Deary me.

When there is a limit to the amount of funds that can be spent on the NHS, it is a disgrace that money is spent on treatments that have no evidence of being effective and it is an even bigger disgrace that the British Homeopathic Association campaigns for wider availability of homeopathic treatments.

Ok, there are hundereds of other reasons for the defecit (PFI, Management Consultants and waste, to name three) but this is just a rediculous tipping of money down the drain. People battle and have battled for years to stop being deined vital treatment (e.g., here and here) whilst at the same time, others are getting homeopathy on the NHS!

A quick trip around the blogs today. Derek Wall and Sian Berry (the Green Party’s co-principal speakers) make a statement highlighting the social problems surrounding Microsoft’s replacement for Windows XP: Vista. Derek, I should add, is a supporter of open-source – an excellent way of breaking big business monopolies on production by working co-operatively and providing the products of work for the public to use and adapt for free.

Derek also makes some important comments stressing the Green Party’s support for the PCS union’s strike to save 100,000 jobs and preserve our public services.

Jim at The Daily (Maybe) comments about Brian Haw and the merits (or lack thereof) of making him a figurehead for the anti-war movement. I fully agree with his comments here, very well put!

=====================================

NHS Together is an alliance of trade unions working together (even the BMA is involved in this one!) to campaign for a better health service. They are arranging a national day of action on the 3rd March: look out for events in your area – new events are going up all the time.

It is about time we all took a stand, together, to put a stop to the government’s ride to greater and greater private involvement in the NHS. In terms anyone can understand: private companies have a responsibility to make money. This is their prime responsibility, not the well being of patients. Corporations don’t give a rats arse about patients- they are money making enterprises. Do we really want that kind of system running our NHS? Health care cannot be reduced to a simple monetary exchange: it is about something much more valuable than that!

Protest against Occupation

Almost four years after the start of the illegal war in Iraq, tens of thousands of demonstrators gathered in Washington on Saturday to press for the removal of US troops from Iraq. I remind readers that this is a war that has been estimated in a study (blogged about here) to have caused 655,000 deaths. A war that was fought for oil: not to help people, but to help big business.

It is amazing and disgusting that a war that leaders claimed to be for human rights has increased the amount of torture occurring. However bad Saddam was, it seems that the occupation forces have caused much worse. It is time now, time to go.

=======================

As a side note, a new group has been started in Bristol (part of the Alliance Against Urban 4×4s) to highlight the problems of 4×4s in the City. It is absolutely ridiculous to drive a 4×4 in a city.  Well done to them for getting some media coverage so early on! Not only is it environmentally daft, it is also incredibly antisocial: to be in such a large vehicle, shielded from any kind of human interaction. I am convinced that regulation should be put in place to ban 4×4s from urban areas unless there is a valid reason for them being used (I can think of very few in such areas!).

Life isn’t all sweets and cakes…

Finally, for the first time in a month, I have good net and computer access. Hopsefully this will be accompanied by a rise in the quality and number of posts!

===============

A poll (reported here in the Guardian) has found British kids spend (or have spent on their behalf, more likely) more money on fizzy drinks and sweets than children in any other EU state. This shows, once again, how vital it is that health education is taken seriously and that regulations are toughened regarding food products aimed at children.

Whilst it is important that we aren’t killjoys (after all, as we all know, fun is great!), regulations need to reduce the amont of sugar and other ‘baddies’ people consume, particularly young children who can’t really make informed choices about their diets. There may be a case for ‘health taxes’ here as long as they are carefully used. Ideally, regulation will attempt to deal with the majority of the problem.

One of the first things that should be done, in my opinion, is the banning of the sale of sweets at the checkout in supermarkets. It is well known that these are strategically placed to encourage impulse buying and unhealthy eating. How about putting apples and other fruits at the checkout so people can impulse buy healthy produce (hopefully locally produced and organic too! – I’ll post about sustainable food production here soon).

=============================

Stuart Jeffery blogs, here, about cars and their bad health effects. Not only are they a problem, but they are massively anti-social (walking being the opposite: healthy and pro-social). Thankfully, the government, in its infinite wisdom chooses to make public transport the expensive and inconvenient option to get around. Only when public transport provides good value for money will ‘middle england’ be encouraged out of his car. Future health benefits are outweighed by immediate convenience for the vast majority of people.

studentmedic

A land of plenty?

Modern, british society has made many advancements in protecting the rights of vulnerable groups. One group, which has arguably been left behind is the elderly. For this reason, if no other, it is vital that issues surrounding elderly people and their treatment are brought to the fore.

As an example, a campaign being run by Age Concern regarding malnutrition in hospitals (although this not only attacks what is effecting the elderly; malnutrition can effect anyone spending a long period in hospital).

 It is thought that 14% of people over the age of 65 are malnourished. It is vital that ideas such Help The Aged’s ’seven steps to end malnutrition in hospitals‘ are taken seriously and action taken to effect the changes. They are simple, but helping the elderly is not as politically sexy as some other health issues despite costing 7.3 billion pounds per year and, far more importantly, impacting the well-being and quality of life of so many elderly people.

 The elderly deserve better.

Other points from Age Concern regarding Ageism in the NHS, here.

NHS Choice

Time for a long overdue post. Firstly I think I should link to The Daily (Maybe)for JimJay’s interesting post on Anarchism. I have always argued that all the different strands in progressive politics have much to learn from each other.

=============================

When the BBC first launched its digital services, what is now called BBC Three was called BBC Choice. While this offered everyone around the country the same service, NHS choice is about the reverse of that: it is about offering everyone a choice between hospitals, implying that hospitals have differing qualities and that we can embrace this because everyone now has the right to choose.

 My biggest concern about this is that whilst everyone has the right to tick a box on a sheet of paper indicating a preference of which hospital they want to go to, many do not have the facilities to go to the hospital that will provide them with the best treatment.

Disabled people, people with children, people with limited budgets and those who care for others are among the people who will not have the ability to make a journey to a hospital far away.

However, this isn’t the only problem with such a scheme. We know that in the NHS as it is currently, those who shout the loudest tend to get the best service. Those who shout loudest also tend to be the most well-off. What the system of choice does is institutionalize and embrace this. Those who benefit the most from choice in the NHS will be those who can afford to travel and those who have the time, facilities (and often the education) to be able to analyse the data to find out which hospital isbe best for them. In the end, without improving care in all hospitals, the same number of people will get poor-quality treatment with this system: the change will be that those who shout loudest will avoid it! The most vulnerable, who need services the most, will have their right to high-quality services restricted to appease the doctrine of consumerism.

Let’s not forget that long-distance travel is also worse for the environment. Large hospitals are also bad for community cohesion. What is needed is high-quality treatment, closer to home, universally.

 studentmedic

Shaky Foundations?

I thought I’d post about foundation hospitals, much hated by most on the left. I think they are an interesting concept. I should state clearly that I am against the policy. However, I want to dissect it a little bit and separate the good from the bad because I do think there is some good to be found in them.

 The most positive thing I have found is the idea that local people can become ’shareholders’ in the hospital – giving them the right to elect members to the governing body of the hospital. Staff also get to do the same. Could this be some long overdue thinking? Making everyone involved in the decisions that effect their healthcare: this kind of democratic thinking should not be limited to a few selected trusts but to all NHS trusts so that the public can really be involved.

Ideally, though, one wouldn’t need to fill in any forms in order to become a member of the foundation trust. It would be based on the electoral roll and the staff roll so that everyone could be involved more easily.

 From the positive, we move to the negative. While it is a good idea to allow local people to decide the direction they want their services to take, much planning needs to be kept at a national level. The idea that such trusts can borrow independently and can choose their own pay-scales for staff is patently unfair. Introducing a business model to state-run services has plenty of examples of not working.

 In additon, trusts should not be forced to compete with each other. Giving trusts funding based on performance means that better trusts get more funding and become better while the worst get less and (i presume) eventually close down… Healthcare needs to be good quality, near home – not miles away to a ’super hospital’.

 Well, those are a few thoughts of mine. I might come back and add/adjust as I think of any other points of interest here over the next few days

studentmedic

Health Taxes

Happy 2007! 

The Christmas break is well and truly over, as demonstrated by my inbox being jammed full of e-mails on the Green Party lists, my legs constantly aching from standing for too long on the wards and my blood pressure rocketing… (I have a lovely essay to do).

===============

A topic which has recently caught my attention, is that of taxes on ‘unhealthy’ substances, such as sugar and fat. It is an interesting idea, not least because it sounds strikingly authoritarian to dictate to people what they can and cannot eat. Should the ‘health apparatus’ be informing people or compelling people?

 An argument I have seen posited is that such taxes are the only alternative to rationing healthcare by not treating the obese. Wouldn’t the end outcome of such taxes simple be that the well-off would keep their autonomy and the poorer in society would loose that autonomy since they would not be able to afford it? Hardly fair for an NHS which is funded through general taxation… Is the NHS not there to treat people regardless of their health ’sins’? What next? Perhaps we should tax people who take part in dangerous sports in order to fund their treatment and to discourage such hazardous activities.  It reminds me of a quote in the front of the Oxford Textbook of Medicine: The aim of medicine is surely not to make men virtuous; it is to safeguard and rescue them from the consequences of their vices. The true physician does not preach repentance; he offers absolution. (H. L. Mencken, 1923)

Hmm, I wonder. It is an interesting idea…