Gransnet forums

Health

Funding the NHS?

(230 Posts)
JessM Mon 31-Mar-14 13:40:02

Lord Warner has written a report that points out the if we want to have an effective NHS we are going to need to get more money for it.
He suggests various things including a £10 a month for using it and levies on gambling, alcohol, tobacco or sugar.
With some drastic cuts in the pipeline under "austerity" - how do you think the NHS can be funded in the face of increasing demand and increasing costs of the latest treatments.

Aka Mon 16-Jun-14 08:02:34

Jess back to the OP. My point being that rather than put more money into the NHS we need to find ways to take less out.

Bariatric procedures for the obese can help stop them developing type 2 diabetes, and in some cases reverse it in those who already have it. This is only one example of good cost effective treatment.

I know I am always harping on about it but £24,000,000 each and every day to treat diabetes is killing the NHS and is on the rise.

Aka Mon 16-Jun-14 07:57:22

AAA note i didn't quote but I will now
" reduction in spasticity of the legs, reduced need for further corrective procedures, quality of life, and improvements in patients’ ability to move, gait and walking, and level of independence"

I'd call that pretty dammed dramatic wouldn't you?

durhamjen Mon 16-Jun-14 00:50:55

I used to be a member of the Patients Association until I realised who the corporate members were, Bupa, Novartis, etc., Happyman.

My husband fell off a ladder and fractured his spine. His spinal cord was damaged quite severely, and he had titanium plates to hold it together.
The side effects and complications can be quite severe, so to actually cut parts of the spinal cord on purpose and not know until after you have done it what the complications would be is a horrible thought. We were told that the nervous system in the spine is like a telephone junction box, and having to find the right one to repair is near impossible. That was after his operation.
I do not envy those parents, having to decide what risk is worth it.
My husband had a 50% chance of being paraplegic with the operation. As it was, he was in pain for the rest of his life.

AAAHappyMan Mon 16-Jun-14 00:35:02

Aka Sun 15-Jun-14 20:27:46
Thanks AAA
The fact that NICE thinks this can dramatically improve the quality of life makes it even worse that it can't be funded.

Whilst it's NICE ;-)) to get your thanks, I can't see where NICE even suggests that this procedure can provide a dramatic improvement.
These are the words used:

What has NICE said?
The evidence shows that the procedure is effective but that
complications can be serious.
However, I do agree that if the Clinicians, other professionals and the parents all agree that on a 'cost / benefit' type analysis the 'risk' is worth taking, then the procedure should go ahead - any other decision seems perverse.
In the days of PCTs, one could lobby the Board at its meetings held in Public. But since control of OUR £65 000 000 000 NHS cash to pay for such treatments has been transferred into the [private] hands of the GPs who form the CCGs, one does NOT have the right to attend Board meetings.
In addition, the Lay 'Representatives' of the Public and Patients who serve on the CCG Boards are chosen by the CCGs to occupy those £15 000 a year posts.
If any readers of this are not members of the Patients; Association, an effective national lobby group, please do consider joining. If you don't want, or can't afford, to become a Full member, you can be an eMail member and contribute to the activities - FREE.
The Patients Association <[email protected]

Eloethan Sun 15-Jun-14 22:49:16

Aka What I was trying to say was I'm sure the majority of people cannot, hand on heart, say that their lifestyle does not contain several elements that may adversely affect their health.

Of course, for smokers and heavy drinkers it is a bit more clear cut. But what about people who: don't eat the seven portions of fruit and vegetables a day; don't engage in moderately vigorous exercise three times a week; fly several times a year; drink several cups of coffee a day; drink full fat milk; don't breastfeed their children; eat meat several times a week; eat some processed foods;

So far as nutrition is concerned, many foods highly processed foods are heavily marketed. Some foods which on the face of it are natural, are likely to have undergone processes that are unnatural (e.g. meat from animals that have been given hormones and antibiotics). Even certain sorts of food packaging have been found to be potentially damaging to health.

Also, other elements of people's lives are likely to be damaging to their health but largely beyond their control:

Jobs that are, for example:
sedentary/screen-based; (office workers)
involve contact with chemicals, dust, etc. (factory workers, cleaners, hairdressers, florists, construction workers, pharmaceutical workers, etc.)
involve high levels of stress (e.g. ambulance workers, health workers)
involve working nights/long and/or irregular shifts

Environment:
Areas with high levels of air or ground pollution
Areas with high levels of naturally occurring radon
Homes that are cold, damp, badly ventilated

Genetic predisposition to particular illnesses

I know many people who are not smokers/drinkers/over eaters who have been unfortunate enough to be struck down with cancer or other serious illnesses. I feel that, whilst many of us could be more vigilant about our lifestyles, it is too simplistic to say that most illnesses are wilfully self-inflicted, firstly because there are so many other factors that contribute to illness and secondly because it is too convenient to blame the individual rather than to strictly regulate the food industry and clean up the environment.

gangy5 Sun 15-Jun-14 21:46:02

PS durhamjen Yes I agree - we've a water cannon to contend with now so perhaps the Westminster idea wasn't so bright.

gangy5 Sun 15-Jun-14 21:39:28

AAAHappyMan you've made me laugh - thanks for that! It's strange how petitions on these foodie subjects don't go viral - not like some other useless subjects which in proportion are of very minor importance. I only wish I knew how to spread the 'gospel' on this here internet!! Thanks to you all for your supportive words.
I have put my epetition link on here before for them in the 'control room' to relegate it to the epetition department. I shall do my best to keep introducing it into any discussion I think appropriate.
I apologise for butting into this one and going off course and not keeping to the original subject.
epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/62209

newist Sun 15-Jun-14 21:28:28

Thanks, I did Aka in capitals

Aka Sun 15-Jun-14 20:58:55

try this Newist

Why sorry? I think it's a lovely gesture smile

newist Sun 15-Jun-14 20:32:02

Sorry Aka

newist Sun 15-Jun-14 20:31:12

AKA is there any links by which a donation can be given to help in a small way, I would be heart broken if she was my child

Aka Sun 15-Jun-14 20:27:46

Thanks AAA

The fact that NICE thinks this can dramatically improve the quality of life makes it even worse that it can't be funded.

Just think of that £1,000,000 per hour!

AAAHappyMan Sun 15-Jun-14 20:22:38

.... about :
Selective dorsal rhizotomy for spasticity in cerebral palsy: understanding NICE guidance

AAAHappyMan Sun 15-Jun-14 20:19:41

This is what NICE stated :
www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/live/11220/52084/52084.pdf

Aka Sun 15-Jun-14 20:16:35

That's probably correct angry sad

janeainsworth Sun 15-Jun-14 20:14:02

Yes Aka it is, and it's not as though by making it available, it would unleash an unmet demand IYSWIM, as might be the case with NHS-funded cosmetic surgery for breast reductions or eyelid-lifts.
It's hard to avoid the conclusion that this particular cut has been made because the group of patients is quite small and not very vocal - can you imagine the outcry that would attend cutting back on breast screening for example.
angry

Eloethan Sun 15-Jun-14 20:13:40

gangy That was a very useful summary of what has happened re food standards and regulation over the last few decades. Thank you.

Aka Sun 15-Jun-14 20:01:18

It's such a small amount too Jane sad

janeainsworth Sun 15-Jun-14 19:57:46

Sorry Aka I hadn't heard of this girl's plight. That's shocking.sadangry

Quote: "Changes to funding arrangements mean this treatment is no longer available on the NHS. But we continue to meet with the family as they explore self-funding Sophie's surgery.

– NOTTINGHAM UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS TRUST"

I would really like to know where these budget cuts have come from, whether it is the Dept of Health, the University Hospitals Trust or local funding arrangements.

Aka Sun 15-Jun-14 19:46:17

Jane a link to the case

It is claimed funding for the operation has dried up completely. That’s despite the National Institute of Clinical Excellence stating the operation can dramatically improve quality of life.

Aka Sun 15-Jun-14 19:35:52

Jane it was a cause célèbre locally. Once this operation was funded by the NHS now it isn't. And yes, it's all to do with finance.

AAAHappyMan Sun 15-Jun-14 19:28:58

gangy5 Sun 15-Jun-14 15:04:04
THE FOOD MANUFACTURING INDUSTRY AND THE HEALTH OF THE NATION
All HAIL to thee, gangy5
And to ''Cap and Gown'' it all - There seems to be much momentum now on this subject - I wish we could mobilise into an effective force. How about a march on Westminster??
With your abilities, I reckon that you'd be able to raise even more than the 2 000 000 who marched against the Iraq war.
Shall I start organizing Busses from West Yorks? Say 50 to start?
No, I'll charter a TRAIN

AAA_Fan

janeainsworth Sun 15-Jun-14 18:59:02

Well said pen.

With regard to petitions, perhaps some of them don't get many signatures because they are not very well thought through, and the aims not clearly expressed.

Ana Sun 15-Jun-14 18:39:39

Just what we need - yet another tablet, to counteract the possible side-effects of the others we're being prescribed willy-nilly...hmm

durhamjen Sun 15-Jun-14 18:01:24

epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/62209

Here's the e-petition for you, gangy. I've just signed. It closes just before the election.
For those of you who do not like signing petitions because you do not want to put your name and address on the form, believe it or not the government knows where you live.
They will not send you any more emails apart from the one to confirm it's you, because they do not want you to sign these petitions.
I do not fancy doing a march on Westminster, not with those water cannon having been bought.

Not all cases of diabetes, even type two are self inflicted. As shown in some posts above, some are caused by medication. So how much extra would it cost to go through everybody's lifestyle to sort out which are the undeserving?
I notice that one of the links on statins says that it is possible to stop the extra risk of geting type two by taking another tablet on top of the statins.