gives everybody a sense of 'we are all in this together', and if nothing else, this is a much better environment to advance treatments and care practices. I would always criticise the NHS for not doing a good enough job and for not looking after some of it's patients well enough, but on the whole it does a considerably better job than the US healthcare system in providing healthcare for all of it's citizens. And afterall, is that not what a healthcare system is supposed to do? Some things really are that simple.