Ellee,

the same kind of government that will not allow NHS cancer patients to be prescribed the same beneficial drugs in England, yet can allow them to be prescribed in Scotland!

Good to see the mainstream media picking up on this story now…

and are dazzled by promises of immortality the ‘wonders’ of hip replacement surgery and miraculous cures for cancer, or fashionable heart surgery – a lot of which is high cost surgery.

We want to provide day surgery for complex treatments (and don’t mention complications, sweep them under the carpet or bury them in the paperwork)
We want to provide medication for every ailment imaginable. But simply providing medication, does not mean the medication works, or that the condition has been treated.

And with dentistry, you have to know the reality on the ground to believe it. Those who need most dentistry are often those who can least afford it. And they need labour intensive dentistry (not attractive to dentists) – hence these patients are offered minimal dentistry, whilst the problems in their mouths grow.

Of what use is an annual check up – whether teeth or breats – if a solution is not provided or made available when (or if) it exists.

One thing is things we cannot treat, because we haven’t yet found a cure (or treatment)
and another is things we do not treat, though we have the cure, simply because there is no money in it

We all now NHS hospitals have shareholders, the State is the stakeholder, those who pay NIC and the patients are the shareholders, until someone decided to turn patients into ‘clients’ and introduce ‘costs & pricing’.

And we all know that community centres and GP surgeries (built by ths state & councils) were privatised and GPs became shareholders in GP practices (for peanuts) – and some built ‘new’ GP practices (with State & NHS Funds).

Jusy like 2 million Council Homes were sold to Housing Associations in stock transfers for a tenth of the market value …

And the recent ex-MOD homes selling for £120,000 plus in Norfolk, were sold only a few years ago by government to a Housing Association for less than £40,000 each – and leased back.

Addenbrookes hospital (Cambridge) is a Foundation Hospital – means it is funded by the NHS & MRC (and Cambridge University) but if nhs patients had little say before, they have none now. Addenbrookes hospital is not accountable to anyone – and can refuse anyone treatment. And they would rather spend £15,000 on court fees than provide a patient with £2000 in treatment (which is available on the nhs) if only to prove a point.

Choice means surgeons and hospitals can choose which patients and conditions to treat, that usually means patients who can PAY, and conditions they can bill the government for (for most profit).

Nothing or little to do with what patients or the community needs. And who sits on The Board of Trustees at Addenbrookes? Three guesses.

but again FYI surgeons are not shareholders in private or NHS hospitals. Indeed many private hospitals (eg Nuffield) are not for profit organisations-they don’t have shareholders. Unbelievable as it may seem to you they are not just in it for the money, but of course they have to break even to survive

The ‘specialised’ pharmaceutical industry needs to raise the funds or capital for its research and development …
If its research is costing £5 million a years it needs £25 million for five years or £50 million for the next 10 years (at today’s costs)

But what is not justified is their pricing -
they’d rather give 1000 patients treatment costing £12,000 a year, than 2000 patients treatment at £6,000 – holding out in the hope that PCTs and NICE will pay the full £12,000 (adding to the NHS burden from the increasing costs of drugs).

You are quite right why should the patients be putting pressure on the government to pay these extortionate prices – (often by reducing spending elsewhere). Seems people are good at getting patents registered, and working for high pay and high rewards in labs and research in comfortable surroundings, and less and less people are interested in patient’s needs and real patient care.

If we are in it for the money, if we are like any other service or restaurant – then we should compete on standards of service – and not expect the government to ultimately pick up the bill of overpriced (value added) meals or pills.

Especially when the real medical value of the pills is often subjective or controversial.

I have a problem with people losing their teeth because they cannot afford private fees.

I have no problem with doctors making money. But if a GP is a shareholder in a multimillion pound surgery – (nice retirement fund) – who do you think is paying for this other than the NHS.

If a surgeon is a shareholder in a foundation hospital – take addies cum papworth – who want to be a ‘world’ leader in heart surgery – note the word ‘world’ offering treatment to the world and his mother or anyone who can pay.

And who decides what surgery is a priority – or which patient. I presume your mother or your wife (or loved ones) and their conditions are ‘your priority’ – but that is human nature, and applies to everyone’s mother (and loved ones).

If I’m unlikely to suffer for diabetis, heart conditions, cancer, Alzheimer’s or abortion – then clearly these are not MY priorities.

If MY problem is MY Teeth – them than it is clearly MY priority. Why should those who have no ‘sympathy’ for my condition expect me to worry about there’s.

Imagine if you are refused surgery to save your leg from amputation to pay for someone’s IVF treatment or boob job. You’d have a Right to be pissed off. – And it does happen!