NHS

End of life care for a dearly loved member of my family was pretty shitnon-existent under the NHS in one of their West Country hospitals quite frankly. In fact despicable.

I really would not want end-of-life care or cancer care run by a company like Serco or Virgincare, even if I lived in Stafford.
Serco ran the out of hours in Cornwall, and had to hand it back because at one time there was only one doctor for the whole of Cornwall. Got into a lot of trouble for that. They also falsified records.

Not talking about the drugs companies, just about how badly the NHS ran services in Stafford hospital and considering whether or not it could be improved if run by a private company. Not a drugs company, a company which provides services, possibly very effectively and efficiently.

We know drugs companies charge the earth for their products; they have to fund research but imo could take some drugs off licence sooner. The problem is that, once off licence and produced by other companies more cheaply, the efficacy of those drugs could be compromised, which is a scary prospect.

opendemocracy.net/ournhs/mike-marqusee/held-hostage-by-big-pharma

About cancer care, rose.

I didn't answer your question properly:-

And yes, I do think it will improve things (imo).

Rose, Staffordshire are now trying to outsource end-of-life and cancer care to private providers. Do you think that will improve things?

DJen: As it was at rock bottom it could hardly be worse.

People I know were scared to go into Stafford hospital because they thought, with good reason, that they would never come out again.

Holly The hospital you provided a link for does provide all sorts of care, but the NHS patients that are referred to private clinics are not patients requiring emergency or complex care. They receive scheduled appointments for routine diagnostic and surgical procedures that are relatively simple and unlikely to require anything other than a very short stay in hospital. Many private providers do not have the facilities to deal with unexpected emergencies and, should such an emergency arise, these patients may well be whisked off to an NHS hospital.

Patients who may require a lengthy stay in hospital and who require ongoing, complex care, are generally not wanted by private providers or referred to them. In an article in the Mirror on 8 April this year it was reported that BUPA was offering their patients £2,000 to use public services if they required cancer, heart or gynaecological operations. They want to offload the "difficult" - and less profitable - cases on the NHS and keep the easier, scheduled procedures for themselves.

https://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jul/11/nhs-safeguarded-european-commission-eu-us-trade-deal&sa=U&ei=aOC_U_bEGYKb0wXcz4GwDA&ved=0CAoQFjAC&client=internal-uds-cse&usg=AFQjCNGyPgh7hlqzG3q1Kju-2K0B17aUPQ

Sorry, gave you the whole page to read in the last link.
This is the important bit, although you can read the rest if you want.

POGS, I have spent a couple of hours trying to find statistics for the NHS workforce. What I have found is that in 2010 there were 1.4 million working in the NHS, and now there are 1.3 million. Where do you get your figures for increases from? NHS England does not seem to collate figures any more, and they now say they are going to change their methods of collecting - to confuse us even more and make it difficult to compare?

Anyway, good news, Eloethan.
https://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.theguardian.com/politics&sa=U&ei=bd2_U8-RDOeX1AWugoFQ&ved=0CAYQFjAA&client=internal-uds-cse&usg=AFQjCNHTulXf-2v6vqiJigy3Za8UnPhmqA

pulsetoday.msgfocus.com/c/13Q2jJqbH6lysyiFlQqrDKx
POGS, here's an interesting article for you about jobs and GPs.
Apparently 60% of OOH services are having trouble recruiting.

Rose, Staffordshire are now trying to outsource end-of-life and cancer care to private providers. Do you think that will improve things?

Agree with everything you say, Eloethan.

pulsetoday.msgfocus.com/c/13Q3fl8J7JxQr35xQrLWQqi

Has anyone actually proclaimed labour as the saviour of the NHS?
It's a socialist institution, which is not the same as Labour, and not the same Labour party which started the NHS. Beveridge would be appalled at what New Labour did.

When I say I have received excellent treatment, I would say an experience on an A&E ward was horrendous a few years ago (would have been under Labour as I remember?) whereas DH received very good treatment fairly recently.

I think if you start another thread it would have to be forward looking and constructive and avoid bashing any particular party if that is possible.

To anyone who proclaims Labour as the saviour of the NHS I will say one word: Stafford.

And, yes, POGS, many people in Wales are extremely concerned about the way Labour is running the NHS here, although, so far, I will say I have received excellent treatment.

It does need reform, but is so cumbersome that I would not presume to know what is the best way forward. It is so vastly different from what Labour envisaged at its inception that I believe even those visionaries would be shaking their heads in disbelief and calling for reform.

I will pick up a point someone else made about managers - a young relative works nights at a large hospital; the rota system works well, efficiently and amicably - along comes a new young manager, tells all the nurses that changes must be made, trying to force through a mixture of nights and days for all. Cue a lot of unhappy nurses . I am not sure of the outcome but it would seem like change for changes sake.

As I see it, just moaning about the state of the NHS and blaming the Tories gets no-one any where.

Precisely kitty - it just blurs the argument.

I have already given some suggestions.

Yes, let's start a thread under 'Health' and ask for positive suggestions

Trouble is we have no good role models in Parliament when it comes to eliminating the 'blame culture' and moving forward.

sneaks out of thread before.....

As I see it, just moaning about the state of the NHS and blaming the Tories gets no-one any where.

We need to find a way forward - does anyone on here have any good ideas

The private providers may well seem better organised but that is because they "cherry pick" services that are easier to provide. (In the same way that private postal services "cherry pick" the easier and more profitable areas of business because they are not legally obliged to provide the same service as the Royal Mail). NHS hospitals on the other hand provide a whole range of services, from relatively minor injuries to major emergencies, minor and major surgery, physiotherapy, terminal illnesses, maternity services, etc., etc. They don't just pick up the "quick fix" conditions but have to deal with anything that comes through the door.

Untrue.

www.bmihealthcare.co.uk/hospital/treatment?p_hosp_name=BMI%20The%20Priory%20Hospital&p_hosp_id=302&in_page=Treatments

If this government gets in again the NHS will only be getting 6% of the GDP by 2021.

Is that a figure from their own perspective or is it one they've lifted from the Labour proposals originally put forward?

It's a contentious issue, but I think it's worth remembering that we all DO pay for the NHS through taxes anyway, and that perhaps taxes should now be raised, partly to help fund the straining system.

Here's another contentious point: maybe if politicians stopped wasting money raised in taxes then the NHS wouldn't keep running short. They could start by not handing over millions of pounds every day to the EU and stop wasting billions of pounds on a train that will only benefit a few people. That should keep the NHS afloat for a while.

Rowantree

and we have some real challenges in that we have an increasingly ageing population.

That notion has already been debunked - it is a political tool that is being used as an ends to justify the means.

The private providers may well seem better organised but that is because they "cherry pick" services that are easier to provide. (In the same way that private postal services "cherry pick" the easier and more profitable areas of business because they are not legally obliged to provide the same service as the Royal Mail). NHS hospitals on the other hand provide a whole range of services, from relatively minor injuries to major emergencies, minor and major surgery, physiotherapy, terminal illnesses, maternity services, etc., etc. They don't just pick up the "quick fix" conditions but have to deal with anything that comes through the door.

Also, once private companies form a major part of health services, their prices will no doubt increase. We have seen this with the energy companies. There is supposed to be competition but as soon as one company puts its prices up, the others follow suit.

Recent research has established that the NHS is very cost-effective. It may not be perfect and, like any large organisation there is definitely room for improvement, but I think it is infinitely preferable to the alternative.

Durhamjen

If, as you do, like to process data, what do you think about the figures that come back at Labour time and again in Parliament when they like to profess to be the NHS Saviour. There are now more nurses, more doctors and more midwives than under Labour. Miliband has gone on the waiting times for A&E but has never challenged Cameron on that point.

What do you think about Circle who has been widely reported to have turned around the service at Hinchingbrooke Hospital.

What do you think about the reports and comments made about Labour run NHS services in Wales? Not a matter I have followed with fervour but cannot fail to notice there does seem to be a problem

.Do you every give credibility to the fact the numbers going to A&E and using the NHS have increased year on year on and must at some point have to be taken into consideration.

Do you ever believe that just maybe no political party has all the answers.

ri.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=A7x9UnUIGL9TDCIAM813Bwx.;_ylu=X3oDMTBybWh0ZnN2BHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDNgRjb2xvA2lyZAR2dGlkAw--/RV=2/RE=1405061256/RO=10/RU=https%3a%2f%2fwww.gov.uk%2fgovernment%2fspeeches%2flistening-to-what-people-think-about-types-of-providers-of-nhs-care/RK=0/RS=92dcAvXtwCPFoOl5FGNBF7eRuZQ-

Sorry, long link again, but I do not know if any of you on here have heard about this, and you should, I think.

Not entering the heated argument except to say that I am surprised to hear that people in Australia are appalled at what this government is doing to the NHS. From what I have heard (or not!) during visits to Australia they are not that aware or interested, and the majority of people I know over there pay into a private scheme as well as the public (Medicare) scheme. These work alongside each other and patients who pay into a private scheme can choose to use either as far as I am aware. Cost of drugs is subsidised but they are not free or subsidised to the extent that they are here.
Australians I have spoken to find our NHS, pensions and other benefits astonishingly generous!
I don't live there, of course, so can only speak as someone who has been on extended visits there (and had occasion to use their medical services a couple of times).

www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-28235850

Gap in NHS funding means free at point of use could come to an end in a few years.