The Student Room Group

How would you save the NHS?

Scroll to see replies

Original post by nexttime
Comparing the UK and Singapore is a complete falsehood. If we had their young person to old person ratio we'd have amazing healthcare too.


then why is japan doing better than us when their population is aging much more than ours...?
https://www.numbeo.com/health-care/rankings_by_country.jsp
Original post by mobbsy91
It's going to take A LOT to save the NHS - I think at the moment, it's more about managing the current problems we have with it to a sufficient level, and then giving the funding to ensure that we can improve and increase the infrastructure to be able to handle the increasing capacity as the population grows, and people live longer...

I think helping the services who help patients once they're discharged is key, because without those services ready to accept discharged patients, many beds are taken up when they could be given to someone who needs it...

Also, not that I'm blaming GPs but I do think we need to have longer opening hours for GP surgeries - not for every surgery, but for those where there's evidence that the extended hours would be used... For example where waiting times are 2 weeks + I think it'd be appropriate to at least trial longer opening hours... Also educating people on when to go to A&E and when they just need to man up a bit... :biggrin:


There's a recruitment crisis for GPs. It's better to educate people on visiting GPs too. Like don't book an appointment for a non-serious cold.
There should be far more of an emphasis being placed on prevention rather than curing. Research and development should be ramped up considerably, although that would be a rather long-term approach to it.

I'd be more than happy to take a disbanded NHS in exchange for very capable prevention mechanisms being made available in a couple decades' time thanks to the money being invested in R&D. An example would be the funding of initiatives such as SENS.

Other than that, the NHS could survive if only the government were to employ Modern Monetary Theory. In essence, print out money to keep the NHS going, and as such have the NHS as one of the principal drivers of the economy (rather than shoving money into the hands of banks that are too afraid to even lend it out, which is what they were supposed to do). No, inflation would be an issue if the whole issue would be managed well.
Original post by Cherub012
There's a recruitment crisis for GPs. It's better to educate people on visiting GPs too. Like don't book an appointment for a non-serious cold.


I most definitely agree with this, it's absolutely ludicrous some of the reasons people go...

I saw a program where a woman went in to check she wasn't pregnant, even though she'd done many pregnancy tests, and when the doctor asked her if she had a test with her, she said yes, did it, and it was negative again, and all the doctor said what that, yes, she wasn't pregnant... bloody ridiculous!
Original post by sleepysnooze
then why is japan doing better than us when their population is aging much more than ours...?
https://www.numbeo.com/health-care/rankings_by_country.jsp


Interesting that you now pick a source that has Singapore lower than the UK despite just singing its praises.

Also, whilst far from an expert on healthcare in Sri Lanka, it surprises me that that index has it rated literally 6th in the world. From a country that ranks 125th in terms of spending. Why aren't you raving about the miracles being pulled off there?

Possible explanations for Japan doing well is a genetic preponderance for longer life, low rates of violent crime, low rates of smoking and drinking, low rates of obesity.

I'm not here to argue that the UK is the best. That's for people much smarter than me to decide. Just to point out that the common comparison made with Singapore is not a valid one.
Original post by sleepysnooze


the NHS is becoming a bit of a ruin. the last 3 times I went to the doctors (and I was actually very ill) I waited 35 minutes, then 50 minutes, then ****ing 1 hour and 15 minutes for my ****ing appointments - and the latter was for a ****ing nurse. why am I waiting so long for somebody to give me a ****ing permission slip for anti-biotics? let me get it myself ffs
I've also been hospitalised by some drunk thug and I waited 7 HOURS to get treatments. because it took so long my injuries scarred. they never even gave me ****ing ice.


You have a 10 minute slot. I've had some appointments which are about 2 minutes. Other take far longer because they are far more complex.
Original post by aj123456
How would you save the NHS?


I think this question highlights one of the reasons why the NHS is suffering.

I, personally, could do absolutely nothing to save the NHS. Nor could any other individual.

It is the responsibility of everyone to make sure that less pressure is placed on NHS services, be it through understanding when/when not to go to A&E or visit your GP, or living a healthier life so you don't develop a disease which is expensive to treat (such as diabetes).

If we give ourselves this idea that the only thing which could 'save' the NHS is some man or woman who can wave a magic wand and make it better is never going to help improve the situation of health in this country, which is pretty poor.
Original post by nexttime
Interesting that you now pick a source that has Singapore lower than the UK despite just singing its praises.


I *did* say singapore *and* taiwan.
taiwan is 3rd and basically has the exact same system as singapore

Also, whilst far from an expert on healthcare in Sri Lanka, it surprises me that that index has it rated literally 6th in the world. From a country that ranks 125th in terms of spending. Why aren't you raving about the miracles being pulled off there?


okay I will?

Possible explanations for Japan doing well is a genetic preponderance for longer life, low rates of violent crime, low rates of smoking and drinking, low rates of obesity.


this is the index of "health care", not "health" though
and, again, surely they balance their generally better health with an aging population factor?

I'm not here to argue that the UK is the best. That's for people much smarter than me to decide. Just to point out that the common comparison made with Singapore is not a valid one.


I don't think the UK is the worst system in the world, not by a long shot, I just think that it's inefficient. the USA is worse though in the way they have their over-regulated private~ style of provision.
fine then, maybe I confused singapore with south korea - I haven't even look at these figures in years
Original post by Tiger Rag
You have a 10 minute slot. I've had some appointments which are about 2 minutes. Other take far longer because they are far more complex.


yeah but they aren't going to take longer calling for the next appointee if they've already finished with their last one who took a shorter time. surely not. my appointments are always about 5 minutes yet I spend an eternity in the waiting room. and what really rubs salt into the wound is the fact that I can't even listen to music in there when I have to listen up for them calling my name. call me fussy but I'm just so used to being put in a horrendously long queue for a diagnosis that I already understand. i.e. I've had tonsillitis 3 times in my life and I've had iritis twice - sitting in a room to wait for them to tell me what I already know I have is such a waste of time and tax money. they really ought to be some kind of system of exceptions for people who have the basic sense and memory to understand that what they probably have is what it is. the prescription system is so cumbersome to people with this kind of situation.
the fundamental problem the NHS faces, is it;s status as a religion ofthe left, and becasue of the way Labour is funded by Unions a religion of Labour and especially the clause4 istas

Here is an uncomfortable truth for those people - THE VAST MAJORITY OF NHS FUNDED PATIENT INTERACTIONS , HAVE ON CONTINOUS BASIS SINCE 1948 TAKEN PLACE IN 'PRIVATE' SETTINGS .

GPs always been private, Dentists always been private, community Pharmacy always been private, Opticians always been private ...

There is no implicit or explicit reason why any service has to be state owned , instead the Union types and clasue 4 istas insist o nthe nHS draggign round 70 years of useless baggage and outdated working practice.
Original post by Mathemagicien
You clicked on it 65 times? lol

Its a lot less effort for me to type it 64 times than it is for you to click on it 64 times.

I write both things once, and have 2 levels. Copy paste. Copy paste. Copy paste. Copy paste. Copy paste. Done

But you?
"Hmm, I wonder what's in the spoiler"
Click
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Damn it. I wonder what's in the next spoiler"
Click.
"Wow, that was worth it" - ehh, probably not.


Reported for spam.

Original post by sleepysnooze
why am I waiting so long for somebody to give me a ****ing permission slip for anti-biotics? let me get it myself ffs.


What do you mean?
Original post by sleepysnooze
why am I waiting so long for somebody to give me a ****ing permission slip for anti-biotics? let me get it myself ffs
.


Because you might be the kind of idiot who takes antibiotics for a viral infection. Antibiotic resistance is no joke.
Original post by Captain Haddock
Because you might be the kind of idiot who takes antibiotics for a viral infection. Antibiotic resistance is no joke.


nah, nah I promise you I'm not. if I have the same illness as many times as that, I know what the problem is. I don't need a doctor to run me through the symptoms. if the doctor takes 50 minutes to see me about it only to confirm what I already know, then surely for both my time and my taxes I am maybe owed at the very least some kind of fast track? if they have my records and they know I've had this kind of condition multiple times then I don't see it being abused very easily.
Original post by Mathemagicien
Euthanise old people.

Spoiler




I clicked on every one of them. Cool.
Original post by Cherub012
Reported for spam.



What do you mean?


what I'm saying that if I have had an illness whereby the treatment requires a doctor's prescriptions (i.e. let's say steroids for iritis or antibiotics for tonsillitis) my time that I have to wait to see a doctor ought to be in proportion to the certainty that I have the same illness again. if I've had it twice, I ought to see a doctor twice as quickly for it. if I have it three times, then maybe three times quicker, etc. I shouldn't be made to wait almost an hour just to reaffirm my own knowledge on what the obvious condition is. if I'm not allowed or trusted to get the prescription myself (which I think I ought to be if I have a history of a certain condition that I can prove), then at the very least I ought to have better access, because making me wait for almost an hour for no good reason for a very quick appointment is ****ing stupid.
Original post by sleepysnooze
what I'm saying that if I have had an illness whereby the treatment requires a doctor's prescriptions (i.e. let's say steroids for iritis or antibiotics for tonsillitis) my time that I have to wait to see a doctor ought to be in proportion to the certainty that I have the same illness again. if I've had it twice, I ought to see a doctor twice as quickly for it. if I have it three times, then maybe three times quicker, etc. I shouldn't be made to wait almost an hour just to reaffirm my own knowledge on what the obvious condition is. if I'm not allowed or trusted to get the prescription myself (which I think I ought to be if I have a history of a certain condition that I can prove), then at the very least I ought to have better access, because making me wait for almost an hour for no good reason for a very quick appointment is ****ing stupid.


Except, they're not making you wait for no good reason. For all you know, the GP could be seeing someone has a much more serious medical problem than you.
Original post by Tiger Rag
Except, they're not making you wait for no good reason. For all you know, the GP could be seeing someone has a much more serious medical problem than you.


that's why you can tell the secretary that it's an emergency if it is serious and the first instance...but if I know that I have something and I'm not allowed to get the treatment without first seeing a doctor, my purpose isn't to see the doctor at all but merely to jump through a hoop for the sake of regulations. so I don't even really *need* their advice. I just need them to sign my prescription. that's why I ought to be seen quicker - it's more likely than I am in need of it (or the prescription) AND I will take a shorter time, most likely, seeing them anyway.
Original post by Mathemagicien
Why though?!


Ha! Well i've just had my dinner; i'm very full and sleepy, with one of my three cats snuggled up next to me, and I had never clicked on one of those to the end before and wanted to see where it ended and what happened at the end. [I lead a sad life ].
Couple of ideas:
-Make people pay for ambulance trips when they were unnecessary.
-Reduce the number of bureaucrats and put the money saved from this into doctors and nurses pay, research into new treatments or just the infrastructure of the hospitals.
-Make over 60's pay for their prescriptions as, due to the compression of morbidity, their medical care will cost more than any other age group.
-Also have an equivalent of A&E for less serious incidents so A&E doesn't have ridiculously long waiting times, they do at some hospitals but this should be standard.
Original post by sleepysnooze
I *did* say singapore *and* taiwan.
taiwan is 3rd and basically has the exact same system as singapore


Why are they ranked so differently then? This table doesn't seem the most reliable...

okay I will?


I was saying that i doubt the methodology of whoever came up with that list.

But given that Sri Lanka is a government-funded government-run system like the UK I guess... you still can? No objection?

this is the index of "health care", not "health" though
and, again, surely they balance their generally better health with an aging population factor?


Intricately linked.

Sadly their methodology explanation is totally inadequate, so your guess is as good as mine.

I don't think the UK is the worst system in the world, not by a long shot, I just think that it's inefficient.


Lots of inefficiencies. But its hard to think of a healthcare system that isn't.

The fundamental problem with applying the private sector to clinical medical provision is that consumers do not have a true choice. Your average patient doesn't know which hospital has the best outcomes for heart attacks, and the factors that may explain seemingly poor outcomes, and even if they did they certainly aren't in a position to decide mid-agonising chest pain. All applying the private sector to clinical decision making does is incentivise spending. When you pay a doctor/hospital £1000 per CT scan they order, they're more likely to recommend you get a CT scan. Funny that.

There are some places where it has a role - a private ward with nicer rooms is fair game - the patient can make a valid comparison there. The government's current approach - to create thousands of mini-monopolies with minimal quality control and minimal penalties is a company decides to drop out at short notice - is a pure cost-cutting measure and recipe for disaster.

maybe I confused singapore with south korea - I haven't even look at these figures in years


Singapore is a commonly cited example whereas S.Korea isn't - i don't think you picked wrong.

Original post by sleepysnooze
the prescription system is so cumbersome to people with this kind of situation.


Allowing antibiotics in particular without prescription is a terrible idea. Our control has meant we're far better off compared to the rampant antibiotic resistance affecting other parts of the world like, for instance, Sri Lanka and its neighbours.

You have, of course, picked one of the areas in which antibiotics are most over-prescribed for. You can recite the criteria which determine whether a tonsillitis is likely to be bacterial or viral i assume?

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you