Nurses: The NHS is at breaking point
Discussion
jjlynn27 said:
Tony427 said:
I really don't think that money is the problem, it's the management of resources thats the problem.
<snip>
No wonder they all say we need to shovel more money into this bottomless pit. Wouldn't you in their position.
Cheers,
Tony
I love posts like this. I do. <snip>
No wonder they all say we need to shovel more money into this bottomless pit. Wouldn't you in their position.
Cheers,
Tony
On one hand, you have research after research, by people who know what they are doing, saying that NHS is one of the most efficient health systems in the world. On the other hand, you have Tony, who knows better, and NHS is 'bottomless pit'.
There are some overpaid managers in NHS, just like there are some overpaid people in any organization (>50 people) you care to mention.
To characterize the whole of NHS as bottomless pit because of that is stupid.
www.theguardian.com/society/2016/jan/26/nhs-comes-...
We rank at 14th below Estonia ffs.
Now who looks stupid?
I have personal experience of the inefficiencies of the NHS. Not just those above. For the past 38 years I have had personal experience of the pharmaceutical industry and the GP sector through both sales organisations and because my ex Mrs worked for big Pharma. I know all about GP "one day retirements", double dosing prescriptions and overider prescribing rebates.
Want to become a millionaire on the NHS? Become a dispensing GP.
My current Mrs used to work for the NHS and is now in academia. So she's seen both the practical, clinical side and the higher management echelon at work. It was certainly better and more efficient in the good old days when managers were far, far fewer than they are now.
I think the NHS is, just as I said, a bottomless pit, we just cannot throw enough money at it, as its appetite will always be greater than the country's ability to fund it.
Most countries use insurance based healthcare and citizens end up paying more than us per capita or percentage GDP. Rationing by the ability to pay in other words. My Dutch relatives can only afford basic insurance cover and dread getting ill. They are charged for appointments and try to avoid going to the Doctor. So its easier getting appointments in Holland than it is over here. Well that's one way to both cut down the GP workload and improve GP appointment waiting times. Perhaps we should try that?
Or perhaps not.
What we cannot keep on doing is to throw more and more money down a bottomless pit.
We really do need a rethink as to what the NHS is for.
Should we really be paying for gastric band etc operations for people who are too lazy or irresponsible to lose weight by diet and exercise. And then pay again to get their skin folds removed?
Is that what the NHS is for?
Shouldn't people take responsibility for their own actions ? Smokers, drinkers, dangerous sport afficianados, regulars at the clap clinic etc etc but who would decide what is a genuine NHS case or not? IVF, if you want kids you'll have to pay. Are kids a right we all should pay for other people to have? Just because we can do it doesn't mean we should. How much is a kid worth? How much is an additional month of life worth for a cancer sufferer? To the parents or the cancer sufferer immeasurable, but to the NHS ie us?
It's time for a really basic discussion within the population as to what the NHS is for.
Is it a safety net as I believe it was initially set up to be, or is it a service to supply whatever is needed, at any price, anywhere, to anybody.
Until that is carried out we will all be just pissing in the wind and each year will be worse than the previous.
Cheers,
Tony
Tony427 said:
Really this took all of 20 seconds to google
www.theguardian.com/society/2016/jan/26/nhs-comes-...
We rank at 14th below Estonia ffs.
Now who looks stupid?
You. www.theguardian.com/society/2016/jan/26/nhs-comes-...
We rank at 14th below Estonia ffs.
Now who looks stupid?
Health Consumer Powerhouse vs Commonwealth fund. Hmm, that's a tough one. If you were any brighter you'd check credentials behind both. Go do that, then come back.
I never said that NHS was perfect. What I said is, given the amount of spend on NHS, compared to any developed nation we get fantastic results. If you were really interested you could dig a bit deeper than '20 seconds google' and find out that, for example, we are terrible at cancer survival rates for some cancers. Why? We fewer oncologists. We have fewer scanners. Because we find them later. Because we are fatter.
Bottomless pit, eh?
Tony427 said:
<more irrelevant twadle>
There are quite a few people, some of them on PH who are making a living by providing services/products to NHS. One of my previous jobs was with a subsidiary of Welch Allyn, good sales people never had a problem hitting targets, saying that, they had good products. What I personally find funny is that most people on PH who are complaining about NHS, are the same people who'll complain about pretty much anything. BBC, global warming, public sector or whatever else daily mail tells them to get angry about.
You think that it's easy to make money as a GP? Become one. Same applies to people who think it's easy to make money as a banker, lawyer, it consultant or whatever else.
As a GP you are pretty much guaranteed a job.
jjlynn27 said:
You think that it's easy to make money as a GP? Become one. Same applies to people who think it's easy to make money as a banker, lawyer, it consultant or whatever else.
As a GP you are pretty much guaranteed a job.
I wonder if the hundreds of GPs being imported from Poland, Lithuania and Greece will have had the same entry criteria for their training as applies in the UK.As a GP you are pretty much guaranteed a job.
Sheepshanks said:
jjlynn27 said:
You think that it's easy to make money as a GP? Become one. Same applies to people who think it's easy to make money as a banker, lawyer, it consultant or whatever else.
As a GP you are pretty much guaranteed a job.
I wonder if the hundreds of GPs being imported from Poland, Lithuania and Greece will have had the same entry criteria for their training as applies in the UK.As a GP you are pretty much guaranteed a job.
RicksAlfas said:
The NHS will always be at breaking point, until the powers that be recognise that it is no longer a sustainable service in this day and age.
It was a wonderful creation, and the envy of the world when it started in the late 1940s, but with the cost of looking after our ever increasing and ageing population, it simply isn't sustainable to keep going in the same way.
But for many people it's ingrained in their psyche. They just need an NHS. They expect it to be there. Because of this, politicians skirt round the issue as it's a taboo subject, so it will never be sorted out. What was once so great has become a millstone round our neck.
There should be a £10 charge a day to enter a hospital. It can include parking and a cup of tea, but when you enter the hospital as a patient or a visitor it's £10 no matter what.
It's not such a simple answer as finding another revenue stream.It was a wonderful creation, and the envy of the world when it started in the late 1940s, but with the cost of looking after our ever increasing and ageing population, it simply isn't sustainable to keep going in the same way.
But for many people it's ingrained in their psyche. They just need an NHS. They expect it to be there. Because of this, politicians skirt round the issue as it's a taboo subject, so it will never be sorted out. What was once so great has become a millstone round our neck.
There should be a £10 charge a day to enter a hospital. It can include parking and a cup of tea, but when you enter the hospital as a patient or a visitor it's £10 no matter what.
As an earlier poster pointed out, the NHS is now political. We've recently had 'outrage' in the DM because someone was charged £10 for parking at a hospital whilst visiting their dying relative. The continual attacks on the NHS from the right wing press is just an example.
It is perfectly possible to have an efficient and effective national health service. Other countries manage it, but perhaps their service is not a battlefield where everyone knows what's best for it. The fuss over providing a basic service in the USA, again where it is seen as a political issue, shows where the fault lies. People seem to follow the dictates of their political leaders without offering an alternative.
The problem seems to be that one side of the political divide in the UK wants to use the threat of a dismemberment of the NHS as a reason to vote for them, and the other side doesn't want it to succeed.
People are healthier at 80 nowadays than the 65 year olds were when I was a kid. I remember visiting my older aunts and uncles with my mother, the weekly grind. My father was the youngest of 18, my mother the youngest of 8, so there were a few to go around. One problem, if that is the right word, is the many advances in treatment of illnesses, not all aimed at the old, that cost so much. The care of the old no longer seems to be the responsibility of their family. This is nothing to do with the NHS's ability to provide a service. Then we had all the fuss in the DM some time ago where a woman's estate was taken into account when the local authority had her dumped on them.
If, as you seem to be suggesting, old people are the major problem, then the fault lies with expectations. Many people today don't want the bother of caring for their family members but seem to want their inheritance unmolested. I don't see why my taxes should go to keep someone's children more comfortable.
It would appear that many expensive beds are occupied by those who should be placed into the care of the local authorities but they have had to cut back on service due to lack of funding from the government. So old people are contracted out to care homes, giving private industry and nice little earner for a while, but with continuing scandals of low service levels, legislation and checks have been brought in and this has meant that many such companies, but by no means all, have had to up their game. The profit levels drop so they pull out.
My younger son-in-law works for a local authority as a carer, working with those whom private industry don't want to take over as they require trained and expensive staff to look after. They have been 'advertised' and sooner or later some company will come up with a plan to take them over. If the trend of other councils is followed, they will probably last a few months then be sent to hospital where they will vegetate. Your taxes and, much more importantly, my taxes will be wasted because the government imposed restrictions on local authorities.
The NHS is the victim of societal and political changes. What costs the NHS so much is doing the jobs of others. The real fault lies with politicians of all sides. Other countries manage but, it seems, we can't.
Derek Smith said:
It's not such a simple answer as finding another revenue stream.
As an earlier poster pointed out, the NHS is now political. We've recently had 'outrage' in the DM because someone was charged £10 for parking at a hospital whilst visiting their dying relative. The continual attacks on the NHS from the right wing press is just an example.
It is perfectly possible to have an efficient and effective national health service. Other countries manage it, but perhaps their service is not a battlefield where everyone knows what's best for it. The fuss over providing a basic service in the USA, again where it is seen as a political issue, shows where the fault lies. People seem to follow the dictates of their political leaders without offering an alternative.
The problem seems to be that one side of the political divide in the UK wants to use the threat of a dismemberment of the NHS as a reason to vote for them, and the other side doesn't want it to succeed.
People are healthier at 80 nowadays than the 65 year olds were when I was a kid. I remember visiting my older aunts and uncles with my mother, the weekly grind. My father was the youngest of 18, my mother the youngest of 8, so there were a few to go around. One problem, if that is the right word, is the many advances in treatment of illnesses, not all aimed at the old, that cost so much. The care of the old no longer seems to be the responsibility of their family. This is nothing to do with the NHS's ability to provide a service. Then we had all the fuss in the DM some time ago where a woman's estate was taken into account when the local authority had her dumped on them.
If, as you seem to be suggesting, old people are the major problem, then the fault lies with expectations. Many people today don't want the bother of caring for their family members but seem to want their inheritance unmolested. I don't see why my taxes should go to keep someone's children more comfortable.
It would appear that many expensive beds are occupied by those who should be placed into the care of the local authorities but they have had to cut back on service due to lack of funding from the government. So old people are contracted out to care homes, giving private industry and nice little earner for a while, but with continuing scandals of low service levels, legislation and checks have been brought in and this has meant that many such companies, but by no means all, have had to up their game. The profit levels drop so they pull out.
My younger son-in-law works for a local authority as a carer, working with those whom private industry don't want to take over as they require trained and expensive staff to look after. They have been 'advertised' and sooner or later some company will come up with a plan to take them over. If the trend of other councils is followed, they will probably last a few months then be sent to hospital where they will vegetate. Your taxes and, much more importantly, my taxes will be wasted because the government imposed restrictions on local authorities.
The NHS is the victim of societal and political changes. What costs the NHS so much is doing the jobs of others. The real fault lies with politicians of all sides. Other countries manage but, it seems, we can't.
Do other countries offer a similar level of healthcare as the NHS?As an earlier poster pointed out, the NHS is now political. We've recently had 'outrage' in the DM because someone was charged £10 for parking at a hospital whilst visiting their dying relative. The continual attacks on the NHS from the right wing press is just an example.
It is perfectly possible to have an efficient and effective national health service. Other countries manage it, but perhaps their service is not a battlefield where everyone knows what's best for it. The fuss over providing a basic service in the USA, again where it is seen as a political issue, shows where the fault lies. People seem to follow the dictates of their political leaders without offering an alternative.
The problem seems to be that one side of the political divide in the UK wants to use the threat of a dismemberment of the NHS as a reason to vote for them, and the other side doesn't want it to succeed.
People are healthier at 80 nowadays than the 65 year olds were when I was a kid. I remember visiting my older aunts and uncles with my mother, the weekly grind. My father was the youngest of 18, my mother the youngest of 8, so there were a few to go around. One problem, if that is the right word, is the many advances in treatment of illnesses, not all aimed at the old, that cost so much. The care of the old no longer seems to be the responsibility of their family. This is nothing to do with the NHS's ability to provide a service. Then we had all the fuss in the DM some time ago where a woman's estate was taken into account when the local authority had her dumped on them.
If, as you seem to be suggesting, old people are the major problem, then the fault lies with expectations. Many people today don't want the bother of caring for their family members but seem to want their inheritance unmolested. I don't see why my taxes should go to keep someone's children more comfortable.
It would appear that many expensive beds are occupied by those who should be placed into the care of the local authorities but they have had to cut back on service due to lack of funding from the government. So old people are contracted out to care homes, giving private industry and nice little earner for a while, but with continuing scandals of low service levels, legislation and checks have been brought in and this has meant that many such companies, but by no means all, have had to up their game. The profit levels drop so they pull out.
My younger son-in-law works for a local authority as a carer, working with those whom private industry don't want to take over as they require trained and expensive staff to look after. They have been 'advertised' and sooner or later some company will come up with a plan to take them over. If the trend of other councils is followed, they will probably last a few months then be sent to hospital where they will vegetate. Your taxes and, much more importantly, my taxes will be wasted because the government imposed restrictions on local authorities.
The NHS is the victim of societal and political changes. What costs the NHS so much is doing the jobs of others. The real fault lies with politicians of all sides. Other countries manage but, it seems, we can't.
sidicks said:
Do other countries offer a similar level of healthcare as the NHS?
Do you really need to ask?Some European countries offer higher levels of care. Fair enough, most EU countries have care systems that cost a bit more, but not massively so. I know a few people who have been injured in the EU - but then doesn't everyone? - and they have remarked on how impressed they are with the level of care. Spain, before 2008, was the location that an ex colleague chose to have a serious road accident. He was treated very well.
Japan has an ageing population, 3rd in the world, and individuals have to pay a certain amount of the cost of each treatment. The social system is somewhat unusual out there and most people don't pay it as an individual. I think it is paid by their company. Insurance is easy enough to come by and is fairly cheap compared to private healthcare insurance in this country. Total costs are about the same for the UK - which takes into account the additional charge - but standards are very high, according to my son who spends at least a month out there each year.
From an online graph it seems that Germany - second oldest mean age - pays the most of any EU country per individual. Standards are high according to reports.
Tony427 said:
My current Mrs used to work for the NHS and is now in academia. So she's seen both the practical, clinical side and the higher management echelon at work. It was certainly better and more efficient in the good old days when managers were far, far fewer than they are now.
One of the major triggers for the explosion of managers was the introduction of the purchaser/ provider split. In effect every little thing had to be bought and sold - and someone had to account for each side of that equation.
SD.
littlegreenfairy said:
Our daughter has a 'lactose intolerance' and therefore her milk is on prescription. We would happily buy it but can't as can only get it with a prescription. The pharmacist reckons she has 20-30 kids she gets the milk in for. At £90 a month that soon adds up.
How old is your daughter? I'm assuming she is still a baby and requires a special formula given that you can buy 'normal' lactose free milk for about £1.30 a litre in most supermarkets these days.I'd happily see an increase in my tax if I knew the money was going to be used efficiently and lead to a world class service.
Unfortunately I have had quite a few poor experiences with the NHS - more than enough to make me realise that these weren't just random one offs. The inefficiency and jobs-worthiness runs very deep in the organisation. Couple this with the great unwashed who often abuse the system and you have a recipe for disaster.
There are of course some fantastic people who work within the NHS and they must be extremely frustrated by these things - but to echo the sentiments of others - simply throwing more money at it wont solve the problem.
Unfortunately I have had quite a few poor experiences with the NHS - more than enough to make me realise that these weren't just random one offs. The inefficiency and jobs-worthiness runs very deep in the organisation. Couple this with the great unwashed who often abuse the system and you have a recipe for disaster.
There are of course some fantastic people who work within the NHS and they must be extremely frustrated by these things - but to echo the sentiments of others - simply throwing more money at it wont solve the problem.
Moonhawk said:
I'd happily see an increase in my tax if I knew the money was going to be used efficiently and lead to a world class service.
Unfortunately I have had quite a few poor experiences with the NHS - more than enough to make me realise that these weren't just random one offs. The inefficiency and jobs-worthiness runs very deep in the organisation. Couple this with the great unwashed who often abuse the system and you have a recipe for disaster.
There are of course some fantastic people who work within the NHS and they must be extremely frustrated by these things - but to echo the sentiments of others - simply throwing more money at it wont solve the problem.
Many of us pay more than enough in tax to fund an excellent health services that focusses on what was intended when the NHS was set up i.e. healthcare. If the NHS focussed on that, then there would be more than enough money to go around.Unfortunately I have had quite a few poor experiences with the NHS - more than enough to make me realise that these weren't just random one offs. The inefficiency and jobs-worthiness runs very deep in the organisation. Couple this with the great unwashed who often abuse the system and you have a recipe for disaster.
There are of course some fantastic people who work within the NHS and they must be extremely frustrated by these things - but to echo the sentiments of others - simply throwing more money at it wont solve the problem.
Derek Smith said:
Do you really need to ask?
Some European countries offer higher levels of care. Fair enough, most EU countries have care systems that cost a bit more, but not massively so. I know a few people who have been injured in the EU - but then doesn't everyone? - and they have remarked on how impressed they are with the level of care. Spain, before 2008, was the location that an ex colleague chose to have a serious road accident. He was treated very well.
Japan has an ageing population, 3rd in the world, and individuals have to pay a certain amount of the cost of each treatment. The social system is somewhat unusual out there and most people don't pay it as an individual. I think it is paid by their company. Insurance is easy enough to come by and is fairly cheap compared to private healthcare insurance in this country. Total costs are about the same for the UK - which takes into account the additional charge - but standards are very high, according to my son who spends at least a month out there each year.
From an online graph it seems that Germany - second oldest mean age - pays the most of any EU country per individual. Standards are high according to reports.
So Japan costs the same but standards are higher than the UK?Some European countries offer higher levels of care. Fair enough, most EU countries have care systems that cost a bit more, but not massively so. I know a few people who have been injured in the EU - but then doesn't everyone? - and they have remarked on how impressed they are with the level of care. Spain, before 2008, was the location that an ex colleague chose to have a serious road accident. He was treated very well.
Japan has an ageing population, 3rd in the world, and individuals have to pay a certain amount of the cost of each treatment. The social system is somewhat unusual out there and most people don't pay it as an individual. I think it is paid by their company. Insurance is easy enough to come by and is fairly cheap compared to private healthcare insurance in this country. Total costs are about the same for the UK - which takes into account the additional charge - but standards are very high, according to my son who spends at least a month out there each year.
From an online graph it seems that Germany - second oldest mean age - pays the most of any EU country per individual. Standards are high according to reports.
sidicks said:
So Japan costs the same but standards are higher than the UK?
You asked if standards were as high in other countries. Evidently, in Japan they are. The reason I mentioned the older demographic was for the sake of another poster who suggested that all the faults of the NHS are down to old people. I have not used the health service in Japan but I have close relatives who have and their opinion is that it is, in certain ways, higher than that in the UK. Cost per capita is, according to the previously posted graph, are slightly higher.
Japan has certain advantages over the UK in that abandoning aged relatives is considered bad form. That said, it's not the function of the NHS to take up the slack from local authorities.
sidicks said:
Do other countries offer a similar level of healthcare as the NHS?
hmm nope, better.. My dentist (semi-private) in Barcelona, cost 4 times cheaper than here. And overall quality is superb.A few other friends/colleagues use Istanbul (Turkey, yes funny), in summer for their regular check-ups or mini operations. Apparently the service and value is great. Here is the last one, very close friend has been suffering from a concussion after a bike accident. Unfortunately, NHS could not even diagnose anything and his GP was very non-responsive. He travelled to Thailand (expat), and being looked after there now, much cheaper and quicker.
On the other hand, U.K. health sector is one of the best in terms of "research" in my opinion. Our scientific approach, methods, and talents are incredible when it comes to highly sensitive and difficult fields like cancer. If we look at amount of published data, papers, research on serious diseases are extremely valuable but NHS as a health provider is massively under-performing and not modernized comparing to many other countries.
I must admit I dread getting sick. My limited experience of the NHS has varied from very good to appalling. I certainly could have sought legal help on a couple of occasions but that is not something I could ever see myself doing.
The Express however had an article that claimed that the NHS sets aside 56 Billion to cover its legal costs.
I think I know where we can save some money.
The Express however had an article that claimed that the NHS sets aside 56 Billion to cover its legal costs.
I think I know where we can save some money.
Moonhawk said:
littlegreenfairy said:
Our daughter has a 'lactose intolerance' and therefore her milk is on prescription. We would happily buy it but can't as can only get it with a prescription. The pharmacist reckons she has 20-30 kids she gets the milk in for. At £90 a month that soon adds up.
How old is your daughter? I'm assuming she is still a baby and requires a special formula given that you can buy 'normal' lactose free milk for about £1.30 a litre in most supermarkets these days.It just amazes me that one pharmacy is getting through nearly 3k of milk a month. Just for that one condition. The sheer cost of prescriptions overall must be staggering.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff