Rich Kid's NHS Thread

Former Member

Seeing as you pop in and out of other threads making accusations about how the NHS isn't working, only to disappear whenever I question your comments, I thought I would give you your own dedicated thread.

i don't know whether this avoidance is because you don't like having your assumptions questioned, if you don't like having your Tory propaganda debunked or if you just miss the responses.

So please feel free to comment here so that I can debunk, or agree, with what you are saying...

I promise to answer them all honestly...

Former Member

MRSA

Asylum seekers

Filth

Tory reforms

Labour scum

Privatisation

Waste

Beuraucracy

Blah blah blah blah blah.................

Former Member

Asylum seekers - ???

Filth - tories privatised cleaning contracts

Tory reforms- you are kidding right?

Labour scum - the scum that decresed waiting lists and ploughed double the money the conservatives ever did.

Privatisation - Tories

Waste - ??

Beuraucracy - Agree on this point

Blah blah blah blah blah

Former Member

Thanks Toady, guess I'll work on these for a start.

Toadborg wrote:

MRSA

The rate of reported cases has increased since 1997.

So has the number of tests. Here's a simple concept. If you don't test for something, do you think you will find it?

Asylum seekers

If you mean "health tourists", then I agree that this exists. But not to the extent that Howard would like us to think it does. Besides, same waiting times apply.

Filth

If you are using the Tory description, then I'm wondering if I haven't replied to that in the response above

If you mean clean hospitals let me mention this... The Tories want to return to the days when wards had their own cleaner. Who did away with this... erm see if you can guess... for a clue let me say that someone started a thread syggesting she was the best ever PM...

Tory reforms

Which ones?

Labour scum

Which ones?

Privatisation

Would be a very bad thing IMHO.

Waste

Beuraucracy

Are these the same thing?

Former Member

Man of Kent, you are a very kind person to open an NHS thread, but the trouble is where do you start? Labour have created such an awful mess that its difficult to find a starting point.

If you don't believe me just take a look at this list for a start, scroll ever downwards, its mind-blowing the gross mis-management and incompetence of labour!

http://www.labour-watch.com/health.htm

Former Member

Man Of Kent wrote:

I agree

Did I say that these were issues I would raise?

:no:

Merely foreshadowing other peoples posts, as cna be seen by Richkids pointing to the list at all.

I suspect I could actually right a lot of peoples posts before they could, some people are so predictable.

Maybe a business opportunity?

Former Member

Rich Kid wrote:

Man of Kent, you are a very kind person to open an NHS thread, but the trouble is where do you start? Labour have created such an awful mess that its difficult to find a starting point.

If you don't believe me just take a look at this list for a start, scroll ever downwards, its mind-blowing the gross mis-management and incompetence of labour!

http://www.labour-watch.com/health.htm

Because that source is so neutral isn't it.

As I've said before, you are a moron for beleiving the Conservatives could save the NHS. The Conservatives are the people who brought it to it's knees.

Then again for people like you, I guess it isn't a concern if some people can't afford health care. You make me sick.

Former Member

<img src="http://www.torytrouble.org.uk/mt-static/images/torch.gif"&gt;

Former Member

I'd be now prepared to bet money on RK not only being a member of the Tory Party, but actually being on some kind of crusade on this and other forums trying to get as many people as possible to vote Tory- or failing that, getting them not to vote for Labour.

I wonder if we'll see much of him after May 5th...

Former Member

Renzo wrote:

As I've said before, you are a moron for beleiving the Conservatives could save the NHS. The Conservatives are the people who brought it to it's knees.

Then again for people like you, I guess it isn't a concern if some people can't afford health care. You make me sick.

I'm sorry you don't like to read evidence that runs contrary to your mistaken beliefs but unfortunately you need to wake up and smell the coffee!
Labour can tax all they like, they can pump what they like into the NHS, and let me tell you, it won't change a thing!
Its like pouring water into a bucket full of holes!!!
The NHS needs urgent re-structuring on a more commercial footing.

Former Member

Man Of Kent wrote:

If you mean "health tourists", then I agree that this exists.

Does MOK see this("health tourists") as a problem?

seeker

Former Member

Aladdin wrote:

I'd be now prepared to bet money on RK not only being a member of the Tory Party, but actually being on some kind of crusade on this and other forums trying to get as many people as possible to vote Tory- or failing that, getting them not to vote for Labour.

Let me put the record straight - I'm not a member of ANY political party. I'm an individual with my own opinions, which is perhaps a bit different to some of you on this forum who seem to always be fond of left-wing ranting!

I wonder if we'll see much of him after May 5th...

Is that a wish lamp boy or are you missing me already?
Yes you will but I'll be in the US until the second week of May! But I'll be back have no fear!

Former Member

labour were put in control of a sinking ship...and somehow they kept it afloat. but of course there are loads of negatives - there always were going to be... in my opinion, blair's government have done a great job with the NHS considering what they had to contend with

Former Member

Rich Kid wrote:

Labour have created such an awful mess that its difficult to find a starting point.

Go on, try. Pick one from your list and we'll go from there...

Best start at the bottom as they are the latest "scandals"

its mind-blowing the gross mis-management and incompetence of labour!

Really? Or could it be the mis management of the managers and clinicians who run the NHS, rather tha the policies of an political party?

Rich Kid wrote:

Labour can tax all they like, they can pump what they like into the NHS, and let me tell you, it won't change a thing!

You are wrong, simple as. It does change things and anyone who needs catarct surgery will tell you. (as an example). In 1996 you would have

• Been seen by an optician, who diagnosed a cataract. As he couldn't refer (he didn't have the "right") he would have referred you to your GP.
  
• As GPs were overworked, you could have waited days, or weeks, to be seen. The GP would refer you to a consultant.
  
• As the consultant was popular, possibly "old boys network", you would then face a wait of over a year before he would see you in clinic. He would then list you for surgery.
  
• After 18 months you would be sent a date for your surgery. Of course, there was no consideration if this date was when you were on holiday. heaven forbid if it was, because you could then wait another 18 months.
  
• Before the day of surgery you would come in for an assessment, then you would return a few days later to see the surgeon to have an eye test (which determines the lens used as replacement).
  
• You would then be admitted to a ward. As outdated method were used, you would need to stay in overnight.
  
• After surgery you would need to return a day later, then three weeks later, then three months after that.

Now compare with today

• Been seen by an optician, who diagnoses a cataract. He refers you to a consultant. In some areas he refers you directly onto the theatre list agreeing the date of surgery with you - max. three months wait.
  
• Assuming that you have been referred to the consultant though, he will see you within 13 weeks. Because cataracts a routine work, you will be seen by any unmber of consultant, not just by the one with the "right school tie".
  
• At the appointment you will have an assessment, relevant eye test and then see the consultant. He lists you for surgery.
  
• Within three months you are admitted, 97% of patients are treated as day cases because Labour have invested in the right equipment.
  
• After surgery you would need to return within a week, then three weeks later you can be seen by your optician.

Spot any differnece?

Rich Kid wrote:

The NHS needs urgent re-structuring on a more commercial footing.

I don't disagree with this principle, if applied properly.

Former Member

seeker wrote:

Does MOK see this("health tourists") as a problem?

Nope.

Why should it be?

Former Member

Just to help you out, to save you the hassle, I;ve taken the bottom two items from your list...

Many GPs 'snubbing NHS changes'

This change referred to would be “Practice Based Commissioning”. Funnily enough not due to be in place across the country until 2008. Bit premature to suggest that the idea is being snubbed. My pCT hasn't even asked GPs to formally sign up yet. However, as I lead of this change, I have asked practices to express an interest. 1 4/20 practices have already said that they want to do something, depending on how it will work.

Worth noting that it is very similar to the Tory “Fundholding” system. Something which GPs claimed marked the biggest bureaucratic nightmare they have ever faced, and the reason why many practices don’t want to go with PBC just yet.

Stroke patients 'still miss out'

An issue showing Labour to be so bad that it contains this quote:
”Professor Ian Philp, National Clinical Director for Older People's Health said: "Record levels of investment have been already been made in the NHS and this audit shows dramatic improvements in specialist stroke care.
"Death rates are falling and people are going home from hospital a full week faster than before.
"We have raised the numbers of hospitals that treat stroke with specialist units from 45% in 1998 to its current rate of 91% and expect to be at 100% by the end of April 2005." “

Former Member

Aladdin wrote:

I'd be now prepared to bet money on RK not only being a member of the Tory Party, but actually being on some kind of crusade on this and other forums trying to get as many people as possible to vote Tory- or failing that, getting them not to vote for Labour.

I wonder if we'll see much of him after May 5th...

obviously,we won't.

Former Member

Renzo wrote:

Because that source is so neutral isn't it.

Almost no source on the planet is going to be neutral, except possibly the raw data. Everything has a bias, that doesn't necessarily dismiss it from having a valid arguement that needs addressing.

This is a general point, not necessarily support for the site in question. But it's easy to dismiss something because it supports the opposing point of view without actually arguing against it.

Former Member

According to an article I read in my favourite paper the NHS spends £80 million on Viagra a year, but only £60 million on drugs for Alzheimers Disease.

The NHS is trying to cut down the money it spends on alievating Alzheimers Disease depriving patients and their loved ones of a better quality of life, whilst it seems quite happy to encourage more erections.

Tell this to the millions suffering directly or indirectly from the terrible disease of Alzheimers, it visits many families and wreaks havoc yet this government thinks it sensible to spend precious NHS resources this way!

Former Member

Rich Kid wrote:

According to an article I read in my favourite paper the NHS spends £80 million on Viagra a year, but only £60 million on drugs for Alzheimers Disease.

That's the problem with detractors, they only look at basic statistics. At first glace those two figures seem, as you suggest, irreconsilable.

What you haven't addressed is the number of people requiring each treatment, nor have you look at the relative costs of their drugs. You also fail to look at what other treatment is available in each case or the benefits of each treatment.

Still, since when did detailed knowledge get in the way of a soundbyte?

BTW No comment on anything I have answered then?

Former Member

Rich Kid wrote:

According to an article I read in my favourite paper the NHS spends £80 million on Viagra a year, but only £60 million on drugs for Alzheimers Disease.

The NHS is trying to cut down the money it spends on alievating Alzheimers Disease depriving patients and their loved ones of a better quality of life, whilst it seems quite happy to encourage more erections.

Tell this to the millions suffering directly or indirectly from the terrible disease of Alzheimers, it visits many families and wreaks havoc yet this government thinks it sensible to spend precious NHS resources this way!

Maybe impotence is an issue too... Imagine if you couldn't get it up, wouldn't that effect your self esteem? Or is sex trivial to you?

What paper was it in? The Mail?

Former Member

Plus the lads and lasses with Alzheimers forget to turn up for treatment.

Former Member

klintock wrote:

Plus the lads and lasses with Alzheimers forget to turn up for treatment.

Thats just a sick cheap comment.... whatever your name is....

Former Member

I've had a few hospital visits over the last 3 or 4 years and although A&E waits are a bit grim (they're not going to be nice) all the nurses and such were nice and the consultants I have seen have been totally faultless.

Former Member

Rich Kid wrote:

Thats just a sick cheap comment.... whatever your name is....

Dude, you must be a very angry person. Everything seems to get to you, whether it be public services, homosexuals, public displays of affection or tongue in cheek jokes.

I'd imagine you'd be more at home in 1910.

Former Member

bongbudda wrote:

although A&E waits are a bit grim

19/20 patients are seen and admitted/treated and discharged with 4 hours. i remember seeing stories only a couple of years ago where patients waited more than 12 hours...

Former Member

bongbudda wrote:

I've had a few hospital visits over the last 3 or 4 years and although A&E waits are a bit grim (they're not going to be nice) all the nurses and such were nice and the consultants I have seen have been totally faultless.

I would agree. The staff do a terrific job under difficult circumstances. If only the NHS yoke around their necks was lifted by this target-obsessed government who wants total control over healthcare!

Former Member

Man Of Kent wrote:

19/20 patients are seen and admitted/treated and discharged with 4 hours. i remember seeing stories only a couple of years ago where patients waited more than 12 hours...

Well it was a few years ago and I was seen and treated within about 5 or 6 it was.

My last visit to A&E was rather good, I luckily did it at 7am on a week day and had the whole place to myself, you couldnt ask for better service!

Former Member

Well I got crushed by a vehicle in the middle of a night and had to wait until morning for a x-ray dude. About 8 hours of sitting around casualty with a broken, crushed left leg and popped ribs wasn't much fun but then again neither was being flattened in the first place.

This was two years ago. I agree that NHS staff are generally very helpful, but my GP gets a bit fed up when I tell him what I want him to do at imes.

Former Member

Rich Kid wrote:

I would agree. The staff do a terrific job under difficult circumstances. If only the NHS yoke around their necks was lifted by this target-obsessed government who wants total control over healthcare!

how would you know it owuld be getting better though.... the public that scrutinise actually want some statistics.... tough balance you know, but its called public accountability

Former Member

Personal experience - I've never had any problems under Labour or Tory. There's always going to be the odd horror story, no matter how much money is put in because no system devised by man can be perfect, but 99% of the time its fine.

Then again if I'd read the Mirror when the Tories were in power, or the Mail now I suspect I'd think the NHS was continually suffering its worse crisis since the war.