According to the Telegraph page linked in the DW article,

"eye clinics were unable to keep pace with demand.... In four out of five cases, those affected had chronic conditions requiring long term follow up, meaning they are not covered by NHS targets." https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/06/06/hundreds-going-b...

While pathetic, it's not clear how it follows, as the DW asserts, "This is what will happen in America if Democrats get their way on 'Medicare for all.'" There are lots of countries with socialized medicine without the problem that NHS has. DW fails to mention that, possibly because of its bias. Private insurers in the US, in the meantime, are widely known to pick-and-choose what they will cover ... and will not.

Edit: here's a description of 'Medicare for All' from Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/teresaghilarducci/2018/07/16/wh...

You're right to be concerned. But the linked article shows what happens if you have socialised medicine that you then starve of funding.

The US is already paying far more for healthcare than the UK, and that stays true even if we only consider government funding and ignore insurance. There's no reason something similar would happen in the US.

Also, that report mentions macular degeneration, and this is a problem mostly caused by terrible pharma practices.

Avastin and lucentis are very similar. Avastin is older, and is much cheaper than lucentis. They can both be used to treat AMD. The owner has licenced lucentis for use in AMD, and has chosen not to licence avantis for AMD. This means that doctors can use avastin "off label". The rights-holders decided to sue the NHS to prevent this off-label use.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-30138097

https://www.hsj.co.uk/finance-and-efficiency/breaking-nhs-wi...

That's a reasonable conclusion. I guess then my concern would be: what guarantee is there that the US won't be one of the underfunded socialized healthcare systems. In fact, it seems almost inevitable that it would be as soon as the Republican party gained control.

See also this, which describes how US healthcare is killing people: https://www.ft.com/content/05f7fa82-a315-11e9-a282-2df48f366...

You don't think that unreasonable rationing is happening in the US right now?

I think that under the current system most of the rationing is in the form of people who don't have insurance not being able to afford care. Therefore, I think convincing the people who do have health insurance to take on some of the rationing will be a tough sell. Many people in the middle class would probably perceive it as "potentially sacrifice your health for the good of society".