It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The inherit flaw of the NHS and will America fall down the same trap?

page: 3
7
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 09:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: Agartha

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
Anyone who works in MFE Should be paid double automatically just for what they put up with.

I have massive respect for the nurses who work in those environments I think it is the most challenging area to work in.


I wish you were in charge of nurses pay! LOL

I love working with the elderly, but I am upset at how they are treated by the government after they fought wars for our future and after they worked and contributed for so many decades. We need more funding to get them out of hospitals and back in the community, with package of care or in good care homes.


I worked for a short time in MFE.

I found it quite upsetting at times.

Was so undignified, just 6 poor elderly folk sitting staring at each other 24 hours a day 7 days a week not having a clue what is going on, most of the time utterly terrified of what his happening around them. Prisoners are being treated better than the elderly and its not the staff to blame its the way the system is set up and its only going to get worse. Nothing worse than watching a war hero die alone in a bed surrounded by strangers still sitting in his own filth because there are 3 members of staff for 30 patients. It was so depressing i just had to get out.

I think in the context of this thread, privatisation would only make that worse
edit on 9-2-2017 by OtherSideOfTheCoin because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 09:19 AM
link   
It's nice and all until the money runs out. What happens when the tax benefiters out weight the tax contributors? And with smoking such a faux status symbol, what happens to the baby boomers in the next 10-14 years who need all those expensive cancer treatments?



posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 09:35 AM
link   
It doesn't matter if you have NHS or just healthcare here in the USA. Most people will eat what they want, and from studying things extensively, I do not believe that a lot of people can eat all the vegetables that they say is healthy for us, in fact a lot of northern Europeans will be worse off eating what they say is good for us.

The facts are, our healthcare is too expensive, private healthcare allows doctors to be misdiagnosing you to get you to go for tests not needed just to support other healthcare workers. That means that there are people who stay sick longer.

I do see that we need these services, and I know a lot of people who work in healthcare. There is hardly near as much industry left here, if there was, these healthcare workers could go work there. It is just the way it is. If We do get some jobs back, then we should go to a basic healthcare and if people want to buy supplement insurance they can.



posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 09:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

originally posted by: TheBulk
Currently pretty much all medical advances and Innovations come from America. If we start doing socialist medicine, that is going to end. Who is going to make all the advancements at that point?


Emmmm no they didn't, penicillin for example is a Scottish invention.

Sure America has contributed some amazing advances but please don't try to pretend that pretty much all of it has came from America because a quick google search will prove otherwise


You're wrong.

www.forbes.com...



posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 09:50 AM
link   
a reply to: TheBulk

I think anyone who has ever needed Penniclin would disagree

Why are you even challenging this with a article about number of publications?

Anyway I am not going to get into a pissing match with you about who has done more because frankly I don't care

And the uk published way more than 300 articles in 2009 that data is bollocks
edit on 9-2-2017 by OtherSideOfTheCoin because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 09:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Soloprotocol

Solo protocol has it right. They are running the NHS into the ground on purpose. The cuts, hospital closures, and PFI contracts are all contributing factors. I'd like to give my insight as a British American who has used both systems and has siblings working in the NHS and the U.S. system here in Florida.

Firstly, in the US, I had tests years ago for a heart rhythm issue. I was diagnosed after around a year, with sinus tachycardia, and mitral valve prolapse. I was schedule for a valve replacement at a cost of $153,000 after insurance was to pay the first $62,000. I did not go ahead, as my grandfather passed away and I had to go to the UK. I decided to get the tests done on the NHS and see if they offered me the surgery free. I was in the UK 7 months of the year at this point, so I thought I'd better recover here and not get into debt. The NHS ran the same barrage of tests, and discovered that I had a slight tachycardia, not bad but no evidence of mitral valve prolapse whatsoever. The dr showed me the scan, and pointed out my mitral valve was going up and down as normal. He was horrified and said that I had either had it replaced, a miracle had taken place, or I never had the issue in the first place. He said it was most probably due to money. I contacted my DR in the US who is my uncle and looked into it. It was indeed that the hospital tried to get me to have an operation I didn't need. He discovered that one of his patients was given a knee operation which was literally cut open and never had anything performed but the placebo effect kicked in. This started a personal investigation for the both of us.

We have problems in the NHS due to the cuts, etc but overall it is a much better system. Doctors don't needlessly check the paperwork and sign off on an intubation, in order to get an extra $2k like my sister says happens every day when she's the one who does the work. This is here in Florida. Also, the government will try to perform surgeries to correct, or cure illness rather than keep people on medications to "treat" symptoms over years, generating huge profits. It is in the governments interest to buy generic versions of medicines, saving money and not buying the more expensive versions, to increase profits on sick people. Overall , I prefer the NHS experiences I've had and my kids have both been in born on the NHS and had excellent care. Our pediatrician here, is impressed with the little red books with all the kids records, and growth, etc that the NHS provides, and the service we get. I have waited long times in the U.S AND U.K For treatments so I think the wait times are relative. I once waited 8 hours in Florida hospital Orlando with a dislocated shoulder and once waited 5 hours in the UK for a broken toe. Just my insights as someone who has used both systems.


edit on 9-2-2017 by DARKJEDIG because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 11:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: Soloprotocol

originally posted by: SprocketUK
When the NHS is employing hundreds of so called Diversity managers on 50 to 60 grand a year and people still can't understand why it's strapped for cash then there is a severe case of fiscal myopia that will never be cured even if we pay 90 per cent tax and swap trident for a balloon on a stick.

That is not the problem. The UK is Spending billions on stupid stuff when it should be spending on Education and the Health service.


Of course it is.
Check out this madness almost twice as many NHS management staff as there are qualified ambulance staff.
18,862 qualified ambulance staff and 30,952 managers.
sauce www.nhsconfed.org...


Consultancy (non clinical) spend went from 313Mill in 2010 to 640Mill in 2015
www.telegraph.co.uk...

The spend on management spiked during the Blair-Brown years and there seems to be no end in sight as trusts effectively duplicate so many functions across the country. Add in the PFI stuff and paying private practice to perform routine care and it doesn't matter how much money we put in, it will be a never ending money pit.

Don't get me wrong, privatisation will be possibly the single worst thing any government has ever done on these Islands. That said, it's time we made the NHS grow up and realise it is a public service, not a blue chip company and therefore shouldn't be stuffed to the gills with pointless positions that do nothing to help the whole system.



posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 11:39 AM
link   
a reply to: AMNicks

Well I don't deny that the NHS is a godsend here in england for many many people, but I would say that the biggest problem is that it has made doctors apathetic to patients because no matter what the government will pay them. It's even worse if you have a condition that doesn't immediately identify itself. I have seen 3 different doctors this past year and all of them are reluctant to go any further than ordering a basic blood test and because they come back negative I am left with anxiety drugs and antidepressants as they believe it is psychosomatic (not nibbling that rubbish).

If I were a paying customer I can guarantee they would be doing a whole slew of tests to figure out why I am having the issues I am having. Constant pain, bodywide inflammation and mottled skin on hands, arms and legs over the course of 6 months at age 27, you'd think that would be a cause concern right? Nope! You must be depressed, eat these twice a day.............



posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 12:01 PM
link   
a reply to: constant_thought

This is the one major downside I can think of when it comes to having a universal healthcare system. When trying to diagnose a mystery illness, doctors won't seem to invest as much time in the patient because they know they will still be getting their treat at the end of the day. I've actually experienced this myself.

Therein lies upside to privatized healthcare: there's more competition because doctors know they can be 'fired' at any given time if the patient doesn't feel they've done a satisfactory job.



posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 12:02 PM
link   
I can't see anywhere about this so I will put this to you all including the Americans.
Question> If the NHS or any nationalized industry (like the railways or steel or the buses etc.) is running at a loss and costs x amount over budget to run, tell me just why would ANY private buyer buy it?????



posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 12:12 PM
link   
a reply to: crayzeed
Answer> cos it's a manufactured loss. They MAKE it lose to try to prove to the people that they are doing good by privatizing it. Now a question for our American friends. Why do you pay vast amounts of money to a middle man who has literally nothing to do with your health. Apart from having the word health in their title. Health insurance???
Oh, you can say that if something did happen to you that the cost would be higher than you could afford. If that's true then someone in the loop MUST be making a loss. But that aint the truth is it. So insurances and hospitals make vast amounts of money, so now tell me what they are in it for?
Let me tell you. MONEY. Certainly not your health as they make the most out of unhealthy people.



posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 12:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheBulk

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

originally posted by: TheBulk
Currently pretty much all medical advances and Innovations come from America. If we start doing socialist medicine, that is going to end. Who is going to make all the advancements at that point?


Emmmm no they didn't, penicillin for example is a Scottish invention.

Sure America has contributed some amazing advances but please don't try to pretend that pretty much all of it has came from America because a quick google search will prove otherwise


You're wrong.

www.forbes.com...


Article says US produces just under 4 times number of articles as the UK.

What is the population of the US again?



posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 12:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xaphan
a reply to: constant_thought

This is the one major downside I can think of when it comes to having a universal healthcare system. When trying to diagnose a mystery illness, doctors won't seem to invest as much time in the patient because they know they will still be getting their treat at the end of the day. I've actually experienced this myself.

Therein lies upside to privatized healthcare: there's more competition because doctors know they can be 'fired' at any given time if the patient doesn't feel they've done a satisfactory job.


The UK has a universal healthcare system and people can still go private if not happy with their treatment.



posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 12:21 PM
link   
a reply to: SprocketUK

Managers make up less than 3%of NHS staff numbers. Do you think you can run an organisation the size of the NHS without managers?



posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 12:26 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

We all pay into the system through via our national insurance contributions, essentially everyone, so everyone benefits.

No money to pay for health insurance then very little choice is available, it may very well be socialized medicine, but it saves countless lives and does indeed even offer up a modicum of personal choice.

The alternative is to let a significant amount of people perish(millions) down to lack of monies.

Including i may add my own brother who had a heart transplant he could never have afforded had he had to pay for the procedure and organ not to mention the cocktail of immune suppressant drugs he requires to fight of any rejection.

There are not that many things the UK does right anymore but our national health service is one of them. Tampering with it, not funding it appropriately and/or privatization will be to the moral and social detrimental harm of our nation.
edit on 9-2-2017 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 01:07 PM
link   
a reply to: AMNicks

Our NHS should never be privatised.

Our NI contributions raise plenty of money but our vile govt chooses not to allocate sufficient funding. The funding it does get is soaked up with CEO salaries and those of the other plethora of management positions. By the time they've all took their hefty chunk and the PFI's take theirs, there's not much left for services or front line staff.

The PFI aspect alone soaks up £2billion of NHS money, and that sum is rising and always will. It's crippling the NHS.

£2billion and rising. Not so much as an aspirin or a cured headache to show for it.


Oh yes, there's billions to be drained from our NHS by private interests. It killed them for decades that they couldn't get their piggy hands on it. Now it's party time for them. A wonderful idea and fully functioning health system destroyed by a greedy few who, even if they had every penny in the world, still wouldn't be rich enough.


The problem with private health insurance is that insurance companies have a real nasty habit of making the rules up as they go along, and all in their favour. They take your money with a smile and a load of BS spiel, then wriggle out of paying out on claims.

Obscene and out-of-control greed. It's ruining everything, economies, environments, politics, communities, societies. Everything.



posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 01:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: SprocketUK

Managers make up less than 3%of NHS staff numbers. Do you think you can run an organisation the size of the NHS without managers?


Without so many of them and they may make up 3% off the workforce, but I bet there isn't one senior sister on a manager's wage, so the savings are obvious.



posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 01:28 PM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake

Once a system like this is in place, it is difficult to ever remove it or move from it.

I guess creating a system where medical care is affordable to everyone regardless is something that should be focused on, instead of focusing on just ways to PAY for the high costs.



posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 01:44 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

Why would we want to remove it?

Have you any idea how many poor souls suffered and died down to poverty and disease in the U.K before the inception of the national health service?

And now that there are around 64.1 million people in the U.K, think how many of those people who depend on the national health service would be effected if ever said service was to be abolished?

Christ our infant mortality rate amungst our poor and working class was up there with the third world nations before we had a national health service.

The system in place if fixed and funded properly is medical care that's affordable to everyone regardless.
edit on 9-2-2017 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 01:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: SprocketUK

Managers make up less than 3%of NHS staff numbers. Do you think you can run an organisation the size of the NHS without managers?


The problem is how they work.

I had to sit in a meeting a few weeks ago chaired my a senor manager about some pointless and frankly stupid change in how we manage pressure sores. This guy has never actually worked at the bed side yet was talking like he was the expert.

Or they just turn round one day and sent out a email about some new initiative that nobody asked for to audit something nobody cares about.

Sometimes they just blast off emails like "please turn off his our pc to help us meet our environmental targets". I read these and am like that's all very well and good but I have just told a son his dad is dead. The pc being left on is so far down my list of concerns I don't even bother to read it.

And let's not even start on how they go about staff appraisal and discipline because that is frankly disgusting.

They get paid about 4 times as much as me for this and with out wanting to sound arrogant. We are the ones delivering the care and saving life's while they write email and try to deam up the best way to add in a little more red tape.
edit on 9-2-2017 by OtherSideOfTheCoin because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
7
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join