United Kingdom: National Health Service (NHS) news

NelliePledge

NelliePledge

Moderator
Staff member
Some threads have been merged to create this news thread

The future of the NHS: no longer the envy of the world?

Picked up from social media. Article in the Lancet London School of Economics have this project with an independent commission looking to identify big challenges faced by the NHS. An opportunity to highlight the harm and financial waste of ME being “treated” with ineffective approach and the MUS spreading BPS to lots of other chronic conditions. Richard Horton is on the Panel so a good opportunity to shame him for his own contribution to shoring up PACE.
https://www.lselancetcommissionnhs.com/
http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(18)30574-9/fulltext
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I can't manage a submission myself, but I'd love those who might be able to to put their heads together and write a submission telling the NHS could save money by scrapping the roll out of IAPT/MUS and current CBT/GET based clinics and replace them with good quality guidance for GP's on how to diagnose and support patients with ME, and when and to whom to refer for further testing.
 
NHS England to stop 'ineffective' treatments

No mention of GET or CBT.
Tonsils removal, breast reductions and snoring surgery will be offered to far fewer patients from next year, under plans being drawn up by NHS England.

Officials are to discuss proposals to stop or reduce 17 routine procedures deemed to be "ineffective or risky".

The treatment will be offered only if it is judged to be of "compelling" benefit and there are no alternatives.

NHS England said the move would affect about 100,000 people every year and free up an estimated £200m.

It follows reviews last year to save £190m from supplying over-the-counter medications and treatments described as "low value".
Click to expand...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-44665560
 
Last edited by a moderator:
"to be offered to far fewer patients" just means that it will be offered to none. It will be an effective ban.

The same thing happened when the NHS decided that T3 should be taken off patients because it cost so much. The NHS didn't ban it, but in effect that is what happened. Many patients (mostly women) have had their T3 taken away and have lost their jobs and become bedridden. The smart ones and the brave ones find out they can buy it online or they bankrupt themselves paying for private prescriptions. They are told by doctors "my hands are tied, the CCG / the NHS has banned it". It's not true - but it might as well be.
 
What I felt was important for us was the statement that if there was only a treatment with significant harms associated with it, it was better to do nothing. We are continually bombarded with CBT and GET having to be continued because otherwise there would be no treatments available.
 
same old same cost cutting in the name of efficiency .what does it matter if tens of thousands of patients are now denied procedures that would benefit them . as we know not all treatments will benefit all patients so picking out samples of patients who saw no benefit will be easy but then using these sample cases to deny the treatment to others is just plain wrong . evidential bias can always find ways to cut costs .
 
Routine DNA tests will put NHS at the ‘forefront of medicine’

People in England will have access to DNA tests on an unprecedented scale from the autumn when the NHS becomes the first health service in the world to routinely offer genomic medicine.

From 1 October, hospitals across England will be connected to specialist centres that read, analyse and interpret patient DNA to help diagnose rare diseases, match patients to the most effective treatments, and reduce adverse drug reactions.

The move marks a big step towards “precision medicine”, which offers more efficient therapies that are tailored to individual patients.

Under the service, new cancer patients will routinely have their tumour DNA screened for key mutations that can point doctors towards the best drug to use in treatment, or to clinical trials of experimental therapies that patients are likely to benefit from.
Click to expand...

https://amp.theguardian.com/science...e-dna-tests-precision-cancer-tumour-screening
 
Last edited by a moderator:
So the NHS, an organisation with such outdated IT infrastructure that it can't even keep it's machines patched to block drive by ransomware, where critical parts of it's diagnostic lineup won't run on anything newer than window xp, where records are routinely either lost or have to be transferred on paper between departments/consultants because their internal e-coms is so unreliable, these are the people who are going to lead the world in genomic medicine? A field which will either need IT that works or result in mass deforestation globally.

Well.........they do say laughter is the best medicine, although I am not sure they meant maniacal or hollow laughter, and I'm fairly sure that calculation is heavily influenced by the price.
 
Wonko said:
So the NHS, an organisation with such outdated IT infrastructure that it can't even keep it's machines patched to block drive by ransomware, where critical parts of it's diagnostic lineup won't run on anything newer than window xp, where records are routinely either lost or have to be transferred on paper between departments/consultants because their internal e-coms is so unreliable, these are the people who are going to lead the world in genomic medicine?
Click to expand...

You mean something like this could happen? 'Somewhere between the analysis and the printed copy we have been attacked by gremlins. Sadly, the passage of time, theft of a computer containing the original draft, and the fact that none of us can find the proofs anymore, mean that we have no idea when this happened.'
 
How long will it be before the DNA data is passed to (or sold to) insurance companies with sufficient info attached to make it identifiable?

And when we all have to start paying for insurance, how many people will be refused because of dodgy genetics which give them a higher risk of, say, a brain tumour?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom