We have two conversations here: 1.Public Health Education and 2.Making health care available through a public plan that directly competes with big insurance; and its impact on complementary services.
To Lizette's point, Brava! Yes, using marketing techniques to educate kids early on delicious proper nutrition will go a long way. Use the same techniques that big processed food companies use to get their attention. Education on safety to the whole population is another worthy cause that should be supported by the government. Canada currently has an education campaign to help cut fatalities do to accidental deaths (a large percent of all their fatalities). It is in inferred that money saved on accidental deaths can be pumped back in to provide more services in their public program.
This leads us to insurance. The reality is that many people cannot afford health care at all. Care is post phoned until acute, harder to treat and costly, as well as overwhelming our ERs. Public insurance can be used to make for profit insurance companies really compete and at the same time provide for those who can't afford care. As for the "take care of me crowd", many of these people are on, and will stay on, company or private plans that will be continue to have more inclusive coverage that will be costlier than public plans.
Complementary care cuts total medical cost in a way that single provider care cannot. I cannot speak for other modalities but the addition of hypnotherapy cuts healing time, and saves costs on both the patient and medical organization and insurance sides (e.g. cost studies include its use to support the treatment of IBS, asthma, breast cancer). It's time to drop the term 'alternative' from our jargon as it infers 'either or'; and to embrace the term and reality of 'complementary' care.
For people who have money, care is always in their hands as they can pay directly for services. For those without means a government plan gives them access to coverage and care. More care than they have now.