Campaigners marching hundreds of miles from Newcastle to London to protest at NHS privatisation in England say only a Yes referendum vote will protect Scotland's own health service.
Labour Party member and NHS activist James Doran, who is on the walk, said he thought Scottish independence could help stop privatisation in England too.
He said: "A Yes vote would open the way for the NHS to be written into the Scottish constitution, preventing a government coming in and privatising it before voters have a chance to kick them out at the ballot box. This could be inspiration to the rest of the UK, giving a good example to those campaigning for a People's NHS."
Green Party campaigns officer Adrian Crudan, who is also marching, said: "The NHS [south of the Border] is fast becoming a brand name for a profit-seeking franchise rather than an integrated public service. Wake up and get out of the nightmare while you can - by voting Yes."
The People's March for the NHS mirrors the 1936 walk from Jarrow to London which was organised to protect against unemployment and poverty.
It is expected to arrive in London in six days after completing 280 miles. Its aim is to highlight concerns about the "rapid dismantling, privatisation and destruction" of the NHS in England.
It is one of a number of campaign groups which have sprung up.
Professor Sue Richards, co-chair of Keep Our NHS Public, which aims to prevent the NHS being transferred to private healthcare companies, said: "What's really happening in health is a drive towards the reduction of the role of the state in paying for and delivering health. We desperately want Scotland to stay together to help us escape from this. But if I were a Scot and lived in Scotland, personally I think I would be voting for independence."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article