The NHS Two-Year Plan

The Homebrew Forum

Help Support The Homebrew Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I don't think they have thought many things through to be honest; and here's another example!

The "Think Tank" is suggesting that to save money the NHS should stop giving free vaccinations for people going abroad whether to work or on holiday!

If they put that policy into effect:

1. Insurance companies will definitely use it as an excuse to increase their premiums and refuse cover anyone who goes abroad without ALL of their vaccinations up-to-date. I can also guarantee that if you are unfortunate enough to catch something whilst abroad, then an "exception" buried somewhere in the small print will be activated so that they still don't have to pay anything.

2. People won't pay to have ALL of the vaccinations required (believe me when I say that there are a bewildering number of them), as a consequence they will then catch a wide variety of avoidable diseases and infections and bring them back to the UK. Back home they will help spread the infections and diseases amongst the UK population and ultimately finish up in hospital for treatment under the NHS. :doh:

I suppose that the "good news" is that, with the GB Pound plummeting against most foreign currencies, a lot of UK subjects won't be able to afford a holiday abroad anyway! :whistle:

I think the word that describes the Conservatives at the moment is Hubris. I think that they feel that as Labour are so ineffectual at the moment they can do what they like.
You only have to look at the recent budget and spread sheet phil's attack/row back on the self employed. Again another group that would probably naturally vote for the conservatives. I read in the Sunday papers that the thinking behind the attack was, 'well they'll vote for us anyway no matter, so we may as well dip our hands in their pockets'
 
The "Think Tank" is suggesting that to save money the NHS should stop giving free vaccinations for people going abroad whether to work or on holiday!
I actually think that's a good idea!
Why should the NHS pay for injections for someone who decides to go to some disease ridden place on the other side of the world? If they can afford to do that they can afford the injections.
However, to make it work, so that people don't dodge the injections, catch something, then have to be treated at cost back here, there should be a pre-defined set of affordable fees that GPs can charge.
And for going away on business, my company paid for the injections like many others do and rightly so, and it was charged to the job.
There are parallels with treating the chronically obese who refuse to lose weight and smokers who refuse to cut down/give up. And the NHS continues to pay for their treatment when required.
Perhaps that's the next thing to be serious about. I hope so.
 
.......... If they can afford to do that they can afford the injections. ...........

........ And for going away on business, my company paid for the injections like many others do and rightly so, and it was charged to the job. ..........

I sense that this may be the common argument of "I don't need it so the NHS should either not provide it or charge for it."

Many old people use this to argue against spending money on such things as fertility treatment, anorexia support, gastric bands etc etc.

Many youngsters use it to argue against the provision of hip and knee replacements etc etc.

Just about everyone who is not overweight or a smoker uses obesity and smoking to argue against the provision of treatment for the people who are; even if the ailment is unrelated to their obesity.

Using the same logic, how about all those people who "self-harm" by indulging in sports? Surely, they should pay for any rescue or treatment required?

The truth is that we have a National Health Service that is supposed to provide treatment FREE at point of delivery to EVERYONE who needs it.

Within that remit, over the last seventy years, NHS management and UK Politicians have decided that certain things will be provided and over the years, as demand has increased and technology has improved, these provisions and the costs that go with them have also increased.

In the name of "efficiency" hundreds of local hospitals have been closed and now in the name of "austerity" thousands of treatments and services are to be removed.

The real reasons behind the current problems are a lack of control and good management both inside and outside the NHS, coupled with the massive expectations of the general public.

We are now in a state of "free-for-all" where vested interests are screaming more or less "Don't take it away from ME, take it away from THEM."

I sincerely hope and pray that I will be dead before I ever need a gender change or help with a fertility problem; but I don't see why the people who need such things to live a better and happier life should be denied them.

Ditto on the highlighted aspects above. I know many people who pay their National Insurance and have to scrimp and save to take themselves and their families on holiday abroad. Why should THEY be punished by being given an added burden.

There are hundreds of thousands of Brits who work overseas as independent contractors (I was one of them) who have already paid their National Insurance in the UK and by working overseas will not be a burden on the NHS until they return to the UK.

If any of these people (holidaymakers OR workers) return to the UK with an ailment or disease due to a lack of vaccination what do we do then? Let them roam the streets and spread their illness? Make them pay for their treatment even though they will be unable to work?

These are the reasons why I consider that charging for vaccinations would be a step in the wrong direction!
 
One aspect of the NHS that could be radically altered fairly simple without charging for treatment., make people pay for their food whilst in hospital! This could have two impacts.

!) paying for food should drive up the standard of food delivered as people are paying for it and can complain

2) Take the organisation and delivery out of nursing hands and would be paid for by the cost of the meals

No one should really object as if you are at home you have to buy meals anyway so there really is no cost impact on the patient. A proper diet is part of the treatment so Hospitals would have to liaise with the caterer on suitable meal options hopefully of a better standard and for those who want to pay more gourmet options, but there is no reason at all why patients should not pay for food that they would have eaten at home anyway.
 
Same problem with my right elbow. Lifting pints now with the left hand! Just isn't the same. It does help control the pain... beer I mean.
 
I guess almost everyone will have heard about the Body Mass Index, but it is not a measure of a person's health or fitness.

The Body Mass Index is "A person's weight in kilograms divided by their height in metres squared." (e.g. A person who weighs 90 kilograms and stands 1.8 metres tall will have a BMI of 27.78 [90 divided by 3.24].)

Anyone with a BMI over 30 is classed as being "Obese". :doh:

http://www.nhs.uk/Tools/Pages/Healthyweightcalculator.aspx

The BMI wasn't even thought of by the Medical Profession! It was initially developed and used by diving companies back in the 1960's to calculate how long they needed to decompress saturation divers.

The Offshore Oil Companies (i.e. the people who employed the diving companies) heard of the BMI and started to include it in their annual medical requirements. It was introduced as a measure of a worker's "fitness" but in reality by flying "skinny" people offshore instead of "fat" people they saved a lot of money.

Only at this stage did the Medical Profession latch on to the system. They initially adopted the scales used by the offshore companies but then introduced a rather spurious scale that is supposed to indicate whether or not a person is "Obese". This scale is now being used to discriminate against people who have a BMI that is higher than the one currently recommended.

Here's the irony. Using the BMI system, almost ALL of the men and women who won Gold Medals in the discus, shot-put, weightlifting, wrestling and similar events in the 2016 Olympics were "Obese" ...

... but I'll bet no-one argues with them! :whistle: :whistle:
 
Back
Top