Australia moves to boost private health cover
BMJ 2000; 321 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.321.7252.10/a (Published 01 July 2000) Cite this as: BMJ 2000;321:10
All rapid responses
Rapid responses are electronic comments to the editor. They enable our users to debate issues raised in articles published on bmj.com. A rapid response is first posted online. If you need the URL (web address) of an individual response, simply click on the response headline and copy the URL from the browser window. A proportion of responses will, after editing, be published online and in the print journal as letters, which are indexed in PubMed. Rapid responses are not indexed in PubMed and they are not journal articles. The BMJ reserves the right to remove responses which are being wilfully misrepresented as published articles or when it is brought to our attention that a response spreads misinformation.
From March 2022, the word limit for rapid responses will be 600 words not including references and author details. We will no longer post responses that exceed this limit.
The word limit for letters selected from posted responses remains 300 words.
Who edited this story should check their spelling of "Sidney" and the
current exchange rates for the Australian dollar. The story equates A$225
to £150 when it should be closer to £90.
Competing interests: No competing interests
That public health care is generally better for the patient's health
is evidenced by the use of public hospitals for any really serious or
difficult condition.
The best doctors are in the public health system. Private health
subsidy benefits only private health doctors and private hospitals.
Public hospitals suffer from lack of funds which are bestowed by
electorally sensitive political parties for political reasons and not in
the best interests of the public.
Competing interests: No competing interests
Sydney, not Sidney
Please, our fine city is spelt with a "Y"!
Competing interests: No competing interests