Junior Doctor's contracts petition
Discussion
tdog7 said:
This thread has pages and pages of the usual suspects lecturing on the inefficiencies of the NHS. Yet only a couple of years ago the NHS was labelled the most efficient healthcare system in the world by the OECD. The same people claim the NHS budget is 'biblical' yet the NHS survives on a significantly lower amount of funding (as a % of GDP) than most European nations. The NHS budget of 120billion equates to just £2000 per person in a country of 60million. If you have any concept of the costs involved in healthcare you will know this is not a lot of money.
Perhaps take a moment to educate yourselves instead of continually propagating the right wing myths that the NHS is expensive and inefficient. It isn't.
The problem is it could be better run with the budget it has , there are still efficiency savings to be made - biggest problem at the moment is the people who should be cut in these savings are the ones deciding to make the savings ... Perhaps take a moment to educate yourselves instead of continually propagating the right wing myths that the NHS is expensive and inefficient. It isn't.
the biggest 'advantage' in terms of cost is the way in which it is run - there are no multiple legions of bean counters as there is in insurance based systems, just one lot of bean counters who have rather more 'power' than she should and a lack of understanding of the value - cost equation ... time is saved to a degree by not havign to accoutn for the minutiae of supplies used
sidicks said:
IanA2 said:
Thought you were 'out'?Regardless, surely all the above chart proves is that despite massive spending on the NHS, the patient experience is poor, which does support the need for a significant review of how and why the NHS does so that more money can be spent on actual services to patients.
Johnnytheboy said:
sidicks said:
IanA2 said:
Thought you were 'out'?Regardless, surely all the above chart proves is that despite massive spending on the NHS, the patient experience is poor, which does support the need for a significant review of how and why the NHS does so that more money can be spent on actual services to patients.
in hospital level 0 ( normal ward beds) through to level 3 ( full ITU bed with multi systems support and invasive ventilation ) ... i get the impression that elsewherei n the world doesn;t distinguish between level 0 and 1 beds and between HDU (l2) and ITU (l3) in the way the UK does ...
( the fifth bed classification being the sub acute / intermediate care / step up / down beds in rehab units, and some care homes )
johnfm said:
Why is 'number of ICU beds per 100,000' and indicator of anything other than the number of beds?
Is there some correlation between that stat and something useful or important?
I'm afraid that the person who posted it thinks it is important (although can't explain why), but at least we should be grateful that he is trying to move on from simply posting that Tolstoy quote!Is there some correlation between that stat and something useful or important?
sidicks said:
I'm afraid that the person who posted it thinks it is important (although can't explain why), but at least we should be grateful that he is trying to move on from simply posting that Tolstoy quote!
If you are unfortunate enough to be extremely unwell and require an ITU bed, I can assure you its extremely important. Its an indicator of funding, clearly. One of many. Saying something is irrelevant, simply because it doesn't fit your political agenda to acknowledge it, is a clear sign you are loosing the argument.sidicks said:
Thought you were 'out'?
Regardless, surely all the above chart proves is that despite massive spending on the NHS, the patient experience is poor, which does support the need for a significant review of how and why the NHS does so that more money can be spent on actual services to patients.
I'll say it one more time. The spending is not massive. In fact by any measure its insufficient. Less than most developed nations. £2000 per person on average. Just because you feel 120billion is a big number, doesn't mean we are spending massively on healthcare. We are not.Regardless, surely all the above chart proves is that despite massive spending on the NHS, the patient experience is poor, which does support the need for a significant review of how and why the NHS does so that more money can be spent on actual services to patients.
I do find that graphic pretty meaningless without any context.
Official figures (2010) put the total number of critical care beds at around 3,400 in the UK.
The graphic suggests that more is better but if you take Australia as an example they have around 2600 spread over a vast area. Is that better than the UK situation?
Medicine waste is my biggest NHS gripe and should be one of the priorities that could save around £300 million a year.
Official figures (2010) put the total number of critical care beds at around 3,400 in the UK.
The graphic suggests that more is better but if you take Australia as an example they have around 2600 spread over a vast area. Is that better than the UK situation?
Medicine waste is my biggest NHS gripe and should be one of the priorities that could save around £300 million a year.
tdog7 said:
sidicks said:
I'm afraid that the person who posted it thinks it is important (although can't explain why), but at least we should be grateful that he is trying to move on from simply posting that Tolstoy quote!
If you are unfortunate enough to be extremely unwell and require an ITU bed, I can assure you its extremely important. Its an indicator of funding, clearly. One of many. Saying something is irrelevant, simply because it doesn't fit your political agenda to acknowledge it, is a clear sign you are loosing the argument.Is there a link between number of beds and quality of care (or level of spend or whatever the chap is trying to show by posting it) - either a correlation or a causation effect?.
Without that it is just numbers.
KarlMac said:
spaximus said:
Purchasing, each hospitals has people involved, they don't want a central contract where an order can be drawn from. They love the negotiations even when they are crap, The suppliers love it as they get more from one hospital for exactly the same products.
I can support this with first hand experience. Went through my CIPS with a class of 20+ NHS buyers. All flatly rejected the idea of any centrally sourced deal, even for things like pens and paper because "how would a central dept understand our stakeholders wants and needs?".The absolutely loved the 7 stage tendering process too, despite the fact that most companies reject it out of hand as too much work for the return, so all you end up with is vendors that talk to each other before submitting quotes.
Before tackling salaries someone needs to go through purchasing with a massive broom
And what are we to o with the drugs companies that rip off our hospitals by overcharging ?
crankedup said:
KarlMac said:
spaximus said:
Purchasing, each hospitals has people involved, they don't want a central contract where an order can be drawn from. They love the negotiations even when they are crap, The suppliers love it as they get more from one hospital for exactly the same products.
I can support this with first hand experience. Went through my CIPS with a class of 20+ NHS buyers. All flatly rejected the idea of any centrally sourced deal, even for things like pens and paper because "how would a central dept understand our stakeholders wants and needs?".The absolutely loved the 7 stage tendering process too, despite the fact that most companies reject it out of hand as too much work for the return, so all you end up with is vendors that talk to each other before submitting quotes.
Before tackling salaries someone needs to go through purchasing with a massive broom
And what are we to o with the drugs companies that rip off our hospitals by overcharging ?
There are fortunes to be saved in the general office supplies, without even looking at the specialist equipment. Last I knew there still wasn't centralised contracts for wholesale energy, stsrionary or work wear. This is the easy stuff.
The junior doctors are a bunch of self serving, greedy individuals, who are a disgrace to their profession.
Putting money before the care of their patients. Whatever happened to the Hippocratic oath?
Fortunately, the striking junior doctors are in a minority. Let's hope this minority of militant, unionised self centred idiots get their cummupance.
Putting money before the care of their patients. Whatever happened to the Hippocratic oath?
Fortunately, the striking junior doctors are in a minority. Let's hope this minority of militant, unionised self centred idiots get their cummupance.
Edited by The original Nick the Greek on Monday 15th February 19:05
tdog7 said:
This thread has pages and pages of the usual suspects lecturing on the inefficiencies of the NHS.
I iunderstand 968 to be a doctor. He described the waste as "huge". tdog7 said:
The same people claim the NHS budget is 'biblical' yet the NHS survives on a significantly lower amount of funding (as a % of GDP) than most European nations.
Maybe they are more wasteful even than the NHS. Looking at their faults doesn't excuse ours.tdog7 said:
The NHS budget of 120billion equates to just £2000 per person in a country of 60million. If you have any concept of the costs involved in healthcare you will know this is not a lot of money.
It would go a lot further if a load of it wasn't wasted. This is not a complicated concept that I'm trying to put across.tdog7 said:
Perhaps take a moment to educate yourselves instead of continually propagating the right wing myths that the NHS is expensive and inefficient. It isn't.
Estimates of fraud & error are 10-25%; this is not efficient.There are numerous examples of stupid practices; this is not efficient.
A very simplistic conclusion is that it could become more efficient if people in the NHS accept that there is a problem, accept the need to do something about it & actually do something. Denial of problems & demanding more money is not a sustainable or sensible answer.
The original Nick the Greek said:
The junior doctors are a bunch of self serving, greedy individuals, who are a disgrace to their profession.
Putting money before the care of their patients. Whatever happened to the Hippocratic oath?
Fortunately, the striking junior doctors are in a minority. Let's hope this minority of militant, unionised self centred idiots get their cummupance.
About how I see it. Watching those idiots hopping up and down with placards really does make you wonder who is just taking up being doctors in recent times. I really did expect better of a profession I thought better of. Putting money before the care of their patients. Whatever happened to the Hippocratic oath?
Fortunately, the striking junior doctors are in a minority. Let's hope this minority of militant, unionised self centred idiots get their cummupance.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff