Plasma

pinno

The blood supplied to the NHS is outsourced - yep to a private company and wots worse, this private concern is now owned by an American company. All under the watchful eye of this lovely administration that says its is not trying to dismantle the NHS and "...fully committed to its preservation".
Not only is the NHS charged for blood services by a private company, we can't even keep the profits in the UK - a continuation of selling Blighty off to the highest bidder. McVities is now owned by a Chinease corp. wonderful. Where does it end?

verylonglegs

People will only care when tv and facebook is switched off, the yoof of today aren't interested in politcal protest in the same way previous generations were.

Cleat Eastwood

Don't ask how will it end - more worrying is how it began - as verylonglegs says there is a worrying tendency for peeps to disengage from the processes that control them. If you can satisfy your moral drives by clicking a 'like' to end poverty in Africa but not want to change the system that creates the problems in the first place then it's going to be a difficult ride.

VTech

I find it odd because when I have posted about similar things, quite quickly people argue the toss yet in reality we are in big trouble.
According to reports, 70% of U.S debt is owned by Chinese companies so work that out.
The UK has long been in trouble, the problem is, instead of selling contracts, we sell companies and services, its quite foolhardy.

I often hear about people complaining that immigrants take their jobs, right before they go and sign on for free cash
We are a lazy nation, a nation where people think short term, thats the issue.

Frank the tank

And guess who is one of the top men at the company to which this has been "outsourced". Our old friend Mitt Romney and we all know his attitude to state run health schemes, surprise, surprise.

This came from a mate of mine in my local and he's switched on to this sort of thing.

Mikey23

So what can we do about it?

ballysmate

Frank the tank wrote:

And guess who is one of the top men at the company to which this has been "outsourced". Our old friend Mitt Romney and we all know his attitude to state run health schemes, surprise, surprise.

This came from a mate of mine in my local and he's switched on to this sort of thing.

Have you got any mates who are switched on to horse racing, and know who will win the 2.30 at Kempton Park?

Stevo_666

OK, I'll play devils advocate

1. The State is usually pretty wasteful and inefficient compared to the private sector and from what I've heard from mates who work in the NHS, the waste and inefficiency there is on an epic scale. So the more you can get the private sector involved in the NHS, the better value for money us taxpayers should get for the NHS. We pay enough for it so we should try to get value for money.

2. Why are you so precious about the NHS? There are plenty of other of life's essential services - food, water, heat, light, communications, transport etc - that are provided pretty much entirely by the private sector. Or do you think Tesco should be nationalised and turned into the 'National Food Service' ?

In the end you shouldn't worry, people have been saying there's a plot to get rid of the NHS since the 80's: it hasn't happened and it never will - IMO.

ballysmate

I am no doctor, nor administrator, but like everyone else here, have an opinion.
Pinarello posted

All under the watchful eye of this lovely administration that says its is not trying to dismantle the NHS and "...fully committed to its preservation"

.
I assume he has a somewhat skeptic view of the current governments claims.

The failure of so many NHS trusts and the resulting avoidable deaths of hundreds of people happened under the previous 'lovely administration', who had '24 hours to save the NHS' in 1997. What a joke that turned out to be.

It is time to put the politics of it aside and accept that the NHS is f*cked and is no longer working as it should.
From seeing your GP to being admitted to A&E, the system is f*cked.

It is time to leave behind the dogma from both sides and come up with something that is more workable and suited to this modern age. The system was a marvel in 1947 but is no longer fit for purpose.
No party from wherever on the political spectrum has the monopoly on good ideas. What is certain though, is the present system is broken.
I have no idea how the face of any new would look, but a start would be to be able to see a GP 24/7 and to not feel that the admission to hospital, particularly certain ones, is tantamount to a death sentence.

finchy

Stevo 666 wrote:

1. The State is usually pretty wasteful and inefficient compared to the private sector and from what I've heard from mates who work in the NHS, the waste and inefficiency there is on an epic scale. So the more you can get the private sector involved in the NHS, the better value for money us taxpayers should get for the NHS. We pay enough for it so we should try to get value for money.

Remember those scandals in which patients (including my great-nan) died because hospitals weren't being cleaned properly? Private companies running them.

Did you notice how the cause of last week's train crash in France was found? Now compare that to the lengthy battle for the truth in the UK.

Who was it again who got away with feeding British schoolchildren shite food for more than a decade before Jamie Oliver forced the government to take action? Private companies again.

Yes, public services can be badly-run, but where is the evidence that private companies which come in and take over do a better job?

Frank the tank

I'm totally pissed off at onslaught the NHS is having over the last few years.

It is a massive organisation and there will be issues with it, however, to think private medicine/insurance is the way forward, Christ!

I'm very fortunate I've been brought up in a generation where health care can be taken for granted and long may it continue. To those who think that the NHS should be done away with I say.

What your chance of getting medical insurance if your born with a life long medical condition, what about when you can no longer afford your premiums? Anyone on here see the programme "the man with 10stone testicals? His plight came about 'cos he couldn't afford medical insurance. It would NEVER HAPPEN under the NHS.

Keep taking in the bullsh1t and propaganda and we may well get ourselves into such a state. People come on TV saying my dad died on a hospital trolley in a corridor, at least he got into an hospital in the first place. The NHS isn't perfect the alternative is more expensive and a lot worse.

VTech

Frank, is anyone really wanting to dismiss it ?
I think people want to get the organisation of it privatised to stop waste, not to actually remove it.

Frank the tank

VTech wrote:

Frank, is anyone really wanting to dismiss it ?
I think people want to get the organisation of it privatised to stop waste, not to actually remove it.

I think some are fella. They're well off and are driven by self interest and greed and stuff us "plebs" as long as there is a profit to be made.

Privatisation doesn't stop waste. All I care about is that we ALL have good medical care as a given and should not in any way be dependent an an ability to pay.

Stevo_666

johnfinch wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

1. The State is usually pretty wasteful and inefficient compared to the private sector and from what I've heard from mates who work in the NHS, the waste and inefficiency there is on an epic scale. So the more you can get the private sector involved in the NHS, the better value for money us taxpayers should get for the NHS. We pay enough for it so we should try to get value for money.

Remember those scandals in which patients (including my great-nan) died because hospitals weren't being cleaned properly? Private companies running them.

Did you notice how the cause of last week's train crash in France was found? Now compare that to the lengthy battle for the truth in the UK.

Who was it again who got away with feeding British schoolchildren shite food for more than a decade before Jamie Oliver forced the government to take action? Private companies again.

Yes, public services can be badly-run, but where is the evidence that private companies which come in and take over do a better job?

We can all pick examples to suit the argument but look at it this way: where is the public sector (incl the NHS) incentive to run things efficiently and deliver good customer service? There isn't one: they are monopolies and there's effectively no competition. Don't like our service? Tough, you've got no real alternative. The lack of a motive to control costs and (shock, horror) make a profit explains why there's too much waste in the public sector. These things are pretty self evident and the experience of people I know who have seen both sides of the coin - in several different areas of activity - back this up.

One thing is for sure - it needs to change because it ain't good enough. And treating the NHS as a sacred cow won't help. It's not like it is even a venerable institution - created in 1948 IIRC. Christ knows how my old man made to that year alive the way some of you are talking.

VTech

NHS is a great thing, the running of it is the issue.
There are huge amounts of wastage which needs to be cut.

Treatment for illnesses should be covered but I would gladly support making drunks pay for a start

ballysmate

Frank the tank wrote:

I'm totally pissed off at onslaught the NHS is having over the last few years.

It is a massive organisation and there will be issues with it, however, to think private medicine/insurance is the way forward, Christ!

I'm very fortunate I've been brought up in a generation where health care can be taken for granted and long may it continue. To those who think that the NHS should be done away with I say.

What your chance of getting medical insurance if your born with a life long medical condition, what about when you can no longer afford your premiums? Anyone on here see the programme "the man with 10stone testicals? His plight came about 'cos he couldn't afford medical insurance. It would NEVER HAPPEN under the NHS.

Keep taking in the bullsh1t and propaganda and we may well get ourselves into such a state. People come on TV saying my dad died on a hospital trolley in a corridor, at least he got into an hospital in the first place. The NHS isn't perfect the alternative is more expensive and a lot worse.

You are right in asserting that there would be problems with relying totally on private insurance for the reasons you give. But a new way has to be found to help fund the huge cost of the NHS, which is becoming unsustainable.

As regards your last paragraph, I have to ask WTF!!!!!!!!
Are you suggesting to the thousands of people who have lost loved ones needlessly in failing hospitals that they should be grateful that they were at least admitted? Or that they should be grateful for a trolley to die on? Are we supposed to just accept it, because it is the sacred NHS?
If I or anyone else had suggested that people should accept such appalling treatment from a private company, you would rightly be outraged.
Frank, in a previous thread, you accused some on here of being dismissive of people, but I have to say that last paragraph of yours was the most dismissive thing I have read on here, if not just downright insulting.

ballysmate

VTech wrote:

NHS is a great thing, the running of it is the issue.
There are huge amounts of wastage which needs to be cut.

Treatment for illnesses should be covered but I would gladly support making drunks pay for a start

You are right about wastage, all large organisations have a degree of wastage.
As regards drunks, I think we are all annoyed at the images of drunken youths rocking up at A&E on Saturday nights.
But as Tony Soprano would have said,'What you gonna do?' Have a triage nurse breathalise all people that attend A&E.

Consider the scenario. Saturday night at VTech towers and the soiree is in full swing and everyone enjoying your wine cellar, Opus One perhaps.
Some of your guests are feeling peckish, so you mention to Mrs V that she might want to open another tin of Spam. Unfortunately she slices her hand on the sharp tin. Now you being a good husband and because she has had one or two glasses of wine, you drive her to the hospital.
On arrival, do you think she should be assessed as to whether her injury was drink induced and therefore be lumped in with the vomit covered louts. If you think she should be assessed, at what level of intoxication would you set the level, and who do you think should assess her?

Frank the tank

Ballysmate wrote:

Frank the tank wrote:

I'm totally pissed off at onslaught the NHS is having over the last few years.

It is a massive organisation and there will be issues with it, however, to think private medicine/insurance is the way forward, Christ!

I'm very fortunate I've been brought up in a generation where health care can be taken for granted and long may it continue. To those who think that the NHS should be done away with I say.

What your chance of getting medical insurance if your born with a life long medical condition, what about when you can no longer afford your premiums? Anyone on here see the programme "the man with 10stone testicals? His plight came about 'cos he couldn't afford medical insurance. It would NEVER HAPPEN under the NHS.

Keep taking in the bullsh1t and propaganda and we may well get ourselves into such a state. People come on TV saying my dad died on a hospital trolley in a corridor, at least he got into an hospital in the first place. The NHS isn't perfect the alternative is more expensive and a lot worse.

You are right in asserting that there would be problems with relying totally on private insurance for the reasons you give. But a new way has to be found to help fund the huge cost of the NHS, which is becoming unsustainable.

As regards your last paragraph, I have to ask WTF!!!!!!!!
Are you suggesting to the thousands of people who have lost loved ones needlessly in failing hospitals that they should be grateful that they were at least admitted? Or that they should be grateful for a trolley to die on? Are we supposed to just accept it, because it is the sacred NHS?
If I or anyone else had suggested that people should accept such appalling treatment from a private company, you would rightly be outraged.
Frank, in a previous thread, you accused some on here of being dismissive of people, but I have to say that last paragraph of yours was the most dismissive thing I have read on here, if not just downright insulting.

I didn't put that very well and appologise.

I like anyone would be rightly disgusted if that were to happen to anyone. The point I was trying (rather clumsily) to make was we all at least have access to medical care. Sometimes this care does fall short of best practice and that has to be sorted. What is getting under my skin is that almost on a daily basis there is something in the media belittling the great work the NHS does. Millions are treated everyday and successfully, but they're not news worthy. Death rates in hospital over the last decade (for several reasons) have dropped.

Our NHS isn't perfect but it is better for ALL than the alternative, it certainly isn't the third world cr@p service a lot of people would like to have us believe in order to further their own agenda.

BelgianBeerGeek

+1 to this Frank^

I fell down the stairs at home about 4 weeks ago and landed on my face, breaking a cheekbone. I had to be persuaded to go the hospital by Mrs BBGeek as I felt rather foolish about the whole thing. I spent Sunday in A&E and the way I was treated was good. I went back the next day to see the consultant who told me he was going to operate on that Friday. Went in, operation done (plate fitted), overnight stay and out the following morning. I went back after about 10 days for stitches to be removed and the consultant was pleased with the whole thing.

The whole experience was blimmin' brilliant. As I said above, the fall was my fault and pretty embarassing but I was treated professionally and with great care throughout. Nurses, doctors etc don't have to do that, and I'm not sure I could do that for a living. Some may be half-hearted, or worse, but my recent experience of the NHS is positive. We are very lucky in this country to have it.

ballysmate

The NHS is an emotive subject for a lot of people, who will not countenance any criticism of it. The campaigner, Julie Bailey, has been vilified by people for alerting people to the failings of Stafford hospital and has consequently, had to move home.

http://www.expressandstar.com/news/2013 ... -campaign/

I find it bizarre that people want to shoot the messenger and bury their collective heads in the sand. If something is wrong, it needs highlighting and rectifying, otherwise standards continue to fall.
My personal experience of the NHS is mixed, to say the least. But problems have to be identified and eradicated without people getting all defencive, because they feel someone is attacking their sacred NHS.
The same goes for any public service. If there is a problem, it needs rectifying.

Frank the tank

There will always be failures in the NHS just like any other business and the best we can hope for is that mistakes/failures are kept to a minimum. However, to my mind there seems to be a concerted smear campaign against the NHS in order to get a groundswell of public opinion to believe it is all bad and the way forward is privatisation.

In my lifetime there has always been an NHS and I certainly would never want it to be broken up for the benefit of the few.

pinno

The NHS and the education system has been too long used as a political football.

The ethic of preventative medicine fror school meals and free milk to proper PE has been eroded away in the name of 'choice' and middle England complaining that little Tarquin doesn't like competing 'cos he might come last. Large supermarkets and commercial ventures selling and advertising sh1t to eat. Ready meals, fizzy drinks, chocolate: All in the name of choice and commercialism.

Business managers were put into the NHS in the early sixties, it is not a new thing for the NHS to be run by coporate style executives, so one could argue that the rot set in when they decided to run the thing like a business years ago.

May I suggest that the burgeoning (literally) and unfit population and at least a generation of very unhealthy people are the straws currently breaking the camels back and not necessarily the lack of bad management. When an organisation as large as the NHS is being squeezed by red tape, bureaucrats and profit making organisations trying to get in on the act, then it is doomed. Time to take it out of political hands and make it a national concern.
Vote for me.

pliptrot

pinarello001 wrote:

Time to take it out of political hands and make it a national concern.

Exactly. I'm mystified by the enduring idea that the private sector is better at managing, er..whatever. Consider the banking sector, the railways etc. etc. and it looks quite the opposite. If the notion that private sector involvement in the health service is a good thing appeals, take a long hard look at America. This should disabuse you of any such thoughts.

surfatwork

Privatization is not the solution in itself - it has to be privatization with good oversight, regulation, ensuring transparency, by the government. The Railways in the UK are hugely over-priced - because the regulator allows National Rail bosses to share £2m bonuses while raising prices every year. Heathrow charges £4.90 an hour for parking because it is a monopoly and can do so.
On the other hand, the BBC is quasi-government, but I would argue, reasonably well run (notwithstanding Mr.Saville and his ilk).
Privatizing the NHS wouldn't work at all because there is no real way to introduce competition - that would simply create a monopolistic mega-corporation. The NHS doesnt work always, but usually does, in my experience.

ballysmate

pinarello001 wrote:

The NHS and the education system has been too long used as a political football.

The ethic of preventative medicine fror school meals and free milk to proper PE has been eroded away in the name of 'choice' and middle England complaining that little Tarquin doesn't like competing 'cos he might come last. Large supermarkets and commercial ventures selling and advertising sh1t to eat. Ready meals, fizzy drinks, chocolate: All in the name of choice and commercialism.

Business managers were put into the NHS in the early sixties, it is not a new thing for the NHS to be run by coporate style executives, so one could argue that the rot set in when they decided to run the thing like a business years ago.

May I suggest that the burgeoning (literally) and unfit population and at least a generation of very unhealthy people are the straws currently breaking the camels back and not necessarily the lack of bad management. When an organisation as large as the NHS is being squeezed by red tape, bureaucrats and profit making organisations trying to get in on the act, then it is doomed. Time to take it out of political hands and make it a national concern.
Vote for me.

I agree that it would be the ideal if the running of the NHS was to become apolitical, as alluded to in my earlier post, but I can't see it happening.
As regards little Tarquin, I would suggest that you are wrong. It was not Middle England that lobbied for the abolishment of grammar schools on the grounds that they were elitist, it was the socialist politicians. Likewise, it was 'The Loony Left' councils that decreed that there should be no winners and losers in school games, but different levels of achievement. Left wing councils banned competition on the grounds that it was divisive and elitist.
The levels of obesity are undoubtedly on the increase and the population is becoming less fit and healthy as a result. But you can't lay this at the doors of supermarkets and burger chains. People have to take responsibility for what they shove into their and their children's mouths.
Obesity and lifestyle certainly does impact on the NHS, but the fact is, more complex and expensive treatments are being developed all the time and the budget is being stretched beyond breaking point.

finchy

Stevo 666 wrote:

We can all pick examples to suit the argument but look at it this way: where is the public sector (incl the NHS) incentive to run things efficiently and deliver good customer service?

A sense of duty? Democratic accountability? Working to a fixed budget?

Stevo 666 wrote:

The lack of a motive to control costs and (shock, horror) make a profit explains why there's too much waste in the public sector. These things are pretty self evident and the experience of people I know who have seen both sides of the coin - in several different areas of activity - back this up.

I've worked in the public service before and you when you get the private sector on board it just means that you have a load more inefficiency. These companies are getting public money, so their work needs to be co-ordinated and monitored to ensure that it's been used for the public good. Unfortunately many of them don't seem to be willing to play ball, even in issues as vital as child protection.

Stevo 666 wrote:

One thing is for sure - it needs to change because it ain't good enough. And treating the NHS as a sacred cow won't help. It's not like it is even a venerable institution - created in 1948 IIRC. Christ knows how my old man made to that year alive the way some of you are talking.

I agree that some things need to be changed, but that does not mean that they have to be privatised. The problem might be with the British people. The fact that we don't stand up to our political class in any meaningful way gives them little incentive to make sure that these services are run in our best interests. If we took to the streets demanding that heads roll whenever these scandals happen, we might see some proper change.

DrKJM

Polly Toynbee covered much of this last week in The Guardian. Doubtless the source will infuriate some but the truth is that the current administration is busy structuring the NHS to facilitate its privatisation in whole or part, and misusing statistics to sell the idea that the NHS is failing. Its a short hop then to proposing the currently publicly unacceptable privatisation of front line healthcare. If it were true that the NHS was failing this might be ok, but by and large it's not failing so the story gets spun to support the idealogy.

http://m.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2 ... gallops-on

I have nothing to do with healthcare, but I did spend a while discussing this at the weekend with a friend who is a an NHS consultant. He wasn't optimistic for the future of provision to all in need, free at the point of delivery.

ballysmate

DrKJM wrote:

Polly Toynbee covered much of this last week in The Guardian. Doubtless the source will infuriate some but the truth is that the current administration is busy structuring the NHS to facilitate its privatisation in whole or part, and misusing statistics to sell the idea that the NHS is failing. Its a short hop then to proposing the currently publicly unacceptable privatisation of front line healthcare. If it were true that the NHS was failing this might be ok, but by and large it's not failing so the story gets spun to support the idealogy.

http://m.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2 ... gallops-on

I have nothing to do with healthcare, but I did spend a while discussing this at the weekend with a friend who is a an NHS consultant. He wasn't optimistic for the future of provision to all in need, free at the point of delivery.

Was it Polly that Frank was talking to down his local?

The Little Onion

to bring this conversation back to the facts of the blood plasma issue, the reason why the last government nationalised the blood plasma service was because it was seen as too strategic to be owned by foreigners - in much the same way as we don't let other strategic companies (e.g. BAe systems, etc) be owned by foreigners. In this age of BSE/CJD etc, it is too important to be left to foreign businesses.

Related to this, if anyone wants an accesible introduction to the very interesting debate over public versus private control of the blood service, have a look at Michael Sandel's books and youtube lectures.

Frank the tank

Ballysmate wrote:

DrKJM wrote:

Polly Toynbee covered much of this last week in The Guardian. Doubtless the source will infuriate some but the truth is that the current administration is busy structuring the NHS to facilitate its privatisation in whole or part, and misusing statistics to sell the idea that the NHS is failing. Its a short hop then to proposing the currently publicly unacceptable privatisation of front line healthcare. If it were true that the NHS was failing this might be ok, but by and large it's not failing so the story gets spun to support the idealogy.

http://m.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2 ... gallops-on

I have nothing to do with healthcare, but I did spend a while discussing this at the weekend with a friend who is a an NHS consultant. He wasn't optimistic for the future of provision to all in need, free at the point of delivery.

Was it Polly that Frank was talking to down his local?

No not quite! but DrKJM is making the same point as I, there is a genuine attempt to create public unrest with the NHS in order to allow private interests take over.

ballysmate

DrKJM wrote:

Polly Toynbee covered much of this last week in The Guardian. Doubtless the source will infuriate some but the truth is that the current administration is busy structuring the NHS to facilitate its privatisation in whole or part, and misusing statistics to sell the idea that the NHS is failing. Its a short hop then to proposing the currently publicly unacceptable privatisation of front line healthcare. If it were true that the NHS was failing this might be ok, but by and large it's not failing so the story gets spun to support the idealogy.

http://m.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2 ... gallops-on

I have nothing to do with healthcare, but I did spend a while discussing this at the weekend with a friend who is a an NHS consultant. He wasn't optimistic for the future of provision to all in need, free at the point of delivery.

I won't comment on Polly Toynbee, she is beyond parody, just as some right wing journalists can't be taken seriously.

But you are concerned about services being free at the point of delivery?

6 or perhaps 7 years ago my wife was suffering pain in her feet. Doctor referred her to a podiatrist. She received communication from the hospital that she didn't meet the criteria for treatment on the NHS. She had to pay £100 to see a podiatrist at the local NHS hospital. As far as I was concerned, the only criterion to be met was that she was in pain, but not according to the NHS

When my son was 17,(he is 26 now), he had to see a neurologist. The neurologist said that he needed a MRI to check for a brain tumor. When I asked when he would get it, she was embarrassed when she told me the waiting list was 10 months! She said the machine was available but t was down to cost.
I asked if I could pay the cost of the scan and get him in sooner. He was done the following week. All clear, thank God.
I asked the consultant if by paying privately, I was depriving another patient of their slot. I was told that it was the opposite. I was actually freeing money so that another patient could have a scan. The scanner was available but there were no funds.
The scanner was and, as far as I know, still operated by a private company.
This obviously happened during the last administration's tenure of the NHS and although I have said the NHS should be apolitical, I want to show that privatisation of varying degrees has been happening for a while. It is not just Tories bad, Labour good or vice versa.


Free at the point of delivery? Perhaps you will forgive my wry smile.