[Closed] What to cut to fund the NHS?

The corporate paymaster rules the roost.

The Donald has put the fear of God into US Pharma as he has said US Healthcare will be bidding much more aggressively on drugs as its the worlds largest buyer. Expects to save billions.

It would - but anti-biotics are actually pretty bloody cheap. So I doubt it, it seems to me like there's a nice little band of quacks in the USA who have got together to make money off people like you.

As no NICE guidelines currently exist then exactly how are GPs going to diagnose?

The USA is streaks ahead with their knowledge which is why I have a private American doctor.

Tom - there is a lot of nonsense out there around chronic diseases and parasitic phoney medicine - however Lyme is somewhat different. At the core there is good science and consensus view is changing in the light of this. NICE has even accepted now long term effects albeit equating this to immune system damage in untreated people. Outside of this core is plenty of nonsense for sure but look behind that to see the good science being done.

The Donald has put the fear of God into US Pharma as he has said US Healthcare will be bidding much more aggressively on drugs as its the worlds largest buyer. Expects to save billions.

Given that antibiotics can be sourced without having to consult a private doctor in the states, why would anyone be paying them for anything? I think everyone would much prefer their GP's to be freed from dated NICE guidelines and for standardised diagnosis and treatment to reflect the reality of the illness.

So if you can source them without an exensve gp why would insurance firms care?

And not even the utterly loaded oil companies, who dwarf the imsurance firms could sway scientific opinion on climate change.

Tom - there is a lot of nonsense out there around chronic diseases and parasitic phoney medicine - however Lyme is somewhat different. At the core there is good science and consensus view is changing in the light of this. NICE has even accepted now long term effects albeit equating this to immune system damage in untreated people. Outside of this core is plenty of nonsense for sure but look behind that to see the good science being done.

Sure, long term immune and neurological damage have nothing to do with antibiotics though.

As no NICE guidelines currently exist then exactly how are GPs going to diagnose?

The USA is streaks ahead with their knowledge which is why I have a private American doctor.

Because they've had a minimum of 5 years of university education, and at least that again of clinical experience. Guidelines are good, but we don't have guidelines for everything, nor does every case fit the guidelines.

As for the US being streaks ahead with their knowledge.... Simply not true. The UK has a worldwide reputation for its standards of training - both at undergraduate and postgraduate level. In the states, the practice of evidence, knowledge based medicine is massively impacted by the fact health care in the states is a money-making industry and by the litigious culture that puts a patients wants/demands over the clinicians expertise.

So if you can source them without an exensve gp why would insurance firms care?

Hmm. Let me think, Tom-possibly because medical insurance doesn't work by people buying their own meds and sending in a receipt?

And not even the utterly loaded oil companies, who dwarf the imsurance firms could sway scientific opinion on climate change.

No, but they swayed people like the soon-to-be US President and created doubt in the minds of people for whom climate change is not expedient; creating enough political resistance to squeeze another couple of decades out of fossil fuel investment.

Sure, long term immune and neurological damage have nothing to do with antibiotics though.

It's ok, scientist Tom says anyone without malaria and over 60 can go **** themselves if they think they're getting medical treatment anyway, regardless of how much tax they pay him and his colleagues to do meaningful, informed research, so what's a bit of neurological damage sustained through lack of timeous treatment as a result of ineffective medical guidelines and poor research as a result of so called scientists that would rather cut off their nose to spite their face than admit they got it wrong?

Well now that stw has come up with a paradigm shifting treatment for Lyme disease I think we can declare this winters crisis over

It's also worth noting that Trump has appointed a vaccines cause autism nutter to head his vaccine commission.
Showing that internet conspiracists really can put lives at risk

Also that Trump is a bad example as most world leaders aren't as gullible as trump

It's ok, scientist Tom says anyone without malaria and over 60 can go **** themselves if they think they're getting medical treatment anyway, regardless of how much tax they pay him and his colleagues to do meaningful, informed research,

Scientists get pretty little in the way of research grants derived from tax, and tax oaid by people with lyme disease accounts for such a tiny percentage tax.

A lot of the grant money comes from NGOs.

And I'm not wrong on antibiotics, you've consistently produded very misinformed opinion on how these studies are run and what constitutes evidence.

Tom I am afraid on Lyme you are very wrong and have shown yourself to be closed minded.

Medical consensus changes over time. On Lyme it is doing so. Long term antibiotics have good evidence behind it it you want to see it but you don't

Tom I stayed out of the conversation for a while but why not read up on the US's approach to Lyme. When we lived there with our two young children from 1989-91 there was a good understanding of the disease amongst the general population and medical profession. The UK has been in denial / turned a blind eye.

Malaria, plenty of people take that very seriously including Bill and Melinda Gates. Dengue gets a lot of focus too in Singapore for example, I am sure it's profile will rise in US now. An old boss of mine (American living in London) has had it which means the next time he'll probably die. There is ample room for the UK to focus on Lyme discease, which is totally approporate given it's something which will continue to increasingly affect us.

@kimbers the joint MMR vacine definitely negatively impacted the health of our middle daughter (in our opinion as parents), there have been long term issues she suffers from to this day, she is now 26. My eldest didn't have it and we paid for the youngest to have the individual jabs. The joint vacine was a cost saving excersize no one asked for amd which tye medical profession amd various governments have been wedded to imo for fear of admitting any mistake. You can post the "nutter" stuff if you like but there are very many parents who feel this way.

[url= http://m.imgur.com/VrXnLns?tags ]Literally words fail me. Wakefield was a crook and people still believe his lies[/url]

There are other (alleged) side effects other than Autism.

Vacines are a medically "invasive" process. There are numerous vacines where the aide effects / severe reaction cases are considered worth it overall, ie the good outcomes outweigh the bad outcomes. There ARE bad outcomes. It's like penicillin, some people are highly alergic to it.

No one is saying vaccines are risk free. There are common mild side effects. They are massively outweighed by the benefits though.
The ONLY reason you think mmr caused a problem is wakefield's shitstorm.
I looked after a child with late complications of measles in 1996 when I was doing paediatrics. (SSPE if you want to look it up). He died. It was not nice.
Whatever problems you have been lead to believe that MMR caused, Wakefield caused more.
I have problems convincing people with copd to have the most cost effective treatment available (flu vaccine) because of this pervasive fear of vaccines. If people had their jabs it would save the NHS a fair amount.

It's like penicillin, some people are highly alergic to it.

So you are saying that like penicillin some people are highly allergic to the MRI vaccine (is there anything that people aren't allergic to?). If you're not why are you making the comparison? It is sounds as pointless as saying "you can bleed to death if you are cut with a knife that's why I won't let a surgeon come near me".

You can post the "nutter" stuff if you like

Well you're definitely making it easier with stuff like the above.

Ernie I am making the comparison so as to point out that vacines have side effects, known side effects. What doc says is what I said, most side effects are small or low fequency so are considered "worth it". Of course if you are one of the people or it's your child that's affected then it won't feel that way. There are side effects and negative reactions

My point with MMR is we had 3 seperate vacines and the combined one was forced upon us. It's the combined one we as parents had an issue with

What doc says is what I said, most side effects are small or low fequency so are considered "worth it".

I'm fairly sure that you weren't both saying the same thing, but apologies if you said that most side effects are small or low frequency so are considered "worth it". It wasn't obvious to me.

I'm not sure I would describe anaphylactic shock as a "side effect" btw. But perhaps I'm just less dramatic.

It's the combined one we as parents had an issue with

I looked after a child with late complications of measles in 1996 when I was doing paediatrics. (SSPE if you want to look it up). He died. It was not nice.

Yeah sadly I've had a few in the past can't believe people were prepared to risk measles that not only puts their kids at risks but others too because they believed one guy's report that has no proof in it.

jambalaya - Member
Ernie I am making the comparison so as to point out that vacines have side effects, known side effects. What doc says is what I said, most side effects are small or low fequency so are considered "worth it". Of course if you are one of the people or it's your child that's affected then it won't feel that way. There are side effects and negative reactions

Yes, but when people attribute very serious effects (E.g. Autism) to a vaccine, when there is NO evidence for this viewpoint, consensus of experts is that there is NO link, and the quack who proposed this was STRUCK OFF for his underhand immoral methods and lying, it's DANGEROUS. No one is saying that there are no side effects - just that they're a less frequent and a lot less serious than moron anti-vaxxers want you to believe.

P.s. The CAPITALS are so you can imagine you're reading a FAKE NEWS health news site.

Jambs now we don't agree on many things, but on this one I have to say you are particularly misinformed

The tripple jab is now the most studdied vaccine in the history of vaccines

It's been successfully used for decades and has undoubtedly saved many lives, while as you say it's like any other vaccine, there may well be side effects, it has been consistently shown to be safe and no more likely to provoke side effects than having the jabs seperately, this has been observed in studies of 100s of thousands and meta analyses that include millions of children. (Go on pubmed and look)

If only all medicine were so closely studied !

It was partly about cost, but also about take up rate as 1 jab that gives immunity to 3 diseases increases the numbers that are immunised overall.

Of course people believe what they will about their children, but if your daughter reacted to the tripple it's statistically likely that she would've reacted to one of the single ones as well.
Even more likely (statistically) these symptoms would have occured anyway.

Firstly this is a good read.

http://singletrackworld.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/prostaholics-anonymous-8-guys-riding-to-make-a-difference

Secondly this line here about someone who is 48 says it all to me. We really need a sensible adult conversation about sorting it out.

However, through the course of his treatment and following surgery, he came to realise that the NHS isn’t set up to deal with men of his age who want to get back to their active lifestyle before their illness.

jambalaya - Member

We really need a sensible adult conversation about sorting it out.

Who are you going to have a sensible conversation with, this woman:

[url= http://metro.co.uk/2017/01/14/theresa-may-orders-gps-to-open-surgeries-seven-days-a-week-or-lose-funding-6380788/ ]Theresa May orders GPs to open surgeries seven days a week – or lose funding[/url]

[b][i]"Theresa May is pressing ahead with plans ordering GPs to offer appointments until 8pm seven days a week – or lose funding."[/b][/i]

❓

EDIT : Or perhaps this man?

[img] [/img]

Everyone, from all sides of the political spectrum. At the moment Health Service Provsion is going to continue to slide downwards as it has for the past 20 or 30 years.

Hunt is ABSOLUTELY correct, there has to be better co-ordination between state and private health care. The UK's big failing is in the relatively low level of private spending on health care. That IMO is because NHS and private care does not work at all well together.

Hats off to anyone - even Hunt - for trying to break down the barrier between public and private provision. Monopoly supply of health care serves no one well.

Hunt is ABSOLUTELY correct

It's surprising then that so few doctors and healthcare professionals have much confidence in him.

The UK's big failing is in the relatively low level of private spending on health care.

Well that's easily remedied by screwing the free at the point of delivery universal healthcare provisions.

As you shaft the NHS more and more expect to see a significant rise in private healthcare.

Of course the United States which spends about 10 times more on private healthcare is no shinning example, it's not the envy of the world, and even after Obamacare 25 million Americans still have no healthcare cover.

Still it's not about that, is it? It's about making fat profits out of a huge, absolutely vital, essential, and potentially very lucrative industry.

teamhurtmore - Member

Hats off to anyone - even Hunt - for trying to break down the barrier between public and private provision. Monopoly supply of health care serves no one well.

Which hat are you wearing today THM.........your "politically neutral" hat, or that Tory hat which you claim not to have?

My own thanks.

when you say private , do you mean :

Member of the public paying for some services

or

private companies treating people , and then getting paid by government ( we are still paying with our taxes , but not directly ) .

Jambs now we don't agree on many things, but on this one I have to say you are particularly misinformed

The tripple jab is now the most studdied vaccine in the history of vaccines

It's been successfully used for decades and has undoubtedly saved many lives, while as you say it's like any other vaccine, there may well be side effects, it has been consistently shown to be safe and no more likely to provoke side effects than having the jabs seperately, this has been observed in studies of 100s of thousands and meta analyses that include millions of children. (Go on pubmed and look)

I'm sure jamba will do as you suggest - go look up the facts in the medical literature and then have the "strength of character" to come back here and admit he was wrong.

"Theresa May is pressing ahead with plans ordering GPs to offer appointments until 8pm seven days a week – or lose funding."

Theresa may has no clue does she? a 3rd of GP places unfilled, wtf do they think gps are doing at the moment?

Had lunch the other week with a GP who was ready to jack it all in because his practice was chronically understaffed , he'd only qualified a few years before!

Will we see the same exodus from GPS that Hunt managed to create with Jr doctors?

An NHS in the grip of a staffing crisis really needs more help than to try and bully doctors to magically pull more hours out of the air, some of them even have lives and families they'd like to see now and again

Any fool that works in our business knows the impact on the front and back end of local authority cuts on social care and funding for residential-nursing care. Quite simply, the more it becomes a 'granny-farming on a budget' society the more care homes either fail to keep people well enough to stay out of hospital or financially go under meaning fewer places an it's harder to get 'medically fit' (to not be in an acute medical bed) people out of hospital. These are not just heads on beds either, my acute medical experience was that these poor souls, too poorly to go home proper but just waiting for a nursing home, were actually very 'Labour intensive' meaning impact on the safe staffing levels on the ward. Oddly a sub-hdu but still-very-I'll 45-year old is often far less time consuming to care for safely than a medically stable but very elderly frail or stroke sufferer.

So Jamba is both incorrect in his numbers but slso missing the point that it is the last few years of central government cuts to LA funding (curiously worse for labour councils!) well outside the NHS that is equally to blame for this and of equal importance in coming months.

Ernie, agreed the US is not the right model for the UK. As an aside even Democrat voters in California and NY (East and West coats generally) would not pay higher taxes in order to support healthcare for poor Americans. The US has a different mindset. If they where prepared to do so Obama may have tried to introduce that

Interesting survey in Indy

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/theresa-may-and-tories-will-do-better-job-than-labour-with-nhs-this-winter-poll-a7527551.html

@julian I am not denying we are facing tough times and there are cuts elsewhere contributing. As a country we where living on borrowed money during much of the early 2000's and the inevitable crises occured. We are far from out of the woods and personally I think there are far worse days ahead. Deleveraging is extremely painful and we haven't faced the worst of of yet imo. As far as I am concerned any Government left or right would be facing the same issues with the same lack of answers. As I said before the left wing French Government have asked for all non-essential operations to be postponed.

jambalaya - Member

Ernie, agreed the US is not the right model for the UK.

But it is an excellent example of private sector involvement in healthcare provisions.

Or are you suggesting that free enterprise in the US is inherently flawed?

It's like moaning about having to spend £££ on a new chain and cassette because you skimped on bike maintenance and the cost of degreaser, oil etc.

The government made a rod for their backs de-funding other areas of the wider health and social care system. This was foolish in the extreme and done despite warnings over and over, this short-term (did they even expect to win in 2015?) strategy is costing financially as whatever way you spin it, increased hospital admissions and lengths of stay costs far more than what was saved elsewhere.

This was inevitable, austerity was always going to cost us more than it saved down the line (see also prisons ), this weekend and coming week is going to be the crunch after the cold snap

We are lucky that we haven't seen temperatures and flu outbreak they've had in France recently, we are horrendously vulnerable.

Jamba - the only tough times are those deliberately imposed by the Tories in order to run down public services for ideological reasons,.

As I said before the left wing French Government have asked for all non-essential operations to be postponed.

Bit of a random point, but cancer ops cancelled last week due to lack of beds, meant no samples for us, be more after this weekend.

I think May had been caught off guard, other things possibly sucking up all the government's focus, hunt has brought morale to new lows, her statement just send so I'll thought out,-
at least how it's been put across in the press.

I dont't believe that the Tories are deliberately trying to run the NHS down to privatise it, even though most of the docs I work with do.

I just think they don't give a shit, I it's always been labours , so they just don't bother with it

Why cant we just print some more money and use to pay for more doctors and nurses?

Aaaah TJ. You are the man for economical drivetrain preservation aren't you? 🙂 I had a vision of a saucepan of gently melting putoline when I was making my chain & cassette analogy up there, ^^^

Kimbers, good job Osbounre abandoned austerity years ago then. next thing you know the nasty Tories will be ring fencing the NHS. Bas££rds

As you know thm, this crisis is as much (more) about the cuts to local authorities (biggest ever) which were certainly not ringfenced

Besides which Ringfencing + efficiency savings = cuts