OV9

IanF wrote: Thu Sep 12, 2024 6:01 pm We have a digital gp service (with Axa maybe?) and it’s very good.. problem allocated to the right person and funding authorised if you want to get seen quicker (ie privately).

Just back from Boston MA, and there’s a small shop there called Forward, think it’s an automated human MOT centre..

https://goforward.com/carepod

Preventative medicine and treatment is a no brainer, like servicing your car before something actually fails, saving us and gov money plus it’s less messy when you don’t end up dumping a load of fluids below your chassis

There is a lot of this stuff tapping into the intersection between healthcare and "wellness". I think most of it is positive and motivates people to look after themselves better as well as tailoring preventative medicines like blood pressure / diabetes / cholesterol control. Some of it is a bit snake oil like though, medicalizing asymptomatic conditions without any benefit to the punter.

IanF wrote: Thu Sep 12, 2024 6:01 pm We have a digital gp service (with Axa maybe?) and it’s very good.. problem allocated to the right person and funding authorised if you want to get seen quicker (ie privately).

Just back from Boston MA, and there’s a small shop there called Forward, think it’s an automated human MOT centre..

https://goforward.com/carepod

Preventative medicine and treatment is a no brainer, like servicing your car before something actually fails, saving us and gov money plus it’s less messy when you don’t end up dumping a load of fluids below your chassis

Kinda similar in London - Randox popping up on all the high streets.
Only thing is I don’t really trust them. The NHS isn’t really trying to sell you anything. I just feel like these large privately run health firms may not necessarily be in your best interests as they’re usually in bed with big pharma. You do a blood test and there’s always some supplements needed and they recommend you take X Y Z because you’re at risk from some disease

IanF wrote: Thu Sep 12, 2024 6:01 pm https://goforward.com/carepod

Looking through their website, there is stuff there that is definitely worth addressing - cholesterol, LDL, thyroid, iron that you can benefit people from addressing. But they are also testing for stuff like lipoprotein A that, while we know it is bad for you, there are no good treatments - so arguably all you do is make people worry. And there are some tests like C-reactive protein that, in someone who is asymptomatic, doesn't really tell you anything.

Mito Man wrote: Thu Sep 12, 2024 6:13 pm

IanF wrote: Thu Sep 12, 2024 6:01 pm We have a digital gp service (with Axa maybe?) and it’s very good.. problem allocated to the right person and funding authorised if you want to get seen quicker (ie privately).

Just back from Boston MA, and there’s a small shop there called Forward, think it’s an automated human MOT centre..

https://goforward.com/carepod

Preventative medicine and treatment is a no brainer, like servicing your car before something actually fails, saving us and gov money plus it’s less messy when you don’t end up dumping a load of fluids below your chassis

Kinda similar in London - Randox popping up on all the high streets.
Only thing is I don’t really trust them. The NHS isn’t really trying to sell you anything. I just feel like these large privately run health firms may not necessarily be in your best interests as they’re usually in bed with big pharma. You do a blood test and there’s always some supplements needed and they recommend you take X Y Z because you’re at risk from some disease

Yeah some of it is snake oil. Also a big and damaging trend where people get a "full body scan" - an MRI or suchlike - then give you a report saying "oh that sucks better go see your GP". Grifters gonna grift, especially when people aren't getting a good service from the NHS.

Ive lost all faith in doctors now. Messed about, no help and they just said “you are getting older Mr Butler” and blah blah eat a salad.

Apart from when I had shingles and my old doctor, Dr Sha being a sensible chap I’ve just been palmed off.
The wife was the same and doing the opposite of what she was told has had huge health improvements.

I’d go to them for a debilitating virus or weird rash but otherwise I don’t think they know enough about human health. I’m sure there are some great ones out there but I’ve not had good experiences.

The surgeon who did my shoulder, absolute genius, solid as a rock, zero pain and quick healing time.
The treatment of my Gran though, disgusting attitude from some awful nurses.

I’d rather see a return to the old ways of a strict matron, nurses doing as instructed and throwing out the wasters.
Baby number 1, amazing treatment during the birth, they were amazing. Birthing ward, lazy workshy wastes of oxygen who were kicked into touch by a senior nurse or Matron in the morning.
Baby number 2, brilliant, calm, relaxed and excellent treatment.

The NHS isn’t underfunded, it needs to remove the ones not pulling their weight and reward the ones working hard and providing a great service. I bet you could pay the good ones 60k a year and increase the standards and still save money by removing the chaff.

Dave!

Hasn’t Starmer spent the last few years telling the tories they had underfunded the nhs and should be ploughing loads more money in?

I’m sure anyone who’s worked anywhere below management level in the nhs in the last 20 years will tell you how badly managed everything is, so yep something does need to be done, but no idea what or how!

He's also spent the last few years complaining about the tax burden the Tories levied on people, and is about to increase that burden yet further because the train drivers wanted £70k for pushing a few buttons and Starmer wanted to make sure that he didn't neglect the balls whilst fellating Mick Lynch.

Well I, for one, am very surprised by all this…

It was Not the outcome I’d expected…

V8Granite wrote: Thu Sep 12, 2024 8:34 pm
The NHS isn’t underfunded, it needs to remove the ones not pulling their weight and reward the ones working hard and providing a great service. I bet you could pay the good ones 60k a year and increase the standards and still save money by removing the chaff.

Dave!

And some of that might actually happen if it wasn’t for specific groups who aggressively fight this kind of performance related outcome…

Nurses and junior doctors are treated like min wage workers. Without unions they would be.

V8Granite wrote: Thu Sep 12, 2024 8:34 pm Ive lost all faith in doctors now. Messed about, no help and they just said “you are getting older Mr Butler” and blah blah eat a salad.

Apart from when I had shingles and my old doctor, Dr Sha being a sensible chap I’ve just been palmed off.
The wife was the same and doing the opposite of what she was told has had huge health improvements.

Another interesting tidbit from the Darzi report was how big the NHS litigation cost is staggering. It's a clear indication that, not only are we not doing things right, but we're doing it so wrong that it is creating additional cost.

"NHS in England is an outlier in clinical negligence payments, devoting double the share of total health spending as New Zealand, ten times the level of Australia, and twenty times as much as Canada. In the year 2023/24, clinical negligence payments increased to £2.9 billion or 1.7 per cent of the entire NHS budget178.
....
Aside from pensions and nuclear decommissioning, NHS clinical negligence claims are the largest liability on the Government’s balance sheet180."

tbf to Dave!’s doctor. There can’t be many healthcare professionals that would recommend an all beef diet

https://news.sky.com/story/winter-fuel- ... t-13213760

No impact assessment carried out for the winter fuel change - I mean, only 10.8 million people involved, and most will probably be dead before the next general election, so fvck em!

Not to worry though, it’ll only be those comfortable, asset rich pensioners that will be affected.

ZedLeg wrote: Fri Sep 13, 2024 8:55 am tbf to Dave!’s doctor. There can’t be many healthcare professionals that would recommend an all beef diet

ZedLeg wrote: Fri Sep 13, 2024 8:59 am Not to worry though, it’ll only be those comfortable, asset rich pensioners that will be affected.

you know - Tory voters...

I just can't get my head round this decision - there may be a black hole but this isn't the way to fill it. The most "Least Laboury" thing they can do as their first major decision.

It’s weird that the same folk who would argue that they aren’t well off even though their house is worth 7 figures think that pensioners in that position definitely are.

The thing with a lot of 'rich' pensioners is that they may have owned their Fulham (for eg) home for 40 years before prices went silly. Sure, it's worth a lot now, but why should they be forced to sell it and be priced out of their own area just because prices are now silly? They might otherwise be income poor. This 'millionaire' pensioner thing is quite a red herring.

My great grandfather owned a CUL-DE-SAC of houses in Fulham on a doctors salary decades ago. He'd barely be renting a room in a house share nowadays.

the WFA is a strange one though, the concept of making it means tested seems totally correct. Why should Alan Sugar be paid tax money from the potentially very poor? Why should pensioners living in Spain get it? etc…. my mum always donated hers to charity because she didn’t need it.

unfortunately they’ve gone about it in a very blunt way - which has just pissed everyone off.

Means testing has become so invasive that it puts people off applying for benefits they may be eligible for.

If you were to just make it universal for pension age people and tax it back from folk who don’t need it, that wouldn’t happen.

Even if you didn’t do that, I’d rather a few people got a couple of hundred pounds they don’t need than more people missing out on money they do need.

What’s the worst that happens? An old person doesn’t freeze to death.