Free NHS prescriptions

Originally Posted by Xaccers

We have the crazy situation that if you buy your own medication then the NHS won't provide for you.
Terry Pratchett is campainging against it I believe, as he's had to buy his medication becuase the NHS won't provide it during the early stages of his illness, so by the time he does degenerate enough to qualify for it, he won't get it on the NHS.

Well that is utter madness and makes no logical sense, I understand why the NHS may not want to pay part of someones cost to go private but I don't see why they would withhold treatment for someone who also chose to go elsewhere

[demented]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

We have the crazy situation that if you buy your own medication then the NHS won't provide for you.
Terry Pratchett is campainging against it I believe, as he's had to buy his medication becuase the NHS won't provide it during the early stages of his illness, so by the time he does degenerate enough to qualify for it, he won't get it on the NHS.

Which was why there was a massive piece in The Times today about it being about to change for some things.

I think the free prescriptions announced today a good policy.

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Damien

Well that is utter madness and makes no logical sense, I understand why the NHS may not want to pay part of someones cost to go private but I don't see why they would withhold treatment for someone who also chose to go elsewhere

Exactly, if you've paid your NI contributions then you should be entiled just like anyone else.
If I buy Anadin for my flu rather than the prescribed paracetamol, should I no longer receive NHS treatment if my flu turns into pneumonia?
Sorting that out, to me, is more important than not charging people who already aren't charged for medication.
Course it would cost more, and the reality behind this idea is that it's just to try and win votes, not actually help people.

[Dai]

It's one of those *new* labour things.. If you're an ordinary bloke and you go a bit 'private' then they despise you as having elitist ideas and they hang you out to die..

However, if you're rich enough to bung a couple of million into the party bank acounts then you can do no wrong. Rip off the pension funds of millions of working people and you'll still remain untouched..

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

Exactly, if you've paid your NI contributions then you should be entiled just like anyone else.
If I buy Anadin for my flu rather than the prescribed paracetamol, should I no longer receive NHS treatment if my flu turns into pneumonia?
Sorting that out, to me, is more important than not charging people who already aren't charged for medication.
Course it would cost more, and the reality behind this idea is that it's just to try and win votes, not actually help people.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/com...cle4812952.ece

Alan Johnson, the Health Secretary, The Times said yesterday, is considering allowing NHS patients to pay for extra cancer drugs. Certainly, the Government needs to find a way to deal fairly with these patients. I believe that it can do this if it recognises that they are exceptional cases and treats them as such. It is important that the Government does. This controversy is in danger of undermining the principle of fairness at the heart of the NHS.

This is not the actual article I had read, it went into more depth..

[demented]

All in yesterday's Times.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/lif...cle4806144.ece

Top-up fees for drugs herald two-tier NHS
Ministers poised to relax ban on patients paying privately for life-extending treatments while receiving NHS care

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/lif...cle4806143.ece

Case study: ‘My dad must pay £45,000 for his cancer drug or that’s it - game over’

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/lif...cle4806119.ece

Co-payments: the top-up healthcare system that could divide the haves from have-nots

[greencreeper]

I don't know why people use GPs anymore. You can Google your condition and gain accurate, in-depth information - more than anything your GP can provide. If you want to see a doctor, there are walk-in centres where you can be seen far quicker (20 minutes versus up to two weeks) than visiting your GP. It's not like the family doctor exists anymore - just a different locum from one week to the next. Casualty is there for acute problems and injuries. Shut the GP surgeries. Build more walk-in centres. The odd poly-clinic so that some secondary and specialist care can be provided more readily. Put the saved cash into providing better NHS services, including free prescriptions for all.

Just a thought

[Taf]

I reckon it's all spin... Brown loves to announce "new" money that has been around for years, and this time he is trying it on again. Most chronic illnesses including diabetes allow for free meds and equipment already... let's hope this extends to asthma, COPD, etc.

[Caff]

Originally Posted by fireman328

My late wife had a condition called "non hodgkins lymphoma" which is basically cancer of the lymph system which stops working against antibodies and allows the body to "destroy" itself.
She did die, but there was no question, that she recieved the best care and no drugs were withheld to try every combination which might put it into regression.

A very poignant post.
A Beloved sisiter, Mother and ex-boyfriend all had one thing to say about thier treatment......... 'the staff were wonderful'.

It's going to be an exraordinary doctor/consultant that eventually concedes that the 'condition' is most likely to be 'terminal' in the early stages when everyone around the person is busy considering what can and should be done for them.

Back to the OP - it's a start? The 'free' NHS isn't quite so free because of funding and keeping up with research and red tape IMHO.

Originally Posted by Taf

I reckon it's all spin... Brown loves to announce "new" money that has been around for years, and this time he is trying it on again. Most chronic illnesses including diabetes allow for free meds and equipment already... let's hope this extends to asthma, COPD, etc.

Not all apparently, charity groups have been going on about these "12%" who for one reason or another are not covered. The Times had a mention that just over 50% of people with cancer at ages 18 to 35 have to pay some sort of fee.

The other thing, which was not mentioned in his speech, is allowing people to buy the expensive, newer, drugs.

---------- Post added at 13:51 ---------- Previous post was at 13:45 ----------

Originally Posted by greencreeper

I don't know why people use GPs anymore. You can Google your condition and gain accurate, in-depth information - more than anything your GP can provide. If you want to see a doctor, there are walk-in centres where you can be seen far quicker (20 minutes versus up to two weeks) than visiting your GP. It's not like the family doctor exists anymore - just a different locum from one week to the next. Casualty is there for acute problems and injuries. Shut the GP surgeries. Build more walk-in centres. The odd poly-clinic so that some secondary and specialist care can be provided more readily. Put the saved cash into providing better NHS services, including free prescriptions for all.

Just a thought

People are not experts in self-diagnoses, it's a very bad idea. A lot of these sites are actually poor and they don't come with the required information to judge if something is a condition or just has similar symptoms, it would led to a nation of hypochondriacs who are convinced they have a serious illness.

For example MS is a disease which encompasses a wide range of symptoms which most of the time are simply normal, and only rarely are indications of something more serious. Having 1000's of people lining up to take tests for it would increase pressure on the NHS.

The internet is a poor substitute for a medically trained professional. A lot of people make this mistake of presuming they know better than the experts hence all the health advice in the Daily Mail and others.

[demented]

Originally Posted by Damien

Not all apparently, charity groups have been going on about these "12%" who for one reason or another are not covered. The Times had a mention that just over 50% of people with cancer at ages 18 to 35 have to pay some sort of fee.

The other thing, which was not mentioned in his speech, is allowing people to buy the expensive, newer, drugs.

---------- Post added at 13:51 ---------- Previous post was at 13:45 ----------



People are not experts in self-diagnoses, it's a very bad idea. A lot of these sites are actually poor and they don't come with the required information to judge if something is a condition or just has similar symptoms, it would led to a nation of hypochondriacs who are convinced they have a serious illness.

For example MS is a disease which encompasses a wide range of symptoms which most of the time are simply normal, and only rarely are indications of something more serious. Having 1000's of people lining up to take tests for it would increase pressure on the NHS.

The internet is a poor substitute for a medically trained professional. A lot of people make this mistake of presuming they know better than the experts hence all the health advice in the Daily Mail and others.

I think greencreeper is pretty much spot on, with regret I say as I think the GP service was better in the past but unfortunately it's now very outdated and poor value for money for the general population. It pretty much seems to cater for small children or elderly and even then they often don't get the support they need.

Your joke about thousands of people having tests I don't find particularly amusing as I believe that a lack of diagnosis processes is one of the fundamental problems.

The idea that we'd end up with millions of hypochondriacs is a ridiculous one too. Plenty of people don't like visiting the GPs, you have a quota system where you have to redial for half an hour and are informed by a sometimes snooty and rude receptionist to try again tomorrow. If you're lucky enough to get an appointment the doctor will tell you that it is unlikely you have condition x, you're fine go away unless it gets worse and subsequent times repeated message. I'm rarely ill, I don't bother medics for ordinary things such as sore throats that I used to get quite often (others get colds or bugs often). When something is seriously wrong I have reasonable grounds to go and seek an opinion I think. I think millions of people are the same and it is not much to ask.

To those who think I'm paranoid there's an ever growing list of friends and relatives that have gone to GPs after suffering symptoms for a while with a theory about what they have to ask for an opinion and the GP has told them to hop it. These are diabetes (x2), kidney stones (x2), reflux, fits, angina, stroke (x2). In each case after even more serious symptoms appear (too late in some cases) it was later agreed grudgingly that the patients weren't delusional.

Your joke about thousands of people having tests I don't find particularly amusing as I believe that a lack of diagnosis processes is one of the fundamental problems.

It's not a joke, it's a genuine concern and a concern which would be fuelled by if there are a lack of diagnosis processes. My point is that people should not take to diagnosing their own conditions as opposed to a professional doctor. Those years at medical school are not replaced by google, there is both a lack of quality content on the Internet and an lack of medical training in the oridinary people to understand the information and use it to form a diagnosis.

Originally Posted by demented

I think greencreeper is pretty much spot on, with regret I say as I think the GP service was better in the past but unfortunately it's now very outdated and poor value for money for the general population. It pretty much seems to cater for small children or elderly and even then they often don't get the support they need.

Your joke about thousands of people having tests I don't find particularly amusing as I believe that a lack of diagnosis processes is one of the fundamental problems.

The idea that we'd end up with millions of hypochondriacs is a ridiculous one too. Plenty of people don't like visiting the GPs, you have a quota system where you have to redial for half an hour and are informed by a sometimes snooty and rude receptionist to try again tomorrow. If you're lucky enough to get an appointment the doctor will tell you that it is unlikely you have condition x, you're fine go away unless it gets worse and subsequent times repeated message. I'm rarely ill, I don't bother medics for ordinary things such as sore throats that I used to get quite often (others get colds or bugs often). When something is seriously wrong I have reasonable grounds to go and seek an opinion I think. I think millions of people are the same and it is not much to ask.

To those who think I'm paranoid there's an ever growing list of friends and relatives that have gone to GPs after suffering symptoms for a while with a theory about what they have to ask for an opinion and the GP has told them to hop it. These are diabetes (x2), kidney stones (x2), reflux, fits, angina, stroke (x2). In each case after even more serious symptoms appear (too late in some cases) it was later agreed grudgingly that the patients weren't delusional.

I think the idea of walking into a doctor's surgery and telling the doctor your own diagnoses is a mistake...telling the doctor your symptoms and allowing them to do their job is a better and more respectful way to get the treatment you deserve.

[demented]

I didn't quite say that. But how it works in practice is somewhere inbetween the extremes that people have posted - the doctor always being right and the patient knowing nothing and the patient somehow knowing everything and doctors being useless. The patient is after all the one familiar with their body and what is and isn't normal (to an extent). Depends what you mean by diagnosis really. It relates to one of the points greencreeper made about locums is an important point in this respect. For example one of the cases of kidney stones was being treated for something else but x-rays and other tests picked up evidence of kidney stones but as it was a different department and seen as less urgent the info was sent off to the GPs for referral. Patient went to see GP three times where they said they were sure it wasn't a problem. Had overnight attack, went into A&E, x-rays and other tests carried out immediately, whisked off to the ward, operated on in days, hospital medics wondering later WTF had gone on as they thought the stuff in the GP notes warranted investigation. It wasn't really a case of that person turning up at the surgery and unreasonably saying to the doctor I have this, this and this, it was supported by evidence and symptoms.

What is a GPs job? That's pretty much what people are talking about here.

---------- Post added at 16:17 ---------- Previous post was at 16:04 ----------

Originally Posted by Damien

It's not a joke, it's a genuine concern and a concern which would be fuelled by if there are a lack of diagnosis processes. My point is that people should not take to diagnosing their own conditions as opposed to a professional doctor. Those years at medical school are not replaced by google, there is both a lack of quality content on the Internet and an lack of medical training in the oridinary people to understand the information and use it to form a diagnosis.

The problem is that although they have years of medical training they don't have any meaningful amount of time to make a diagnosis. Yes, they have years and years of experience enough to have hunches and instincts about what someone has but it's applied too hastily and any kind of further investigation is often baulked at. We simply don't have enough capacity in diagnostics in this country and so these restrictions are introduced. The doctor may be right on a number of occasions but the system relies on where it does go wrong that it being sorted out by someone else. Sure there are some people that go to the GPs too often, but there are also a large number that are deterred from doing so when they perhaps should.

The other thing you and maggie seem to be assuming is taking the google thing too literally. Many people get some of their info from other means such as Pharmacists or from what doctors have said to them in the past, perhaps a reoccuring condition. Having doctors and the system act like the 1950s where we're all supposed to take off our cap to them and have them tell us we're all morons is not really the way to run a service.

P.S. I agree about the free prescription, still thinks it's a good policy.