Save the NHS!

Dolph · 2 Sep 2011 at 18:02

OldCoals said:
Calm down it is GD, I wouldn't have replied in way were we in SC.

And I support NHS reform but I think we should listen to people who deliver the patient care and not the people who look at spreadsheets.

The problem is distinguishing between what the people who deliver patient care think is best for the patient (which is a valid aspect to consider provided it can be supported by objective as well as subjective measures) from what the people who deliver patient care think is best for them.

The BMA certainly don't have a good history in this regard, and 38 degrees is nothing but a random pressure group.

Tefal · 2 Sep 2011 at 18:11

Dolph said:
Which is why you award to the best value tender, not the cheapest. Of course, the challenge comes in setting up the bidding process to ensure you get the best value...

So like every government "bidding" the cheapest will win and they wont deliver for the price and in the end you end up with the cheapest product for the high end price.

Tefal · 2 Sep 2011 at 18:14

Dolph said:
Well, except of course it doesn't, there's no evidence to support this, and the BMA is a trade union, with all the bias involved.

I'm still waiting for any sort of independent, evidence based approach as to why the proposals are bad, rather than 'evidence' (alternatively known as ideological positioning with no evidential backing whatsoever) from pressure groups and trade unions...

Surely an evidence based approach should be evidence that the proposals are "good" before they are implemented not that the default position is they are good until proved otherwise, and in that evidence the side wishing to implement them should also list and examine every negative aspect of them too.

otherwise it's not evidence based but simply misrepresented.

Dolph · 2 Sep 2011 at 18:16

Tefal said:
Surely an evidence based approach should be evidence that the proposals are "good" before they are implemented not that the default position is they are good until proved otherwise, and in that evidence the side wishing to implement them should also list and examine every negative aspect of them too.

otherwise it's not evidence based but simply misrepresented.

The evidence is there is the international comparisons already, all the better performing healthcare systems (of which there are many) operate on an 'any willing and capable provider' model with some degree of choice, rather than a state controlled and dictated to monolith.

Indeed, if there is criticism to be made of the proposals, it would be that they do not go far enough in terms of devolving choice down to patient level and changing to a government provided/access regulated insurance model.

Danthus · 2 Sep 2011 at 18:17

Dolph said:
The problem is distinguishing between what the people who deliver patient care think is best for the patient (which is a valid aspect to consider provided it can be supported by objective as well as subjective measures) from what the people who deliver patient care think is best for them.

The BMA certainly don't have a good history in this regard, and 38 degrees is nothing but a random pressure group.

Who are you to cast opinion on the BMA?

SexyGreyFox · 2 Sep 2011 at 18:17

cm1179 said:
this is what annoys me about this country and its spending. it's the same with the roads. a department gets a budget, it carries out all the work required within the budget and still has a nice chunk left over. instead of being sensible and giving it back, they use it up on areas that don't really need money spent on, purely because if they don't use up all of their budget, they wont get the same amount next year. the buyers don't give a stuff and tbh, why should they? unless they were offered a bonus for cost cutting, it's no skin off their nose.

I can talk from experience that if you send the remaining money back they will knock that off your next budget plus a bit more.
The idea is to spend it all because they will knock some off the budget for next year anyway.
That's exactly what happened in the department I was in between 2008 and 2010.

Danthus · 2 Sep 2011 at 18:18

Dolph said:
The evidence is there is the international comparisons already, all the better performing healthcare systems (of which there are many) operate on an 'any willing and capable provider' model with some degree of choice, rather than a state controlled and dictated to monolith.

How do you know other health care systems perform better?

Glaucus · 2 Sep 2011 at 18:22

OldCoals said:
How do you know other health care systems perform better?

WHO

Dolph · 2 Sep 2011 at 18:26

OldCoals said:
Who are you to cast opinion on the BMA?

An independent observer. The BMA are a trade union, with responsibility to do what is best for their members, not what is best for the patients.

Their website is quite explicit on this, from the tagline 'Standing up for doctors' to their about page...

http://www.bma.org.uk/about_bma/index.jsp

try to find any reference to patients

OldCoals said:
How do you know other health care systems perform better?

Numerous international studies looking at outcomes, death rates, preventable death rates, recovery times, treatment times etc etc. I suggest looking at studies published by the OECD for starters

cm1179 · 2 Sep 2011 at 18:56

Dr. Pain said:
What a stupid question. I almost wasnt going to rise to it.

how is it a stupid question? if you came to me with a big grin on your face and said 'hey, i've just got 41% knocked off this' i'd be telling you to go back and get similar reductions off everything else as they've obviously been making too much off you.

cm1179 · 2 Sep 2011 at 18:58

dmpoole said:
I can talk from experience that if you send the remaining money back they will knock that off your next budget plus a bit more.
The idea is to spend it all because they will knock some off the budget for next year anyway.
That's exactly what happened in the department I was in between 2008 and 2010.

but don't you think this is a flawed system?

SkScotchegg · 2 Sep 2011 at 19:53

I dont understand whats going on...also over the past few years I hear people say bad things about the NHS but I just think wait a second, if something happened to me now, an abulance would show up within 5 minutes, take me to hospital, doctors would fix me up and all of this would be free...that sounds like a great system to me? Especially when in other countries they don't have hospitals or if they do you get charge 50k for having a heart attack like in the US?

I saw a an old war veteran once on TV say "after world war 2, Britain did something amazing, we announced that we was going to have the best health care system in the world, and that it was going to be free for all, no matter how poor you were"...and we've had this great system ever since.

I dont want anything to change in that respect...

But with this new proposed reform will all of this change? will we have to pay like in the US? If they force us to pay then tell me where to email...

Sorry for my words, but I don't really understand all this in-depth like the rest of you.

Thanks in advance for replying and explaining the situation to me.

cm1179 · 2 Sep 2011 at 19:55

SkScotchegg said:
I saw a an old war veteran once on TV say "after world war 2, Britain did something amazing, we announced that we was going to have the best health care system in the world, and that it was going to be free for all, no matter how poor you were"...and we've had this great system ever since.

that's from the michael moore documentary.

the nhs is great but it's not free though it is excellent value for money.

SkScotchegg · 2 Sep 2011 at 20:02

cm1179 said:
that's from the michael moore documentary.

the nhs is great but it's not free though it is excellent value for money.

Not sure what you mean, I've been in hospital for broken bones and asthma attacks, I almost died when I was 10 and I was in hospital for months, and I've never paid anything.

I paid for some inhalers from chemist if thats what you mean?

EDIT: I just dont want our NHS to turn into a US like system, that would seriously scare me, it should be free for everyone forever...as long as your a UK citizen that is.

Danthus · 2 Sep 2011 at 20:03

SkScotchegg said:
Not sure what you mean, I've been in hospital for broken bones and asthma attacks, I almost died when I was 10 and I was in hospital for months, and I've never paid anything.

I paid for some inhalers from chemist if thats what you mean?

EDIT: I just dont want our NHS to turn into a US like system, that would seriously scare me, it should be free for everyone forever...as long as your a UK citizen that is.

Tax pays for the NHS.

SexyGreyFox · 2 Sep 2011 at 20:04

cm1179 said:
but don't you think this is a flawed system?

I'll say yes because I lost my job when we received less money.

Ali195 · 2 Sep 2011 at 20:25

SkScotchegg said:
I dont understand whats going on...also over the past few years I hear people say bad things about the NHS but I just think wait a second, if something happened to me now, an abulance would show up within 5 minutes, take me to hospital, doctors would fix me up and all of this would be free...that sounds like a great system to me? Especially when in other countries they don't have hospitals or if they do you get charge 50k for having a heart attack like in the US?

I saw a an old war veteran once on TV say "after world war 2, Britain did something amazing, we announced that we was going to have the best health care system in the world, and that it was going to be free for all, no matter how poor you were"...and we've had this great system ever since.

I dont want anything to change in that respect...

But with this new proposed reform will all of this change? will we have to pay like in the US? If they force us to pay then tell me where to email...

Sorry for my words, but I don't really understand all this in-depth like the rest of you.

Thanks in advance for replying and explaining the situation to me.

This. Didnt someone in the states recently post about their dentist having a flat screen on the ceiling so you could watch TV while having your teeth done.

The other month i got rescued by the coast guard after floating in the north sea for 90 minutes (thank god someone spotted me otherwise i would have died). I was rushed to hospital in an ambulance (40minutes) & fully taken care of. And they only asked for my name, that's it. No bills, no calls to an insurance company, no hike in premiums due to a 'claim'. God bless the NHS is all i can say.

SkScotchegg · 2 Sep 2011 at 20:29

Ali195 said:
This. Didnt someone in the states recently post about their dentist having a flat screen on the ceiling so you could watch TV while having your teeth done.

The other month i got rescued by the coast guard after floating in the north sea for 90 minutes (thank god someone spotted me otherwise i would have died). I was rushed to hospital in an ambulance (40minutes) & fully taken care of. And they only asked for my name, that's it. No bills, no calls to an insurance company, no hike in premiums due to a 'claim'. God bless the NHS is all i can say.

Well said, totally agree, people dont appreciate how good the NHS is compared to other countries and we're lucky to be born in such a great country where we take care of our citizens, no matter how rich or poor!

SkScotchegg · 2 Sep 2011 at 20:32

OldCoals said:
Tax pays for the NHS.

Yeah we pay tax, but that's better then been sent a bill you cant afford after surviving from serious trauma like open heart surgery.

Imagine getting sent a bill you cant afford and then losing your house because it's been claimed by debt collectors, all because you were unlucky in life and had bad health.

That's not the kind of system we should want for ourselves and our children.

StriderX · 2 Sep 2011 at 20:42

SkScotchegg said:
Yeah we pay tax, but that's better then been sent a bill you cant afford after surviving from serious trauma like open heart surgery.

Imagine getting sent a bill you cant afford and then losing your house because it's been claimed by debt collectors, all because you were unlucky in life and had bad health.

That's not the kind of system we should want for ourselves and our children.

Yet extremely useless managerial staff clogging up funding is much better.

Albeit it is better, in a general sense, but at the end of the day, politicians are deciding with no experience, Westminster should be filled with doctors, military personnel, lawyers, physicists, chemists...and so on, but someone thought it would be logical for that to only be a rarity.