No one remembers cash for peerages? A big criminal investigation? Tony Blair becoming the first sitting Prime Minister to be interviewed by police in relation to a criminal investigation?
Or the bribes he took from Bernie to omit Motorsport from advertising laws?
Genuine question - how is it being carved up? If I believe the propoganda, the NHS budget has been ring fenced for this entire government, -- no increase, but there again no cuts. Isn't this a good thing?
Due to inflation wouldn't that lead to the NHS' funding being cut in real terms every single year?
Spending on the NHS has increased over and above inflation every year since 2010. IN real terms, it is 5% higher than in was in 2010.
It should not have done. There's no reason why health should get a free pass while education, transport, defence and investment are cut. It was a nakedly political pledge, as was Labour's.
IN time of plenty, spending on the NHS goes up. In times of austerity, spending on the NHS goes up. It's got to stop a some point but the politicians are too cowardly and the public too emotive.
God forbid you need its help then mate. You will change your tune I guaratee it.
Really. You think NHS spending should go up continually even if it means we can't afford to e.g. educate our kids?
Genuine question - how is it being carved up? If I believe the propoganda, the NHS budget has been ring fenced for this entire government, -- no increase, but there again no cuts. Isn't this a good thing?
Due to inflation wouldn't that lead to the NHS' funding being cut in real terms every single year?
Spending on the NHS has increased over and above inflation every year since 2010. IN real terms, it is 5% higher than in was in 2010.
It should not have done. There's no reason why health should get a free pass while education, transport, defence and investment are cut. It was a nakedly political pledge, as was Labour's.
IN time of plenty, spending on the NHS goes up. In times of austerity, spending on the NHS goes up. It's got to stop a some point but the politicians are too cowardly and the public too emotive.
God forbid you need its help then mate. You will change your tune I guaratee it.
Really. You think NHS spending should go up continually even if it means we can't afford to e.g. educate our kids?
Of course it has to offer value for money but at the risk of patronising you I don't think you understand the health business.
Patients demand and expect the very best in terms of care and the technology used to achieve that and why shouldn't they ?
This constant upward trend in new technology year on year has a cost and it's not cheap. You buy a CT scanner now and in four years it's dated and there are significantly better on the market. The newer one gives more information so enables better treatment to be given. If you try explaining to a patient why they can't have that better care because the equipment and technology required is not currently available there is an outcry. Proton Beam Therapy which has existed for ten years is not yet available in the UK and won't be treating patients when it is until around 2022. That's a scandal. In medicine if you stand still you go backwaRD's.
If you look at what the NHS provides it is a credit to those who work there. It is cost effective but is falling behind our neighbours in what we offer.
Is a second class health service acceptable to one of the richest countries in the world ? Not for me it isn't.
Genuine question - how is it being carved up? If I believe the propoganda, the NHS budget has been ring fenced for this entire government, -- no increase, but there again no cuts. Isn't this a good thing?
Due to inflation wouldn't that lead to the NHS' funding being cut in real terms every single year?
Spending on the NHS has increased over and above inflation every year since 2010. IN real terms, it is 5% higher than in was in 2010.
It should not have done. There's no reason why health should get a free pass while education, transport, defence and investment are cut. It was a nakedly political pledge, as was Labour's.
IN time of plenty, spending on the NHS goes up. In times of austerity, spending on the NHS goes up. It's got to stop a some point but the politicians are too cowardly and the public too emotive.
God forbid you need its help then mate. You will change your tune I guaratee it.
Really. You think NHS spending should go up continually even if it means we can't afford to e.g. educate our kids?
Of course it has to offer value for money but at the risk of patronising you I don't think you understand the health business.
Patients demand and expect the very best in terms of care and the technology used to achieve that and why shouldn't they ?
This constant upward trend in new technology year on year has a cost and it's not cheap. You buy a CT scanner now and in four years it's dated and there are significantly better on the market. The newer one gives more information so enables better treatment to be given. If you try explaining to a patient why they can't have that better care because the equipment and technology required is not currently available there is an outcry. Proton Beam Therapy which has existed for ten years is not yet available in the UK and won't be treating patients when it is until around 2022. That's a scandal. In medicine if you stand still you go backwards.
If you look at what the NHS provides it is a credit to those who work there. It is cost effective but is falling behind our neighbours in what we offer.
Is a second class health service acceptable to one of the richest countries in the world ? Not for me it isn't.
The mansion tax was I believe originally a liberal idea. People in £2m+ properties have made an absolute killing over the last 10-20 years with property inflation ~ but there is an issue if it impacts London as a global city...and personally I think all proceeds should go to the London NHS to support all people. An estimate of £150m on the tax free pension giveaway ? Don't believe it! These figures are often very wrong. This waiver is bound to attract more investment into this type of instrument... And the next day Osborne announces freezing of benefits for two years! Affecting 10m families FFS! Poor people spend much more of their income on day to day living - that's money going into other peoples jobs and businesses whereas richer people stash it away. This government bang on about the deficit but they've made no headway and have cut corporation tax to boot for the biggest companies. I have always believed that the liberals have stayed the course to prove their credentials and that they will happily cut a deal with labour after the next election. I would hope that such a coalition might offer some sane growth policies while Boris (the new tory leader) and Farage bicker in opposition. And by sane I mean cut government expenditure where they can reshape agendas on youth unemployment and housing. I could write something on health but it would be ill informed - logically nothing should be ring fenced until the national budget is healthy again. People without jobs when they are young are set back for life without training and no hope of a defined benefit pension... They are more likely to become disaffected and support far right causes. I'm not a labour supporter by the way* just see them as the best option but am amazed that professional politicians on all sides are so poor at communicating an agenda for this century! *I was once upon a time but Blair invading Iraq killed that one along with another 200,000 members.
Genuine question - how is it being carved up? If I believe the propoganda, the NHS budget has been ring fenced for this entire government, -- no increase, but there again no cuts. Isn't this a good thing?
Due to inflation wouldn't that lead to the NHS' funding being cut in real terms every single year?
Spending on the NHS has increased over and above inflation every year since 2010. IN real terms, it is 5% higher than in was in 2010.
It should not have done. There's no reason why health should get a free pass while education, transport, defence and investment are cut. It was a nakedly political pledge, as was Labour's.
IN time of plenty, spending on the NHS goes up. In times of austerity, spending on the NHS goes up. It's got to stop a some point but the politicians are too cowardly and the public too emotive.
God forbid you need its help then mate. You will change your tune I guaratee it.
Really. You think NHS spending should go up continually even if it means we can't afford to e.g. educate our kids?
Of course it has to offer value for money but at the risk of patronising you I don't think you understand the health business.
Patients demand and expect the very best in terms of care and the technology used to achieve that and why shouldn't they ?
This constant upward trend in new technology year on year has a cost and it's not cheap. You buy a CT scanner now and in four years it's dated and there are significantly better on the market. The newer one gives more information so enables better treatment to be given. If you try explaining to a patient why they can't have that better care because the equipment and technology required is not currently available there is an outcry. Proton Beam Therapy which has existed for ten years is not yet available in the UK and won't be treating patients when it is until around 2022. That's a scandal. In medicine if you stand still you go backwaRD's.
If you look at what the NHS provides it is a credit to those who work there. It is cost effective but is falling behind our neighbours in what we offer.
Is a second class health service acceptable to one of the richest countries in the world ? Not for me it isn't.
Of course patients demand and expect the very best at the point of use, that's because when they need healthcare they're usually scared & in pain, rely on doctors and nurses to help them and have a warped perception of how hospitals work because of sanitised documentaries that streamline the process or expect George Clooney to appear and zap them with paddles to make them better.
The point you make about technology is not exactly the issue - there is a body called NICE which assesses improvements and advances in healthcare and makes judgements on whether the cost of upgrading or introducing new treatments is cost-effective. These are generally done in isolation of the actual budget allocated to health services and so the decision not to introduce the latest advancements is usually made because the cost of the technology would be prohibitively expensive to roll out on a nationwide level. PCTs take on recommendations from NICE and can vary from it if their own budget allows it (for example, the availability of certain drugs or treatments free of charge differs from PCT to PCT).
Generally, NICE has to assess the 'opportunity cost' of endorsing providing treatment, machines or drugs free of charge to NHS patients. You mention Proton Beam Therapy but the cost of providing the Proton Beam Therapy to save just one life could be the equivalent of of the cost of saving hundreds of lives in a separate healthcare pathway (for example, the cost to the NHS to save the life of one cancer patient using PBT could equal the cost to the NHS to save the lives of hundreds of people with cancer through lower cost early-detection methods).
Now granted it would be nice if every hospital had the best technology available free of charge but we have to be realistic, the cost to the taxpayer to fund such a system would require huge rises in taxation or diverting spending from other areas such as education or infrastructure, most likely both. Yes, people like having well equipped hospitals but they also like having disposable income, educated kids and roads and sewers. I guess that's where politics comes in, where people try to argue where the budget ought to be allocated to, but it's definitely not as simple as throwing money at it. We might be a rich country but we're also a country that has an extremely diverse population that suffers from a vast range of health problems, a lot of them self-inflicted.
Genuine question - how is it being carved up? If I believe the propoganda, the NHS budget has been ring fenced for this entire government, -- no increase, but there again no cuts. Isn't this a good thing?
Due to inflation wouldn't that lead to the NHS' funding being cut in real terms every single year?
Spending on the NHS has increased over and above inflation every year since 2010. IN real terms, it is 5% higher than in was in 2010.
It should not have done. There's no reason why health should get a free pass while education, transport, defence and investment are cut. It was a nakedly political pledge, as was Labour's.
IN time of plenty, spending on the NHS goes up. In times of austerity, spending on the NHS goes up. It's got to stop a some point but the politicians are too cowardly and the public too emotive.
God forbid you need its help then mate. You will change your tune I guaratee it.
Really. You think NHS spending should go up continually even if it means we can't afford to e.g. educate our kids?
You obviously meant to say we should BORROW the money from elsewhere. We aren't generating the income we need for what is spent in the public sector today, let alone tomorrow. Problem comes when we run out of credit with the nations like China who are currently underwriting the debt. We then resort to the equivalent of taking out loans with Wonga and have to divert spending on public services to repay interest. Must be great to live in cloud cuckoo land.
Genuine question - how is it being carved up? If I believe the propoganda, the NHS budget has been ring fenced for this entire government, -- no increase, but there again no cuts. Isn't this a good thing?
Due to inflation wouldn't that lead to the NHS' funding being cut in real terms every single year?
Spending on the NHS has increased over and above inflation every year since 2010. IN real terms, it is 5% higher than in was in 2010.
It should not have done. There's no reason why health should get a free pass while education, transport, defence and investment are cut. It was a nakedly political pledge, as was Labour's.
IN time of plenty, spending on the NHS goes up. In times of austerity, spending on the NHS goes up. It's got to stop a some point but the politicians are too cowardly and the public too emotive.
God forbid you need its help then mate. You will change your tune I guaratee it.
Really. You think NHS spending should go up continually even if it means we can't afford to e.g. educate our kids?
Of course it has to offer value for money but at the risk of patronising you I don't think you understand the health business.
Patients demand and expect the very best in terms of care and the technology used to achieve that and why shouldn't they ?
This constant upward trend in new technology year on year has a cost and it's not cheap. You buy a CT scanner now and in four years it's dated and there are significantly better on the market. The newer one gives more information so enables better treatment to be given. If you try explaining to a patient why they can't have that better care because the equipment and technology required is not currently available there is an outcry. Proton Beam Therapy which has existed for ten years is not yet available in the UK and won't be treating patients when it is until around 2022. That's a scandal. In medicine if you stand still you go backwaRD's.
If you look at what the NHS provides it is a credit to those who work there. It is cost effective but is falling behind our neighbours in what we offer.
Is a second class health service acceptable to one of the richest countries in the world ? Not for me it isn't.
Of course patients demand and expect the very best at the point of use, that's because when they need healthcare they're usually scared & in pain, rely on doctors and nurses to help them and have a warped perception of how hospitals work because of sanitised documentaries that streamline the process or expect George Clooney to appear and zap them with paddles to make them better.
The point you make about technology is not exactly the issue - there is a body called NICE which assesses improvements and advances in healthcare and makes judgements on whether the cost of upgrading or introducing new treatments is cost-effective. These are generally done in isolation of the actual budget allocated to health services and so the decision not to introduce the latest advancements is usually made because the cost of the technology would be prohibitively expensive to roll out on a nationwide level. PCTs take on recommendations from NICE and can vary from it if their own budget allows it (for example, the availability of certain drugs or treatments free of charge differs from PCT to PCT).
Generally, NICE has to assess the 'opportunity cost' of endorsing providing treatment, machines or drugs free of charge to NHS patients. You mention Proton Beam Therapy but the cost of providing the Proton Beam Therapy to save just one life could be the equivalent of of the cost of saving hundreds of lives in a separate healthcare pathway (for example, the cost to the NHS to save the life of one cancer patient using PBT could equal the cost to the NHS to save the lives of hundreds of people with cancer through lower cost early-detection methods).
Now granted it would be nice if every hospital had the best technology available free of charge but we have to be realistic, the cost to the taxpayer to fund such a system would require huge rises in taxation or diverting spending from other areas such as education or infrastructure, most likely both. Yes, people like having well equipped hospitals but they also like having disposable income, educated kids and roads and sewers. I guess that's where politics comes in, where people try to argue where the budget ought to be allocated to, but it's definitely not as simple as throwing money at it. We might be a rich country but we're also a country that has an extremely diverse population that suffers from a vast range of health problems, a lot of them self-inflicted.
Wait until it's you or one of yours that needs a treatment or drug that is available and would help but is not "cost effective" and then come back to me.
As for proton beam therapy. It is not a modality that will save just a few lives. It is the future of radiotherapy and far superior to conventional photon treatment in every respect.
In the UK we are so far behind in radiotherapy compared to practically every other EU country including Greece and Portugal in terms of linear accelerator numbers and number of patient being offered the treatment. We are playing catch up and it's recognised as an issue by central government.
The cause ? Years of under investment by a succession of UK governments.
Genuine question - how is it being carved up? If I believe the propoganda, the NHS budget has been ring fenced for this entire government, -- no increase, but there again no cuts. Isn't this a good thing?
Due to inflation wouldn't that lead to the NHS' funding being cut in real terms every single year?
Spending on the NHS has increased over and above inflation every year since 2010. IN real terms, it is 5% higher than in was in 2010.
It should not have done. There's no reason why health should get a free pass while education, transport, defence and investment are cut. It was a nakedly political pledge, as was Labour's.
IN time of plenty, spending on the NHS goes up. In times of austerity, spending on the NHS goes up. It's got to stop a some point but the politicians are too cowardly and the public too emotive.
God forbid you need its help then mate. You will change your tune I guaratee it.
Really. You think NHS spending should go up continually even if it means we can't afford to e.g. educate our kids?
You obviously meant to say we should BORROW the money from elsewhere. We aren't generating the income we need for what is spent in the public sector today, let alone tomorrow. Problem comes when we run out of credit with the nations like China who are currently underwriting the debt. We then resort to the equivalent of taking out loans with Wonga and have to divert spending on public services to repay interest. Must be great to live in cloud cuckoo land.
Get rid of Trident, there's £3billion a year saved straight away...
Genuine question - how is it being carved up? If I believe the propoganda, the NHS budget has been ring fenced for this entire government, -- no increase, but there again no cuts. Isn't this a good thing?
Due to inflation wouldn't that lead to the NHS' funding being cut in real terms every single year?
Spending on the NHS has increased over and above inflation every year since 2010. IN real terms, it is 5% higher than in was in 2010.
It should not have done. There's no reason why health should get a free pass while education, transport, defence and investment are cut. It was a nakedly political pledge, as was Labour's.
IN time of plenty, spending on the NHS goes up. In times of austerity, spending on the NHS goes up. It's got to stop a some point but the politicians are too cowardly and the public too emotive.
God forbid you need its help then mate. You will change your tune I guaratee it.
Really. You think NHS spending should go up continually even if it means we can't afford to e.g. educate our kids?
You obviously meant to say we should BORROW the money from elsewhere. We aren't generating the income we need for what is spent in the public sector today, let alone tomorrow. Problem comes when we run out of credit with the nations like China who are currently underwriting the debt. We then resort to the equivalent of taking out loans with Wonga and have to divert spending on public services to repay interest. Must be great to live in cloud cuckoo land.
Get rid of Trident, there's £3billion a year saved straight away...
£3 billion? That's a drop in the ocean to the nhs. it's going up by that number every year anyway.
Get rid of Trident, there's £3billion a year saved straight away...
£2bn actually. That will cover one half of next year's rise in NHS expenditure assuming that there are no job losses, decommissioning costs etc from scrapping Trident.
Genuine question - how is it being carved up? If I believe the propoganda, the NHS budget has been ring fenced for this entire government, -- no increase, but there again no cuts. Isn't this a good thing?
Due to inflation wouldn't that lead to the NHS' funding being cut in real terms every single year?
Spending on the NHS has increased over and above inflation every year since 2010. IN real terms, it is 5% higher than in was in 2010.
It should not have done. There's no reason why health should get a free pass while education, transport, defence and investment are cut. It was a nakedly political pledge, as was Labour's.
IN time of plenty, spending on the NHS goes up. In times of austerity, spending on the NHS goes up. It's got to stop a some point but the politicians are too cowardly and the public too emotive.
God forbid you need its help then mate. You will change your tune I guaratee it.
Really. You think NHS spending should go up continually even if it means we can't afford to e.g. educate our kids?
You obviously meant to say we should BORROW the money from elsewhere. We aren't generating the income we need for what is spent in the public sector today, let alone tomorrow. Problem comes when we run out of credit with the nations like China who are currently underwriting the debt. We then resort to the equivalent of taking out loans with Wonga and have to divert spending on public services to repay interest. Must be great to live in cloud cuckoo land.
Get rid of Trident, there's £3billion a year saved straight away...
£3 billion? That's a drop in the ocean to the nhs. it's going up by that number every year anyway.
Where will the money come from?
It shouldn't have a blank cheque of course and uncontrolled growth in spending would be wrong, but in terms of where should we prioritise our spending, I would far rather we found efficiencies elsewhere to ensure we maintain the NHS at the very least to the standard it's at today. If spending needs to increase to maintain or improve standards in areas that are lacking, then yes in answer to the original question, we should find (not necessarily borrow) the money if it's needed. I don't think that's cloud cuckoo land - I'm suggesting reallocating funds from elsewhere if required.
Genuine question - how is it being carved up? If I believe the propoganda, the NHS budget has been ring fenced for this entire government, -- no increase, but there again no cuts. Isn't this a good thing?
Due to inflation wouldn't that lead to the NHS' funding being cut in real terms every single year?
Spending on the NHS has increased over and above inflation every year since 2010. IN real terms, it is 5% higher than in was in 2010.
It should not have done. There's no reason why health should get a free pass while education, transport, defence and investment are cut. It was a nakedly political pledge, as was Labour's.
IN time of plenty, spending on the NHS goes up. In times of austerity, spending on the NHS goes up. It's got to stop a some point but the politicians are too cowardly and the public too emotive.
God forbid you need its help then mate. You will change your tune I guaratee it.
Really. You think NHS spending should go up continually even if it means we can't afford to e.g. educate our kids?
You obviously meant to say we should BORROW the money from elsewhere. We aren't generating the income we need for what is spent in the public sector today, let alone tomorrow. Problem comes when we run out of credit with the nations like China who are currently underwriting the debt. We then resort to the equivalent of taking out loans with Wonga and have to divert spending on public services to repay interest. Must be great to live in cloud cuckoo land.
Get rid of Trident, there's £3billion a year saved straight away...
£3 billion? That's a drop in the ocean to the nhs. it's going up by that number every year anyway.
Where will the money come from?
It shouldn't have a blank cheque of course and uncontrolled growth in spending would be wrong, but in terms of where should we prioritise our spending, I would far rather we found efficiencies elsewhere to ensure we maintain the NHS at the very least to the standard it's at today. If spending needs to increase to maintain or improve standards in areas that are lacking, then yes in answer to the original question, we should find (not necessarily borrow) the money if it's needed. I don't think that's cloud cuckoo land - I'm suggesting reallocating funds from elsewhere if required.
which is exactly what the tories are pledging to do...
Genuine question - how is it being carved up? If I believe the propoganda, the NHS budget has been ring fenced for this entire government, -- no increase, but there again no cuts. Isn't this a good thing?
Due to inflation wouldn't that lead to the NHS' funding being cut in real terms every single year?
Spending on the NHS has increased over and above inflation every year since 2010. IN real terms, it is 5% higher than in was in 2010.
It should not have done. There's no reason why health should get a free pass while education, transport, defence and investment are cut. It was a nakedly political pledge, as was Labour's.
IN time of plenty, spending on the NHS goes up. In times of austerity, spending on the NHS goes up. It's got to stop a some point but the politicians are too cowardly and the public too emotive.
God forbid you need its help then mate. You will change your tune I guaratee it.
Really. You think NHS spending should go up continually even if it means we can't afford to e.g. educate our kids?
If needed ... YES
We should find the money from elsewhere
The magic tree? Wonga.Com?
£1m a week treatment ? Certainly sir.
Sex change operation? Of course Sir/Madam - join the queue. Don't worry, we should find the money from elsewhere.
Fertility treatment - no, of course you don't have to pay madam/sir. It actually works out better as you're more likely to get twins/triplets, which means more child benefit. Fantastic isn't, as someone else pays.
Regarding the NHS, First, perhaps, it would help if GPs stopped giving easy access to antidepressants to people that are in reality just a bit fed up. Just under 46.7 million prescriptions for antidepressants were dispensed in England in 2011, a 9.1% increase on 2010. Yep, nearly a 10% increase in one year!
It seems that until I recently hit the big six zero, I was one of only 12% of people that actually paid anything for my drugs. So, for example, is there really any reason why, pregnant women should get free drugs? If they can't afford the drugs surely they can't afford the child? For that matter should I get free drugs? Probably not.
In 2009, there were 886 million items prescribed, costing £8,529 million. The number of items dispensed has doubled in ten years, with an average of 40.8 items prescribed annually for each individual over 60 years of age. Around two-thirds of GP consultations lead to the issue of a prescription, with 70-80 per cent of all prescriptions issued 'on repeat'.
On a different slant, according to a King's Fund Report, getting all hospitals' performance up to the level of the top quartile would, alone, save £6bn a year. In the past NHS productivity has been woeful.
There's plenty of ways, still, to save the NHS without having to spend more than 8% of GDP on it.
Regarding the NHS, First, perhaps, it would help if GPs stopped giving easy access to antidepressants to people that are in reality just a bit fed up. Just under 46.7 million prescriptions for antidepressants were dispensed in England in 2011, a 9.1% increase on 2010. Yep, nearly a 10% increase in one year!
It seems that until I recently hit the big six zero, I was one of only 12% of people that actually paid anything for my drugs. So, for example, is there really any reason why, pregnant women should get free drugs? If they can't afford the drugs surely they can't afford the child? For that matter should I get free drugs? Probably not.
In 2009, there were 886 million items prescribed, costing £8,529 million. The number of items dispensed has doubled in ten years, with an average of 40.8 items prescribed annually for each individual over 60 years of age. Around two-thirds of GP consultations lead to the issue of a prescription, with 70-80 per cent of all prescriptions issued 'on repeat'.
On a different slant, according to a King's Fund Report, getting all hospitals' performance up to the level of the top quartile would, alone, save £6bn a year. In the past NHS productivity has been woeful.
There's plenty of ways, still, to save the NHS without having to spend more than 8% of GDP on it.
The NHS will cease to exist if the Conseratives are elected. It is on the fast track to privatisation and many services are under significant pressure. There have been big changes in efficiency but these alone will not make up for the resources needed.
The promotion of GPs to the role of commissioning care has just made things worse and was opposed by every professional body in the NHS - Niether was it mandated being a direct and early betrayal of an explicit pledge.
We either want a comprehensive NHS free at the point of delivery or not and if we do want it it requires adequate and stable funding. Of course there is money available it is just a matter of priority
where's your source for this? Or is this just propaganda you picked up from the socialist worker?
Regarding the NHS, First, perhaps, it would help if GPs stopped giving easy access to antidepressants to people that are in reality just a bit fed up. Just under 46.7 million prescriptions for antidepressants were dispensed in England in 2011, a 9.1% increase on 2010. Yep, nearly a 10% increase in one year!
It seems that until I recently hit the big six zero, I was one of only 12% of people that actually paid anything for my drugs. So, for example, is there really any reason why, pregnant women should get free drugs? If they can't afford the drugs surely they can't afford the child? For that matter should I get free drugs? Probably not.
In 2009, there were 886 million items prescribed, costing £8,529 million. The number of items dispensed has doubled in ten years, with an average of 40.8 items prescribed annually for each individual over 60 years of age. Around two-thirds of GP consultations lead to the issue of a prescription, with 70-80 per cent of all prescriptions issued 'on repeat'.
On a different slant, according to a King's Fund Report, getting all hospitals' performance up to the level of the top quartile would, alone, save £6bn a year. In the past NHS productivity has been woeful.
There's plenty of ways, still, to save the NHS without having to spend more than 8% of GDP on it.
"1 in 4 people will experience mental health problems in the course of a year"
So really your statement is completely ignorant of any fact.
Well, first, of course, there are many mental health issues that aren't depression and so are less likely to be relevant to my enquiry as to why so many antidepressants are prescribed. In any event, what, in your opinion, has changed much over the years? Why does that mean that many more people are popping many more pills? How is your one-in-four estimate arrived at? Why were antidepressant prescriptions up by 10% in just one year? The Mind web site concedes that depression, for example, can range from the full-blown version right down to "just being in low spirits". I think that, in some cases, GPs are just issuing prescriptions to get patients out the door. This has been shown to be the case with antibiotics being prescribed for the common cold, for example. pulsetoday.co.uk/clinical/therapy-areas/infectious-diseases/gps-should-refuse-rather-than-delay-antibiotics-for-coughs-and-colds-cochrane-review-concludes/20002962.article These days some are questioning the true role that drugs play in treating depression. This American Professor of Pyschology to name but one psychologytoday.com/blog/curious/201403/what-causes-depression-myths-about-chemical-imbalances
Saving £3bn on Trident reduces total public spending from £700bn to £697bn or reduces borrowing from £121bn to £118bn. Spending on NHS is around £113bn so everything spent on the NHS is borrowed money.
"Find more money" smacks of running a budget based on finding money down the sofa to pay next month's mortgage with only the credit card as a fall back and hoping the bank will raise the limit.
As a hard working family man it's the only party I would ever vote for and history has proved there is only one party in this country that can run the economy properly
Still think labour will get in as the Con/UKIP vote gets shared but Edward could end up quite literally being the most unpopular Prime Minister in our lifetime
Only 8 months to go, 5000 thread easy by May 2015...
Comments
No one remembers cash for peerages? A big criminal investigation? Tony Blair becoming the first sitting Prime Minister to be interviewed by police in relation to a criminal investigation?
Or the bribes he took from Bernie to omit Motorsport from advertising laws?
Patients demand and expect the very best in terms of care and the technology used to achieve that and why shouldn't they ?
This constant upward trend in new technology year on year has a cost and it's not cheap. You buy a CT scanner now and in four years it's dated and there are significantly better on the market. The newer one gives more information so enables better treatment to be given. If you try explaining to a patient why they can't have that better care because the equipment and technology required is not currently available there is an outcry. Proton Beam Therapy which has existed for ten years is not yet available in the UK and won't be treating patients when it is until around 2022. That's a scandal.
In medicine if you stand still you go backwaRD's.
If you look at what the NHS provides it is a credit to those who work there. It is cost effective but is falling behind our neighbours in what we offer.
Is a second class health service acceptable to one of the richest countries in the world ? Not for me it isn't.
Patients demand and expect the very best in terms of care and the technology used to achieve that and why shouldn't they ?
This constant upward trend in new technology year on year has a cost and it's not cheap. You buy a CT scanner now and in four years it's dated and there are significantly better on the market. The newer one gives more information so enables better treatment to be given. If you try explaining to a patient why they can't have that better care because the equipment and technology required is not currently available there is an outcry. Proton Beam Therapy which has existed for ten years is not yet available in the UK and won't be treating patients when it is until around 2022. That's a scandal.
In medicine if you stand still you go backwards.
If you look at what the NHS provides it is a credit to those who work there. It is cost effective but is falling behind our neighbours in what we offer.
Is a second class health service acceptable to one of the richest countries in the world ? Not for me it isn't.
An estimate of £150m on the tax free pension giveaway ? Don't believe it! These figures are often very wrong. This waiver is bound to attract more investment into this type of instrument...
And the next day Osborne announces freezing of benefits for two years! Affecting 10m families FFS!
Poor people spend much more of their income on day to day living - that's money going into other peoples jobs and businesses whereas richer people stash it away.
This government bang on about the deficit but they've made no headway and have cut corporation tax to boot for the biggest companies.
I have always believed that the liberals have stayed the course to prove their credentials and that they will happily cut a deal with labour after the next election. I would hope that such a coalition might offer some sane growth policies while Boris (the new tory leader) and Farage bicker in opposition. And by sane I mean cut government expenditure where they can reshape agendas on youth unemployment and housing. I could write something on health but it would be ill informed - logically nothing should be ring fenced until the national budget is healthy again.
People without jobs when they are young are set back for life without training and no hope of a defined benefit pension... They are more likely to become disaffected and support far right causes.
I'm not a labour supporter by the way* just see them as the best option but am amazed that professional politicians on all sides are so poor at communicating an agenda for this century!
*I was once upon a time but Blair invading Iraq killed that one along with another 200,000 members.
The point you make about technology is not exactly the issue - there is a body called NICE which assesses improvements and advances in healthcare and makes judgements on whether the cost of upgrading or introducing new treatments is cost-effective. These are generally done in isolation of the actual budget allocated to health services and so the decision not to introduce the latest advancements is usually made because the cost of the technology would be prohibitively expensive to roll out on a nationwide level. PCTs take on recommendations from NICE and can vary from it if their own budget allows it (for example, the availability of certain drugs or treatments free of charge differs from PCT to PCT).
Generally, NICE has to assess the 'opportunity cost' of endorsing providing treatment, machines or drugs free of charge to NHS patients. You mention Proton Beam Therapy but the cost of providing the Proton Beam Therapy to save just one life could be the equivalent of of the cost of saving hundreds of lives in a separate healthcare pathway (for example, the cost to the NHS to save the life of one cancer patient using PBT could equal the cost to the NHS to save the lives of hundreds of people with cancer through lower cost early-detection methods).
Now granted it would be nice if every hospital had the best technology available free of charge but we have to be realistic, the cost to the taxpayer to fund such a system would require huge rises in taxation or diverting spending from other areas such as education or infrastructure, most likely both. Yes, people like having well equipped hospitals but they also like having disposable income, educated kids and roads and sewers. I guess that's where politics comes in, where people try to argue where the budget ought to be allocated to, but it's definitely not as simple as throwing money at it. We might be a rich country but we're also a country that has an extremely diverse population that suffers from a vast range of health problems, a lot of them self-inflicted.
We should find the money from elsewher
You obviously meant to say we should BORROW the money from elsewhere. We aren't generating the income we need for what is spent in the public sector today, let alone tomorrow. Problem comes when we run out of credit with the nations like China who are currently underwriting the debt. We then resort to the equivalent of taking out loans with Wonga and have to divert spending on public services to repay interest. Must be great to live in cloud cuckoo land.
As for proton beam therapy. It is not a modality that will save just a few lives. It is the future of radiotherapy and far superior to conventional photon treatment in every respect.
In the UK we are so far behind in radiotherapy compared to practically every other EU country including Greece and Portugal in terms of linear accelerator numbers and number of patient being offered the treatment. We are playing catch up and it's recognised as an issue by central government.
The cause ? Years of under investment by a succession of UK governments.
We should find the money from elsewher Get rid of Trident, there's £3billion a year saved straight away...
Where will the money come from?
£1m a week treatment ? Certainly sir.
Sex change operation? Of course Sir/Madam - join the queue. Don't worry, we should find the money from elsewhere.
Fertility treatment - no, of course you don't have to pay madam/sir. It actually works out better as you're more likely to get twins/triplets, which means more child benefit. Fantastic isn't, as someone else pays.
We have to draw the line somewhere.
It seems that until I recently hit the big six zero, I was one of only 12% of people that actually paid anything for my drugs.
So, for example, is there really any reason why, pregnant women should get free drugs? If they can't afford the drugs surely they can't afford the child? For that matter should I get free drugs? Probably not.
In 2009, there were 886 million items prescribed, costing £8,529 million. The number of items dispensed has doubled in ten years, with an average of 40.8 items prescribed annually for each individual over 60 years of age. Around two-thirds of GP consultations lead to the issue of a prescription, with 70-80 per cent of all prescriptions issued 'on repeat'.
On a different slant, according to a King's Fund Report, getting all hospitals' performance up to the level of the top quartile would, alone, save £6bn a year. In the past NHS productivity has been woeful.
There's plenty of ways, still, to save the NHS without having to spend more than 8% of GDP on it.
"1 in 4 people will experience mental health problems in the course of a year"
So really your statement is completely ignorant of any fact.
The Mind web site concedes that depression, for example, can range from the full-blown version right down to "just being in low spirits". I think that, in some cases, GPs are just issuing prescriptions to get patients out the door. This has been shown to be the case with antibiotics being prescribed for the common cold, for example. pulsetoday.co.uk/clinical/therapy-areas/infectious-diseases/gps-should-refuse-rather-than-delay-antibiotics-for-coughs-and-colds-cochrane-review-concludes/20002962.article
These days some are questioning the true role that drugs play in treating depression.
This American Professor of Pyschology to name but one psychologytoday.com/blog/curious/201403/what-causes-depression-myths-about-chemical-imbalances
I'm genuinely interested.
.
"Find more money" smacks of running a budget based on finding money down the sofa to pay next month's mortgage with only the credit card as a fall back and hoping the bank will raise the limit.
As a hard working family man it's the only party I would ever vote for and history has proved there is only one party in this country that can run the economy properly
Still think labour will get in as the Con/UKIP vote gets shared but Edward could end up quite literally being the most unpopular Prime Minister in our lifetime
Only 8 months to go, 5000 thread easy by May 2015...
Tax custs, although personally welcome, look like a pretty blatant pr-election vote grab and not affordable if we're going to cut the deficit.