|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Feb 13, 2024 16:59:01 GMT
I think it is you who should do the growing up You asked the (imo reasonable) question ‘would i pay more NI to have these drugs available when i need them’ There are many things that must be thought about here Will i get alzheimers, or will i die of something else first ? It is a fact that the majority of men on a pathologist’s slab for a post mortem show unmistakable signs of onset of prostate cancer that would have killed them had the bus / train / fall from height / explosion / machete wielding mad axe murderer not put them on the slab first. To judge if the expense is worth it, what are the chances i will suffer this given my existing medical history. I don't want an answer, i merely wish to present the question i would ask a specialist before deciding if it were worth the expense. And if i do get alzheimers how bad would it get before one of the above or indeed any of the many other ways to die get me If i did present with symptoms of Alzheimer's and a diagnosis is confirmed, how bad would it be before i qualified for this drug. at the time of my second clinical death and resuscitation, while i stood in the foyer of the Welsh assembly back in about 2008, I had gone there to protest Blairs insane 48 hour appointment failure fines on GP surgeries which meant my doctor refused to give me an appointment to collect a repeat script for my beta blockers because they had no slots to do so inside 48 hours. After almost a week of no tablets i went to see my assembly member and collapsed with no pulse while waiting. A lady i was speaking to in the foyer just before my heart gave out was there to protest she had no access to a breast cancer drug known to send early detected cases into remission, because the assembly deemed it too expensive to be used for that and only allowed it be prescribed on the NHS to prolong end stage survival. Private patients and those on the Assembly Menbers Health Plan of course got it privately. But the ordinary payers of NI had to become terminally ill to receive a drug known to send early cases into remission. I’ll let you think about that one.
My next question concerns foreign NHS tourists. My father died in agony on a stinking side ward in floor C5 of UHW because some Nigerian / Gold Coast immigrant who paid not a penny into our NHS was allowed to come here to enjoy the hospice bed he was denied the use of having paid into the system all his soon to end life to provide it for her.
And what guarantee to i have the mad axe murderer who vowed to butcher my daughter and all the other trial witnesses, or some shitbag recently baptised after fucking half the white girls in Rochdale while chanting Allah u Akbar, or Suzy Izzard won’t get ahead of me on the list Then of course the final question is would this actually work ??
If we did throw tbe 20mph rollout budget of the whole UK at it, what guarantee do i have it will work ?? I'll try and ignore your dreadful racism which has nothing to do with this subject. You are being to specific. I'm not talking about just one treatment, (though this is a very important one for the elderly who inhabit this site) I could just have easily said a proton scanner or genetic engineering for cystic fibrosys etc. Whether you could make some small savings with the tiny things you pick is academic they don't come close to the hundreds of new treatments, drugs etc that keep making health care more expensive. Your point on cost and return is fair, but those things are already part of the decision making for each patient. You shouldn't ignore it, the bitch stole my father's hospice bed with the gleefuul delight of the lib dem and labour fuckwits in the bay
Jonathan Tosspot had hell on earth on his hands on Any Answers the day afer he invited questions on palliative care with a panel including two archbishops who hadn't got a clue about the reality in January 2006 the friday after i cremated my father whose use of that hospice bed to die in relative confort was blocked by her.
Even the lib dem assholes who celebrated her getting the bed all over the bbc news wales pge when it happenned were a bit red faced when I brought up the matter at their next ward meeting.
Am I being too specific ? I think not. You made specific statements "WOULD I BE WILLING TO PAY MORE NI IF IT MEANT I WOULD GET THE BENEFIT OF THESE DRUGS IN MY HOUR OF NEED". You then chucked an insult at pacifico's quite reasonable if somewhat general question on the subject of guarantees he might get. And so I thought it would be good to point to several quite real issues that block the supply of treatment to NHS patients in SOuth Wales right now.
And as I pointed out, thanks to those restrictions, i died. As in hit the deck with no pulse and had to be resuscitated. Although i do think you get a nicer class of ambulance if you need to be picked up from the meeting place of the welsh wankers, and treatment on arrival at A&E was first class, although i think i did drop the hint in the ambulance after they put me in it that i worked in the building......
You might also be forgetting maybe that i was a research biochemist, that I was pivotal in the almost accidental rollout of a drug that worked wonders for heart attack victims until something better came along, and that I got not a bloody penny from that although about twenty or thirty have not had to pay the fees for a Ph.D since 1979 as a direct result of the royalties and fees that came along. I was, by the way, funded for my own research work by that very same arrangement on that understanding, so i have no complaints that I had to leave the wealth behind for others to benefit from
I was not really trying to point at any possible "savings" that might be made. I was more interested in highlighting the outlright lis, fabrications and corrupt reshuffling o frather large budgets to meet political agendas, articularly woke ones.
If what you are actually asking is a more general question in regard to NHS funding, the facts are there will never be enough money
If i thought i was genunely going to benefit I might be persuaded to pay it. But experience gained inside and out as an up close and personal user of the system tells me i never will, so i am opposed to wasting my money
|
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Feb 13, 2024 17:08:38 GMT
If you increase public sector productivity you can have the new treatments and keep spending under control. Well the alternative you expounded was to increase spending on the NHS faster than growth in the economy - so at some point that spending will become the largest of any government sector and eventually account for all of government spending.  |
|
|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Feb 13, 2024 17:29:19 GMT
It’s all very well to slag off the nhs but is private all it’s cracked up to be? just look over the pond at two men with potential to be the most powerful figure in the. world and thinking of cracked they’re both crackpots lol. No it is not. And I am not referring to US excesses
In Britain Barclays Bank offered me their private healthcare insurance as part of my employment there 2006-2009. I took them up on it
Now on the UP side this meant because we opted to cover pre existing conditions, my daugter was able to have, at last, within weeks, an operation to correct an injury to her foot caused by a school thug who, annoyed at her olympic trials swimming success when 15, pushed her down a grass embankment to injure her and wreck her hopes of success. The fact the school did fuck all about this bullying bitch did more to wreck jennifer's self esteem and health than the ten year wait for surgery under the fucking abysmal NHS and although this private plan ensured her a place to have the surgery at a day clinic north of Bristol within six weeks (or was it eight weeks) of referral, by then the damage to her mental health and body mass caused by being unable to walk properly had been done. It would please me greatly to find this bitch suffering a life changing injury but as there is no god i feel it unlikely this wil happen
On the DOWN side the plans are extremely restrictive and generally had far too little in the way of outpatient appointment costs factored in. When I needed help with my achilles tendon injury it was very fast in coming, but because i dodged the need for surgery, the extended outpatient appointments quickly condumed all my plan and left me with billls in the thousands.
When i joined the staff of the bank i currently work for they were astounded when i rejected the offer of the private healthcare plan. Until i explained why. Interestingly the premiums have quadrupled for everyone this year. Not sure why though.....
|
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Feb 13, 2024 17:35:51 GMT
Well the alternative you expounded was to increase spending on the NHS faster than growth in the economy - so at some point that spending will become the largest of any government sector and eventually account for all of government spending. We could start by catching up with the EU. But I see no reason to suppose health care should not be the most expensive item in government spending, do you? It feels like you're not thinking it through, If we keep finding new ways to extend life and make it better then sooner or later we are going to have to make a choice. 1, less luxuries more life. 2, Only treatment for those who can afford it. 3, More luxuries less life. I know as a rule exaggerations don't work on here to make a point because there's always some idiot who derails the conversation by taking them literally. But lets try. Imagine if you will a new disease that spread to 30% of the population and would kill them within 5 years, but there's a treatment available at £50,000 a time that would cure it What would you pay for that treatment? Just yourself? Your wife? Your children? Your best friends? Everything you have? Would you pay the extra 15k a year NI to cover the 1in3 risk of getting it? At the moment the attitude seems to be that you would want the treatment if you needed it but would not want to pay unless it affected you. That you think the money could be found by making small cuts to the things you don't value. People talk of withdrawing IVF as a waste in an overcrowded country. But do couples who need IVF talk of withdrawing help for the over 80's as a waste in an overcrowded country. Are we really that selfish. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Feb 13, 2024 17:51:36 GMT
Well the alternative you expounded was to increase spending on the NHS faster than growth in the economy - so at some point that spending will become the largest of any government sector and eventually account for all of government spending. We could start by catching up with the EU. But I see no reason to suppose health care should not be the most expensive item in government spending, do you? I don't think there is any particular reason why it shouldn't but I'm a bit unclear what spending you are going to cut to pay for it?. The biggest spending department at the moment is welfare and pensions - we already have the lowest pensions in europe so cuts in welfare?. I would not complain but I cannot see any of the liberal progressive left ever sanctioning that idea. There is not much scope for large cuts in spending in the other departments so you are left with hard decisions about welfare. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Feb 13, 2024 19:37:32 GMT
We could start by catching up with the EU. But I see no reason to suppose health care should not be the most expensive item in government spending, do you? I don't think there is any particular reason why it shouldn't but I'm a bit unclear what spending you are going to cut to pay for it?. The biggest spending department at the moment is welfare and pensions - we already have the lowest pensions in europe so cuts in welfare?. I would not complain but I cannot see any of the liberal progressive left ever sanctioning that idea. There is not much scope for large cuts in spending in the other departments so you are left with hard decisions about welfare. I think it will have to be more increases in tax, hence my reference to less luxuries more life. Of course that burden will fall on those earning enough. But there are a growing number earning extraordinary amounts of money. Plus those like me who can afford multiple holidays and expensive cars/wine/ trips etc. I hate sounding like I'm bragging but if you don't you are accused of envy and truth is most could afford another 2% on their tax. But as I say, when push comes to shove we need to decide whats more important big cars, nice homes, good wine. health. |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Feb 13, 2024 19:49:49 GMT
If that's your best response then maybe take your own advice. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 13, 2024 19:54:43 GMT
Some on here seem to think the annual increased percentage in health spending is just waste. But every year we are able to treat more diseases. The two new drugs slow the effects of Alzheimer's, but both need expensive testing and treatments. would you may more NI to get these drugs when you need them? I am in a bit of a quandary over this one. Alzheimers is not an issue for me personally - at least not yet - but we have had it in the family. What I do have is a progressive condition - Parkinsons Disease - on top of my pre-existing diabetes. I am going to be an increasing burden upon the NHS in the coming years. I would be happy to pay more if I could yet have had to drastically cut my hours for medical reasons, so am struggling financially. I have been used to being a net contributor to society. No kids that needed educating, paying all my taxes whilst claiming nothing. Sadly circumstances leave me in a situation where I am now a net taker rather than net giver, but none of us know when such a situation might arise in any of our lives. We are all only one serious medical diagnosis away from such a situation, and the odds against us increase with age. The cost of the NHS is soaring because of new expensive medications and an ageing population. Unless we accept a rather poor health service whose bottom line would mean thousands dying who might have been saved with better treatment, somehow a means of funding the healthcare we want in an affordable, equitable and fair way needs to be found, and an NHS structure created which does not waste shedloads of money as at present. This is all easy to say but difficult to do, not helped by ideological assumptions on both left and right. Either private bad and public good, or public bad and private good being the starting point ideological assumptions, when what we really need is what works rather than what ticks either left wing or right wing ideological boxes. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Feb 13, 2024 21:00:32 GMT
If that's your best response then maybe take your own advice. You're late. Most of the snides have already posted. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Feb 13, 2024 21:39:33 GMT
Some on here seem to think the annual increased percentage in health spending is just waste. But every year we are able to treat more diseases. The two new drugs slow the effects of Alzheimer's, but both need expensive testing and treatments. would you may more NI to get these drugs when you need them? I am in a bit of a quandary over this one. Alzheimers is not an issue for me personally - at least not yet - but we have had it in the family. What I do have is a progressive condition - Parkinsons Disease - on top of my pre-existing diabetes. I am going to be an increasing burden upon the NHS in the coming years. I would be happy to pay more if I could yet have had to drastically cut my hours for medical reasons, so am struggling financially. I have been used to being a net contributor to society. No kids that needed educating, paying all my taxes whilst claiming nothing. Sadly circumstances leave me in a situation where I am now a net taker rather than net giver, but none of us know when such a situation might arise in any of our lives. We are all only one serious medical diagnosis away from such a situation, and the odds against us increase with age. The cost of the NHS is soaring because of new expensive medications and an ageing population. Unless we accept a rather poor health service whose bottom line would mean thousands dying who might have been saved with better treatment, somehow a means of funding the healthcare we want in an affordable, equitable and fair way needs to be found, and an NHS structure created which does not waste shedloads of money as at present. This is all easy to say but difficult to do, not helped by ideological assumptions on both left and right. Either private bad and public good, or public bad and private good being the starting point ideological assumptions, when what we really need is what works rather than what ticks either left wing or right wing ideological boxes. Clearly for me you are a case of "but for the grace of god go I" The very reason civilisation has public funded services. You gave as long as you could and I hope you get all the new exciting treatments that are arriving. I don't think proivate is bad, but I do worry that profit and health are not god bed fellows. The health service is stagnating but then this is always the case in a business that is kept strapped of cash. Progress gives way to survival. |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Feb 13, 2024 21:43:44 GMT
If that's your best response then maybe take your own advice. You're late. Most of the snides have already posted. LOL. 
Witness a man so stupid that he endlessly trolls his own personal forum.
Surely it's time that this sham was binned off.
|
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Feb 13, 2024 22:01:30 GMT
You're late. Most of the snides have already posted. LOL.
Witness a man so stupid that he endlessly trolls his own personal forum.
Surely it's time that this sham was binned off.
nothing to add to the thread as usual Squeezy. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Feb 13, 2024 22:10:29 GMT
I don't think there is any particular reason why it shouldn't but I'm a bit unclear what spending you are going to cut to pay for it?. The biggest spending department at the moment is welfare and pensions - we already have the lowest pensions in europe so cuts in welfare?. I would not complain but I cannot see any of the liberal progressive left ever sanctioning that idea. There is not much scope for large cuts in spending in the other departments so you are left with hard decisions about welfare. I think it will have to be more increases in tax, hence my reference to less luxuries more life. Of course that burden will fall on those earning enough. But there are a growing number earning extraordinary amounts of money. Plus those like me who can afford multiple holidays and expensive cars/wine/ trips etc. I hate sounding like I'm bragging but if you don't you are accused of envy and truth is most could afford another 2% on their tax. But as I say, when push comes to shove we need to decide whats more important big cars, nice homes, good wine. health. Well given that we are already at record levels of taxation I doubt there is much scope for any great increase in taxes year on year - even the Labour Party are now saying that taxes are too high. The last time we had the sort of spending increases you are talking about was under the Blair administration - and that was funded by debt rather than taxation. The other point to bear in mind is that when we saw the large increases in funding for the NHS in the 2000's, productivity actually fell so it was costing us more for the same procedure rather than having extra to spend on new drugs. Hence my original question - do we get a guarantee? |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Feb 13, 2024 22:20:31 GMT
I think it will have to be more increases in tax, hence my reference to less luxuries more life. Of course that burden will fall on those earning enough. But there are a growing number earning extraordinary amounts of money. Plus those like me who can afford multiple holidays and expensive cars/wine/ trips etc. I hate sounding like I'm bragging but if you don't you are accused of envy and truth is most could afford another 2% on their tax. But as I say, when push comes to shove we need to decide whats more important big cars, nice homes, good wine. health. Well given that we are already at record levels of taxation I doubt there is much scope for any great increase in taxes year on year - even the Labour Party are now saying that taxes are too high. The last time we had the sort of spending increases you are talking about was under the Blair administration - and that was funded by debt rather than taxation. The other point to bear in mind is that when we saw the large increases in funding for the NHS in the 2000's, productivity actually fell so it was costing us more for the same procedure rather than having extra to spend on new drugs. Hence my original question - do we get a guarantee? There have always record levels of tax. They are not new. The question is can we afford those record taxes? |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Feb 13, 2024 22:25:27 GMT
Well given that we are already at record levels of taxation I doubt there is much scope for any great increase in taxes year on year - even the Labour Party are now saying that taxes are too high. The last time we had the sort of spending increases you are talking about was under the Blair administration - and that was funded by debt rather than taxation. The other point to bear in mind is that when we saw the large increases in funding for the NHS in the 2000's, productivity actually fell so it was costing us more for the same procedure rather than having extra to spend on new drugs. Hence my original question - do we get a guarantee? There have always record levels of tax. They are not new. The question is can we afford those record taxes? if it is at record levels of course it is new - that is the definition. Affordability is another issue - do we have a cost of living crisis? |
|
