An issue I do agree with the Spectator on.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/...failing-us-all
There are better models out there.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Printable View
An issue I do agree with the Spectator on.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/...failing-us-all
There are better models out there.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yes there is a better model. Fund it properly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
The oldest trick in the Tory book; starve a public resource of funding so it can’t deliver services properly and gets public approbation, then suggest an ‘alternative’ which involves flogging the family silver to speculators that you and your parents and grandparents paid taxes for.
The only other ‘model’ on the table at the moment is the American one, just look at MPs declaration of interests and who’s got their ear.
You have to experience the US healthcare system to know how bad it is. The single biggest cause of bankruptcy is being unable to afford being sick. I’ve got a friend with cancer who was well paid and successful in her field, can’t work, has lost her insurance and has sold her house to pay her bills. She’s now destitute and will die sooner than she should in poverty. I don’t even see the point debating with anyone who thinks the US model is the way to go.
If you don’t back the NHS you’ll have a US system before you know where you are. And that’s exactly what the likes of the ****ing ****bags that are behind The Spectator want.
Absolutely this. There may be better models in Europe but this is all about a Tory-Spiv carve up.Quote:
Originally Posted by hibsbollah
See https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/dar...nks-and-conse/
The "Economics Editor" of the Speccy is Kate Andrews (regular Beeb RW talking head) who also happens to be a former Associate Director of the IEA and Head of Comms at the Adam Smith Institute.
Did you read the article? It specifically says that the US system "would be a crazy model to imitate."Quote:
Originally Posted by hibsbollah
It's not right to just say that the NHS isn't being funded properly, we are about mid table in terms of funding as a %age of GDP out of OECD countries, https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=SHA and there are countries below us in funding that are out performing us. It would be madness to not look at other countries' systems and try to work out how we can improve ours to match or exceed the outcomes they have.
We need to be able to have this discussion without people immediately going to the absolute extreme outcome and shouting "look at America, that's what we'll turn into." They are a complete basket case spending absolute fortunes on healthcare with terrible outcomes.
There is certainly a middle ground we could find, like other European countries have found where we can make the health service better for all, whilst maintaining the universal, free at point of use healthcare ethos of the NHS.
I would add that I would not let this Tory govt handle it.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens
In Scotland though we should be able to look at doing thing differently although I accept that being radical is off the agenda until after indyref2.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
...and that sentence you've quoted is pure deflection on their part. I don't care what they say, I care what they do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sergio sledge
In a different world, of course there is a different model of health funding we could follow. But realpolitik suggests that's akin to having a discussion about what kind of jetpacks we'd like as public transport. The problem here is the use of the pronoun 'We'. (which you used a few times in your post, as well as 'Us' which I respectively think is a misleading pronoun to use when it comes to the Tory Govt and the Spectator :greengrin The present government are not going to engage in a discussion with the wider population about what is the best model for Us. I don't believe its wrong in theory to talk about alternatives to the NHS, but don't be fooled that its a genuine discussion. They want to rip the guts out of the NHS. It actually upsets me that more isnt been said and done about it.
Here it comes. They've all been working on it for years. I hope you're ready...
https://i.imgur.com/tN1UMuP.jpg
The Spector softening up for the inevitable privatisation of the NHS using a report from 3 years ago.
Towards the end of the article it mentions 3 countries:
Japan. The average cost of health insurance in Japan is about 35–40,000 JPY per month (330–370 USD). Your medical bills will remain the same and you can use the lump sum given to you by your private insurance to pay the 30% that is normally left over after the public health insurance coverage.
Canada. This is from the Fraser Institute. The reality of Canadian health care is that it is comparatively expensive and imposes enormous costs on Canadians in the form of waiting for services, and limited access to physicians and medical technology. This isn't something any country should consider replicating.
The Netherlands has a*universal healthcare system. It's managed by the government and supplemented by private insurers. Anyone living or working in the Netherlands must obtain basic level health insurance (with or without additional coverage) from a Dutch provider.
It would also be interesting to know if the Spector article is about the combined NHSs in the UK or just England.
Countries should only be compared on how the least fortunate are treated. I know most of Europe have the same as America, but I believe the nhs way is the only way. Its funded ok but the money is used very poorly.
Speaking as an accountant, my view is that they need to cut out huge amounts of admin.
In the public sector there used to be a mentality of costs "lying where they fall". Set budgets using that mentality and get rid of the beancounters and people who bill one NHS trust for work done for another, and there are huge savings available.
I absolutely agree that the Tories can't be trusted with sorting it out, they can't be trusted with anything and are just wanting to make money.Quote:
Originally Posted by hibsbollah
However that doesn't change the fact that there needs to be a discussion around the NHS. Hopefully the next general election or indy ref changes things.
I'm not sure if it's widespread but I have a friend who lives in France and he gets what is essentially a health MOT every 3 or 5 years (I can't remember which). He's the same age as me so the frequency may change with age. It's a few routine blood and urine tests, an eye test, a hearing test, a respiratory function test and a cardio exam. That's in addition to the breast, bowel etc stuff we get here. The results are reported back to his GP and any concerns are double checked and/or treated.
I've always felt the NHS is great in an emergency or critical situation but it fails when it comes to the preventative in a lot of areas. Personally speaking I had a mole removed in 2019 that turned out to be an early stage melanoma. No issue with the treatment; I attended my GP, was referred immediately to dermatology on the cancer pathway, was seen within the 6 week target time, was examined and advised I needed a removal and biopsy, got my results, had a follow up to remove a bit more skin then another 2 follow ups before being 'set free'. Great. However it was recommended that as I have upwards of 10 moles on my right arm (a red flag for melanoma) and 50+ moles across my entire body I be sent for mole mapping to keep an eye on any changes. 3 years plus later and I'm still waiting. Obviously I'm aware there has been a pretty big strain on the NHS in that time but reading various forums it seems such delays weren't uncommon even pre covid. That mapping could be the difference between another early diagnosis and something that is far more difficult (and thus costly) to treat. Likewise my daughter has an unconfirmed nut allergy, she has had 2 reactions thus far so we are aware of it but confirmation is required as to whether it is peanuts only, peanuts and tree nuts or those 2 plus other things. She has been on a respiratory waiting list for 18 months.....
The NHS always seems to be in reactive mode with the notable exception of the big hitters that, quite rightly, have widespread screening strategies. I've always thought a big spend on the preventative can lead to a removal of some of the strain further down the line. The NHS is a concept should be almost sacrosant (unless a genuinely better model that doesn't place financial strain on the individual is found) but it's function and running can be overhauled. I know 2 NHS workers who are leaving the service with a heavy heart after 25 years service between them because of frustrations with how the system is run, it's amazing to think that in this day and age 2 different GP surgeries could be using 2 totally different computer systems. That's glaringly inefficient and leads to mistakes (or crossed wires if you like) that waste money.
A couple of things here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pretty Boy
First and foremost is that the NHS was set up to provide free Healthcare at point of contact. Fundamentally that means you must be ill before it kicks in. It's only relatively recently, past couple of decades, where prevention has become 'fashionable'. Just think of how things in the general population have changed in that time and how health conscience most of us have become. However turning the NHS round to deal more effectively with health prevention will be a doddle in comparison to turning round the whole population!
Health MOTs have been considered in the UK and at the time were not considered effective against targeted campaigns. The MOTs pander to the worried well.
With regards the 2 GP IT systems. Most GPs in Scotland are/were independent contractors and as such get what they consider best for their practice.
Before I retired 9 years ago the finishing touches were being put on a system that allowed all the systems to speak to each other they were all pretty similar anyway. I certainly hope they've finished it by now!
https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/sta...I2MgbcUp9mg_IQ
Interesting thread.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It’s clear something needs to be sorted at the NHS but I’m not sure more money is the key. There is breakdown on the gov.com tax website which tells you how much of your tax went to which area. Health is top on 21.9%. Welfare was the only category which came close.
God knows how much extra money would be required for the NHS to run smoothly but I would bet it’s an unimaginable amount. I’m not sure there are many of us ready for any more tax hikes right now and I can’t think of many other areas which could take a cut. Money needs to come form somewhere.
I might be wrong but I can’t help but wonder if the NHS is maybe run a little poorly.
Maybe a slight degree of means testing and less coverage of what is free. I don’t really have the solution but surely worldwide there is an example of what could be.
Absolutely this 👏Quote:
Originally Posted by hibsbollah
When did we get so distracted by the identity politics that seem to have conveniently sidelined people fighting poverty class war and protecting the right to decent, adequate free at the point of access healthcare?
Those who are behind these manoeuvres have played a neat hand.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Best stay clear of the Tory Kool-Aid.
This is the same tactic used before to privatise water and energy and how’s that going?
The NHS is struggling because the Tories want it to struggle as an excuse to bring in their private sector mates so they can skim a profit off.
I’m not saying their or anyone else’s solution is better, just that the fact is that we are not delivering as good health care as other rich European countries.Quote:
Originally Posted by Colr
If your solution involves the Tories not being in power then we have a problem because they are always in power.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I think this is the ‘the bad guys threatening to steal my house so the sensible thing is to burn it down before he gets the chance’ argument.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
The bad guys are already rationing your access to your house anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by hibsbollah
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The Covid crisis gives the Tories the perfect opportunity to escalate the privatisation of the NHS.
Alternatively, we could try and just implement a proper model of individual and corporate taxation and fund it ourselves.
Just saw a report on the news saying that a young couple in Lewisham, were sent home after the hospital staff had told them their babies heart had stopped beating. The girl then gave birth at home (15weeks). They then took the foetus in a box to A&E, where the staff told them their was nothing they could do for them. The husband then took the foetus home and put it in the fridge as they Hospital said they'd no room.
Absolutely deplorable from the staff.
Is this what it's come to?
Surely someone could have stepped in and helped them.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknew...cid=uxbndlbing
I know a few folk who work for the NHS. They were all very sceptical about the doorstep clapping during the pandemic reckoning that it was superficial bull**** and the narrative would turn against them again as soon as it was over. It’s certainly proven to be the case with Daily Mail readers.Quote:
Originally Posted by superfurryhibby
I got roasted on here for saying that at the time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Colr
Sent from my SM-A505FN using Tapatalk
https://twitter.com/sittongary/statu...dm4sxftY1yJ8yw
[emoji102]
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Softening us up before the flurry of late-round punches…
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/202...-way-save-nhs/
I've been saying for years that the degradation of the NHS was a deliberate, cynical ploy so that insurance was seen as the way to fix it.Quote:
Originally Posted by hibsbollah
I'm not claiming to have great foresight or anything as I'm sure loads of others have had similar thoughts.
The problem is, unless taxation is increased considerably, funding for the NHS will continue to be inadequate.
Uk has one of the highest health funding as a % of gdp in the world. But we've less Dr's and hospital beds than loads bellow us. Funding isn't the problem it's where is the money going
https://mobile.twitter.com/cjsnowdon...18322999517186
I sometimes think there is wilful ‘talking down’ the NHS to make it seem worse than it really is, to encourage more people to use private provision and further degrade it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibbyradge
At other times I have the opposite view, and that for certain branches of medicine particularly this service that we used to think was world leading is now leaving people in pain and to early death. I’ve got friends right now that would get better care overseas.
I suppose you just have to listen to those working in the profession and to patients to get to the bottom of it.
I don't know if the talking down is partly deliberate, but there are countless examples of poor service.Quote:
Originally Posted by hibsbollah
Trying to get a GP appointment where I am is like going through hoops. Phone calls instead of F2F consultations, photographs rather than physical examination and what seems like a layered triage system before the Doctor is even consulted about your case.
I hurt my hand/wrist playing golf on 27 August (must have hit one of those notorious middle of the fairway tree roots 😁) and when it hadn't cleared up 10 days later, I called the doctor's surgery.
I didn't get past the receptionist. Go to A&E, I was told.
I knew York hospital was busy so I checked their website. It said not to go there, but to use another hospital's A&E!
I eventually went to another community hospital in Malton, 20 miles away, and was seen within 40 minutes. There was nothing they could do so I was advised to go back to my GP who might refer me for a scan.
I spoke to the receptionist who said she'd pass my case to the doctor and I'd hear back soon. I got a text the next morning giving me an appointment in 7 weeks, with a "Ist contact physio".
It's sub standard.