It's not, necessarily, the NHS

Just one of those little things it’s necessary to point out. A point being made that health care got very much better post-war. Indeed it did. As listed, UK diphtheria cases declined from 65,000 to 53 between 1938 and 1956. This is both astonishing and glorious, a massive reduction in both disease and human suffering - given the 5% or so mortality rate that’s many fewer parents having to bury their children.

Good.

It is also true that this same period saw the foundation and growth of the National Health Service. We can all have whatever view we like on that event.

But it’s not - not wholly and accurately - true that diptheria declined because the specific format of the NHS. For the diptheria rate declined pretty much equally in the US - which as many will note does not have the NHS. In fact, the diptheria rate has dropped pretty much everywhere and as, again, people will point out the NHS is that uniquely British institution.

The same goes on to be true of polio, tuberculosis and many another disease and condition. Medical technology reached the point that these were all addressable problems. And addressed they were in every (rich at least) country whatever the structure of their health care system.

It is possible that the NHS is better than any other health care structure. We don’t agree, for myriad reasons. But the proof that the NHS is better does have to come from proof of the outperformance of the NHS compared to other health care systems - not from the general advance of medical technology itself.

We’re back with Thomas Sowell’s ever so useful question: “Compared to what?”