> Are you saying that someone with mental health problems not killing themselves is any less worthy a cause than treating someone with cancer?
Not at all. I merely stated that there’s a competition in resources between the two.
Innovations that improve the quality/cost of mental health treatment are therefore still valuable in an NHS system where treatment is free to the patient because they allow more resources to be directed towards the rest of the healthcare system. Or alternatively, expand the coverage of mental health treatment for the same budget.
> I merely stated that there’s a competition in resources between the two.
But why compare/contrast those two? They're both health care, after all. There's competition in resources between all specialties. Why is contrasting those two particular ones worthwhile as opposed to say, stating there's a competition between oncologists and gastroenterologists?
I highlighted budget competition to demonstrate that improvements in the cost of health care are always useful, even in systems where patients aren’t charged directly.
As to the choice of specialties in the comparison, mental health was the subject of discussion in the thread and the other selected speciality was arbitrary because all specialties compete for resources.
Not at all. I merely stated that there’s a competition in resources between the two.
Innovations that improve the quality/cost of mental health treatment are therefore still valuable in an NHS system where treatment is free to the patient because they allow more resources to be directed towards the rest of the healthcare system. Or alternatively, expand the coverage of mental health treatment for the same budget.