I think we've seen enough posts about how the NHS was already in dire trouble simply from the failure of socialism to magically provide the unlimited funds they need. But now things are much worse.... NHS held to ransom: Hospitals in IT meltdown NHS cyberattack: Is your hospital affected? Operations being canceled. Delays at all levels of health care. People being turned away for treatment. Now of course, have us hospitals ever been hit by a cyber attack? Sure. But unlike the union-government-employees that run cyber-security at government run hospitals, our capitalist based profit-motivated hospitals seem to have a better time dealing with it. Of course that costs money. Thankfully the NHS is far cheaper. And we can see the results of that. But what makes this particularly humorous to me, is that this is one of the areas where the left-wing claims our system sucks. I have pointed out many times that various rankings used around the world to claim the US healthcare is terrible and everyone else has a better system, none of them actually look specifically at the quality of care. They look at nearly everything except quality of care. As if the quality and results of care is a static thing, and all that matters is cost and amenities, as if we can cut costs in half and the quality will remain the same. But related to this specific event, some rankings specifically look at how computerized the health care system is. http://www.commonwealthfund.org/~/m...rt/2014/jun/1755_davis_mirror_mirror_2014.pdf On page 22 of the Common wealth fund ranking they say: "Efficiency indicators from the 2012 survey include whether or not primary care practices have “multifunctional clinical information technology.” To be defined as a primary care practice with multifunctional IT functionality, the practice must have an electronic medical record (EMR) system with two or more functions for ordering, patient information, panel information, and decision support." In other words, if only we had computerized electronic medical record system, we could be as efficient as the NHS is now. Granted that has nothing to do with the quality of care... I'll take a high quality doctor writing notes on paper, who can see me in a week instead of year, over anything the NHS has. But that's a negative in their comparison, and so our health care sucks. If only we could be as computerized as the NHS. By the way, doesn't this sound familiar? Like healthcare.gov? Funny how we keep getting the same results with government intervention, but then everyone is constantly surprised by problems.