Discussion on today's 1:00 news

[iNewbie]

Another problem - it is said of our local large hospital that if you don't have an infection when you go in, you'll have one when you come out. This is why my consultant says the last he wants his patients is in hospital. That's why I was home eight days after a leg amputation.

Its the same for all hospitals, Phil. Old people are more susceptible to infections. The heatings always up - a breeding ground for germs. And for some who just stay in bed its a chance for pneumonia.

My dad had Prostate cancer - terminal stage. He had a fall, and a few months later contracted hospital acquired pneumonia. He went in a walking man. He wasn't after 6 weeks in bed - they say for every week in bed you lose a months fitness. The consultant wanted him out, too.

I do voluntary work in my local, 2 days a week - I visit the majority of the wards. Its full of old people.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

I've had double pneumonia twice, I've had the jab now. They haven't yet come up with a jab for the MRSA, though.

 

[DoctorWibble]

In my younger days I worked as a hospital porter. In a few hospitals but the one that stands out was Springfield mental hospital in Tooting. Been demolished now I think. Anyway there were a few very old patients there who (I was told) had come as orphan children. At the time there was presumably nowhere else to put them (no-one any longer really knew) They stayed, became institutionalised, eventually became actually mentally ill and permanent life long residents. Easy to imagine the original hospital administrators trying to move them on, to a church run orphanage or maybe a workhouse, but struggling to find anywhere with room. I often used to wonder about how they came to give up looking. It only really makes sense if they always had loads of similar cases, more than could ever be moved on.

I hope we never give up on our welfare state. Its bonkers to simply roll over and accept the argument that we cant afford what we clearly could afford in the less wealthy 1960's and 1970's. Its just a question of priorities, not affordability.

 

[Jacob]

All necessary care should be funded by the NHS - ...

We aren't even high spenders compared to the rest of Europe. ....

Anyone reading that statement would think that there was a huge disparity between our expenditure and the rest of Europe. In fact the truth is that there is only a marginal difference which the OECD figures show.

We are 6th out of the G7. Italy spends less. America spends far more but is grossly inefficient.
http://visual.ons.gov.uk/how-does-uk-he ... ationally/

 

[finneyb]

We can't use spend as a measure. The more you give the NHS the more they will spend, same as any other organisation.

Neither can we use life expectancy as a measure - the measure must be quantity of quality of life.

But, I'm not sure how we assess quality of life, or even if we can.

So any comparison is useless.

Brian

 

[Jacob]

We can't use spend as a measure. The more you give the NHS the more they will spend, same as any other organisation.

Neither can we use life expectancy as a measure - the measure must be quantity of quality of life.

But, I'm not sure how we assess quality of life, or even if we can.

So any comparison is useless.

Brian

It's possible to assess usable measures of 'quality of life' and then put a cost to it. Lot of variations and inconsistencies of course but thats how it is, but still useful, even if not exact.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quality_of_life

PS that link actually very interesting- it's an important subject and affects all sorts of decisions about how we regulate or invest in the world around us.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

Quality of life? I remember coming out of Wilkinsons one afternoon and seeing something that both me and my loved one thought funny - we just and split our sides laughing. I was in a wheelchair though then I had only lost one leg, when a very sad looking woman passed us going the opposite way. She shook her head as she passed and said I don't know what you can find to laugh about, you've only got one leg and you're in a wheelchair. My friend, a GP, said I should have told her to foxtrot oscar, but I just felt very sorry for her. You cannot sat say what other people have or haven't in the way of quality of life or happiness.

 

[Dusty]

I think there could be less of a problem , not totaly as every system has faults .

from 2010 to 2014 I was involved and ran several large construction projects on several hospitals . one being my local . The more I did the more I saw money literaly being peed down the drain . I wont mention the hospital as it could get complicated but . We were there to install a "facility" that would carry out services normaly subbed out . It was a 1.5m project and was designed to not only deal with their own needs but to also provide the same service for other local trusts . The facility was functional and where it was located 90% of people would never notice it . On the outside they were determined to have multi coloured panels 3 foot square at a cost of £400.00 each , around 20 of them . the list was endless of the special requests of managers for fittings and not functional design elements that serves no purpose . The more I was involved the more I was pricing and seeing the waste . After hearing from some one I got to know , it has made very little £ difference to the hospitals budget . The money that was wasted , would of paid for several nurses for quiet some time .



As for bed blocking , I was unfortunately in hospital around 12 years ago I was admitted on the wednesday , the doctors would make an am and pm visit . On the friday when I was due to be discharged a temp doc came round and declared he wasnt prepared to send me home as he was just taking home and that I would have to wait until monday . I felt fine and wanted to go home . Needless to say I discharged myself within an hour . I could of stayed but when a bed costs around £1000 a day , why waste it , and no doubt someone else was more in need of it . If a doctor or doctors were stationed to wards permanently maybe people could be sent home when needed , not when their shifts dictated . i am not talking about the middle of the night , there is 8 to 12 working hours in a day and people dont come into the hospital only between 9 and 5 .

There is alot things to be looked at , but it is not the frontline staff's fault , it is the holders of the purse strings . I can vouch for that as my partner is a student nurse ( 3rd year ) and she has already made it clear she will never work on a ward in a main hospitals as when she has been on shift , they work like trojan horses ,to make up for the lack of staff . As a second year student she was on a day shift and was given 18 people , two wards who were her responsibilty . that is not only bad but moraly wrong .

ta ta

 

[mailee]

I think the NHS is just the same as most large companies on the aspect of how they are run. Top management and the decision makers just have no idea what goes on on the shop floor. Their decisions are based on figures and plans which have no correlation to the actual work that goes on. They will mostly employ an outside company to work out the best way to run the business and spend thousands for them to come up with a system that is of no use. I have worked for a few large companies who work this way and have the ability to waste thousands of pounds on systems that just do not work. None of them ever think to ask the workforce for their opinion on how to improve or if they do they then take no notice of them! A good example is the company I now work for have made all of the supervisors re-apply for their jobs, half of them are very good at the job and have done it for years but are not so good at interviews. The other half are very good at interviews and can talk a good job, i imagine you can guess the half that got the jobs! All because someone decided to use the HR department for the interviews and not the managers on the job who know their men. :roll: Apparently they intend to spend £50,0000 on us this year but I wonder just how much of that will improve the company and how much will be wasted as usual?

 

[thetyreman]

lol won't be long before this is locked down :-"

 

[Phil Pascoe]

Only if idiots start posting in it.

 

[RogerS]

We aren't even high spenders compared to the rest of Europe. ....

Anyone reading that statement would think that there was a huge disparity between our expenditure and the rest of Europe. In fact the truth is that there is only a marginal difference which the OECD figures show.

We are 6th out of the G7. Italy spends less. America spends far more but is grossly inefficient.
http://visual.ons.gov.uk/how-does-uk-he ... ationally/

No-one is disagreeing. But the European difference is only marginal.

 

[Jacob]

Anyone reading that statement would think that there was a huge disparity between our expenditure and the rest of Europe. In fact the truth is that there is only a marginal difference which the OECD figures show.

We are 6th out of the G7. Italy spends less. America spends far more but is grossly inefficient.
http://visual.ons.gov.uk/how-does-uk-he ... ationally/

No-one is disagreeing. But the European difference is only marginal.

We are actually quite low spenders in terms of proportion of GDP

 

[RogerS]

We are 6th out of the G7. Italy spends less. America spends far more but is grossly inefficient.
http://visual.ons.gov.uk/how-does-uk-he ... ationally/

No-one is disagreeing. But the European difference is only marginal.

We are actually quite low spenders in terms of proportion of GDP

And so are others. But we are going round in circles here.

 

[deema]

The obvious is almost always obviously wrong is an adage that I had drummed into me many years ago. There are a lot of opinions on what should be done that is based on opinion and sound bites. Very very few of us are actually in a position where we understand the problem and can start to contribute to finding a solution. By example, the introduction of a scaled stamp duty was in general a very popular move to generate additional funds. It affects the 'wealthy' and doesn't really hit the average 'house', or at least that was how it was sold. The effect has been that revenue generated by the government has decreased since its introduction. Why, well the majority of the income was generated from the South West / higher value Homes, these people tend to be more mobile as they change their job more often / aspire for a better home. The increased tax has reduced mobility (sale of the higher value houses) and the affordability to move / upgrade people's homes. It's has therefore reduced the trickle of houses down for first time buyers, as well as reducing the funds available to be spent on for instance the NHS.

As a further example, looking at the changes to raise money from landlords who have had most of the tax perks removed, has this affected the revenues to the government, yes it has. Another popular move to stop the greedy grabbing landlords exploiting the vulnerable. However, the consequence is that landlords still want the same return in order to make their investment viable. Demand for rental property remains high......so the level of rents demanded are increasing compared to a few years ago. Those who are in rental accommodation, typically the young and those on lower incomes are now being squeezed further and actually paying a higher proportion of their income to the government. Did anyone see that coming?

The more your worth the more optional paying tax becomes. You can at a certain wealth level move to say Monaco if and enjoy a tax regime that means that you don't need a clever tax accountant to shelter your wealth. Although extremely controversial reducing tax rates, there are enough countries that operate a flat rate tax of say 15% to prove that what in fact happens is that lower taxes increase government revenues. I can't believe any party will propose to reduce taxes down to a flat rate of 15% to support the NHS.....no one would believe it was possible and would in fact alienate the majority of the normal working populous that put them into power.

 

[Farmer Giles]

Just listening to a discussion on the BBC news at 1:00. regarding NHS funding between a doctor and a retired doctor. This retired doctor stated - this issue of a shortage of hospital beds is nonsense. People don't want to be in hospital, they want to be back in their own homes. ( Not verbatim)
I thought that was just unbelievable. We don't need more beds? Closing wards is not a problem? What about people having to stay in ambulances because there are no beds for them? What about people having to wait far too long for emergency ambulances because the ambulances are still waiting outside hospitals because of those patients still in them? And this, as I said, was from a retired doctor.

OK, rant over.

K

I'm on the train so haven't read the whole thread so somebody else may have pointed it out. The retired doctor is a fully paid up member of the tory party and has links to private healthcare. Hardly impartial, but the BBC represents him as such.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

You didn't see the whole interview - it was virtually apolitical. The retired surgeon told of a lifetime in medicine and the junior doctor told him how wrong he was.

 

[Farmer Giles]

Thanks Phil, I didn't see the interview, just heard that the BBC didn't mention his affiliations, I think all interests of interviewees should be known so their opinions can be put into context. Good to here there was some balance with a junior doctor there but I do worry about impartiality given that the head of BBC news is ex-Murdoch and he is one of George Osbournes best buddies and the political editor is clearly not impartial. Channel 4 news seems to bash both sides more evenly I find.

I forgot to mention that my father has had a couple of strokes over the last 3 months so I have been dealing with several hospitals and now the care system as he is not going to recover sufficiently for my mother to look after him. The NHS is fantastic but needs funding properly, with the funding going to care not to third party profit margins in my opinion. I work for a US company and my US colleagues without exception would love to have the NHS, but we are heading in their direction which is expensive and elitist. I will stop there!

 

[RogerS]

Elitist....as in the elite sending their children to private schools, perhaps ? Like Diane Abbot, for instance :-"

 

[Farmer Giles]

Elitist....as in the elite sending their children to private schools, perhaps ? Like Diane Abbot, for instance :-"

No, just people below a certain income level not being able to afford health care.