They say British Health Care is Rubbish.

[noko]

Discuss...

REPLY FAIL!

LOL z0mg!1 orly?! pwned, newfag!1 inb4 STFu epic fails :):>:-(^

[the Empress]

This is a blanket statement: ‘I would be inclined to be less lenient with a lot of people that want cosmetic surgery, fertility treatment or end up there due to their own stupid consumption of too much al-co-mo-hol or even cake! (we're already stretched enough as it is) and the management / target culture in general just seems retarded.’ Qualify your statement with some statistics showing that a significant proportion (that’s significant, not even majority) of people are given free cosmetic surgery because they’re ‘a little bit depressed’ about their breasts.

Your original statement ‘While not a problem caused by the NHS it gives these complete f*cking morons carte blanche to do whatever they want witth their bodies.’ I assumed that referred to people doing something *to* their bodies, as per the article begins ‘One in five women said they had heard of kitchen items, including bread, cling film and even chicken skin, being used as alternative barrier methods. Others had heard food items such as kebabs, Coca-cola or crisps could be used as oral contraceptives.’

If you were attempting to make some reference to the use of the actual pill – the article doesn’t actually prove that women *are* using it to protect from HIV, just that some believe it will. There are no condom-pill HIV statistics provided.

The only other pill misuse discussed is ''One in 10 of the women questioned believed that it always takes a number of years to regain fertility after discontinuation of the pill.' The information we don't have is, how many of those women were taking or had taken the pill. If they were taking the pill, and believed this, then that would have implications for pregnancy rates. If they weren't taking the pill, then that may be due to this belief, but again, tells us little about correlation with pregenancy rates.

Apparently this 'f*cking morons carte blanche to do whatever they want witth their bodies' meant pregenancy, not misuse of kitchen items. Fascinating. I've made no assertion about pregnancy-contraception myth correlation, as I have no evidence. But I believe it extremely unlikely that there is a chronic misuse of kitchen items as contraceptives. However, if you have evidence otherwise, please, produce it.

[Ragamuffin_artist]

Well, if that is the case, then this is good news indeed. With regard to your oblique jab at America, speaking for myself, I value all human life and the intent of this thread was to ensure that all life is treated with equal reverence and respect under nationalized healthcare.

It was a jab at yourself but I left you with with the possibility to blame the culture instead. You should not be impressed that equality is valued, only appalled if it is not.

My cynicism is based in the government's predictable inability to run things properly. In short, I suspect quality may be sacrificed for cost-effectiveness. If cost-effectiveness becomes the primary arbitrator of who gets treated first, as I'm sure it would have to be under any form of nationalized care

Are you also equally worried about the fire brigade treating people differently because they don't pay taxes? What about a murder enquiry being binned because the victim happened to be unemployed? Or perhaps the Sewerage department won't bother fixing the pipes that go to poorer areas?

In all of these government run institutions, the day to day decisions are made by the professionals NOT bureaucrats. Doctors make the individual decisions. Managers and bureaucrats make policy decisions.

Then you should be appalled at some of Europe's state-run health care systems and perhaps reminded that unfortunately such equality isn't something that can be taken for granted.

Chill out Haunted, I'm just trying to learn all about the NHS. As it happens, it turns out some of my presuppositions were thankfully incorrect. No need to be so grumpy!

[Medievalist]

Chill out Haunted, I'm just trying to learn all about the NHS. As it happens, it turns out some of my presuppositions were thankfully incorrect. No need to be so grumpy!

heh, so it isnt just me who was wondering why he has a stick shoved so far up his ass throughout this thread.

[donpablo]

This is a blanket statement: ‘I would be inclined to be less lenient with a lot of people that want cosmetic surgery, fertility treatment or end up there due to their own stupid consumption of too much al-co-mo-hol or even cake! (we're already stretched enough as it is) and the management / target culture in general just seems retarded.’ Qualify your statement with some statistics showing that a significant proportion (that’s significant, not even majority) of people are given free cosmetic surgery because they’re ‘a little bit depressed’ about their breasts.

Not only is it a blanket statement it is also merely an opinion, therefore I shouldnt have to qualify that. Also nowhere do I say a significant proportion of people get free cosmetic surgey because they are a little bit depressed about their boobies. I would be less lenient to them I said. Like in the case of this poor girl. And also this sorta thing...

http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/news/278636/Amanda-Ryan-gets-boob-job-on-the-NHS-at-just-17-to-improve-her-temper.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1175230/Teens-having-boob-jobs-NHS-crazy-Anne-Diamond-says-learn-love-flaws.html

Your original statement ‘While not a problem caused by the NHS it gives these complete f*cking morons carte blanche to do whatever they want witth their bodies.’ I assumed that referred to people doing something *to* their bodies, as per the article begins ‘One in five women said they had heard of kitchen items, including bread, cling film and even chicken skin, being used as alternative barrier methods. Others had heard food items such as kebabs, Coca-cola or crisps could be used as oral contraceptives.’

If you were attempting to make some reference to the use of the actual pill – the article doesn’t actually prove that women *are* using it to protect from HIV, just that some believe it will. There are no condom-pill HIV statistics provided.

Actually I was making a reference to the NHS in general having to pick up the pieces because of this kind of problem which stems really from poor education. While the article I will agree does not say they 'are' using it only they 'believe' it will prevent HIV. I am still of the opinion that if you believe something will prevent something chances are you are going to use it. But maybe they are bigger morons than I am giving them credit for. Im sure the condom-pill HIV statistics would be self explanatory... use a condom there is virtually no chance, use the pill there is the same chance as not using the pill. No statistics needed.

[Dramatisation (may not have happened)]
'Holy shit! it prevents HIV??? Really? But hell I am invincible anyway I don't need that'
--several drunken f*cks behind the bins of a club later @ the doctors
'I'm sorry miss R. Tard but unfortunately you have HIV... and you are pregnant'

The only other pill misuse discussed is ''One in 10 of the women questioned believed that it always takes a number of years to regain fertility after discontinuation of the pill.' The information we don't have is, how many of those women were taking or had taken the pill. If they were taking the pill, and believed this, then that would have implications for pregnancy rates. If they weren't taking the pill, then that may be due to this belief, but again, tells us little about correlation with pregenancy rates.

I have only several years of observations formed and it just happens that I agree with Dr Annie Evans. While the article tells us little at all (pretty much nothing actually) if you would like to contact her instead I'm sure she can provide a much more detailed set of studies or something than just my rhetoric.

Apparently this 'f*cking morons carte blanche to do whatever they want witth their bodies' meant pregenancy, not misuse of kitchen items. Fascinating. I've made no assertion about pregnancy-contraception myth correlation, as I have no evidence. But I believe it extremely unlikely that there is a chronic misuse of kitchen items as contraceptives. However, if you have evidence otherwise, please, produce it.

I am actually surprised I could not find any concrete evidence but here are some bits from http://www.ruthinking.co.uk/the-facts/search/articles/sex-myths.aspx. Now I can only conclude that there must be a significant amount of belief of this (and hence actual instances of this) to make these kind of campaigns worthwhile.

44% of teenagers say they don’t trust the sex advice they get from their friends and would rather get information by talking to their parents*.

Drinking a lot of milk won’t stop you getting pregnant

You cannot use crisp bags or plastic bags as condoms

I hope this is sufficient enough for you.

[the Empress]

to clarify: you'd need statistics to prove that people who use the pill *and* believe it may protect from HIV are more likely not to use a condom. I dislike posts with *random assertion* *DISCUSS* *I DON'T NEED TO PROVE THIS*. But that, of course, is only my opinion. *raises eyebrow*

[edit] I made the mistake of following some of those lines: news of the world link that doesn't work, Daily Maily *Anne Diamond* drivel and an online request for information on a Cosmopolitan forum. *These* are your sources of information? Pull yourself together, man.

[donpablo]

Isn't that a moot point really?

While it's nice to be as factual as possible from the outset when you don't know all the facts its perfectly reasonable to encourage a discussion in the hope that you seek to find out more. In this instance I state an opinion (not a fact), people respond, better opinions are formed, misconceptions laid to rest and so on.

Isn't that the nature of a random assertion? an opinion often without fact therefore cannot be proved. Can you prove that you do indeed dislike these posts and that opinion is your opinion? *grins*

EDIT: I fixed that notw link but hold on! They are not sources of information they are just examples of what I would draw the line at. Stop taking everything out of context.

[Haunted]

Then you should be appalled at some of Europe's state-run health care systems and perhaps reminded that unfortunately such equality isn't something that can be taken for granted.

I am and don't.

Chill out Haunted, I'm just trying to learn all about the NHS. As it happens, it turns out some of my presuppositions were thankfully incorrect. No need to be so grumpy!

Fair enough, I apologise. I've just been infuriated at a lot of the moronic republican talking points that seem to get taken as fact and the spurious attacks on my beloved NHS.

[Gubbins]

I just read that and nearly had my brain collapse in on itself! This is one of the unfortunate downsides of the NHS. While not a problem caused by the NHS it gives these complete f*cking morons carte blanche to do whatever they want witth their bodies. And I think these people should have their kids taken off them because they are clearly not intelligent enough to look after themselves. Does this kind of situation happen in America? Screw the death panels we might actually need eugenics panels!

Sadly, this (and other stories in this thread) have shown that people, on the whole, really aren't that bright. The more I deal with the general public, the more I find just how stupid many of them are! Going out with a doctor, you pick up some good stories about the NHS. A case in point: a life-long smoker has breathing difficulties and requires oxygen to be administered 20 hours each day at home. The conversation, roughly as related to me (so probably not exactly how it went):
"So we will provide oxygen at home for you, but obviously there's a very serious danger of naked flames near the apparatus, so you'll have to give up smoking."
"I'm not doing that! I'll smoke out the window instead."
"I'm afraid we can't let you do that. It's too much of a risk to you and your neighbours to have oxygen if you're still smoking."
"I'm not giving up smoking. Give me the oxygen, I'm going home!"
"You can keep smoking, but we can't give you the oxygen. There's too much of a risk - if you forget to take it off, you'll explode."
"I pay my taxes for this oxygen! You're going to give me it and I'm not quitting!"
(continue ad nauseum)

Another recent one - this time a young office worker:
"So you're saying that you always get cold and shakey, irritable and hungry about 1pm? And the same about 7pm?"
"Yes."
"And it goes away when you have a snack, or drink; or when you have lunch or dinner?"
"Yes."
"Do you think it could just be that you're getting hungry?"

Remember that, for every intelligent person that comes through the doors, every doctor sees two or three of these people. Their common denominator for people's intelligence is not that high, so don't be surprised if the ask the obvious.

From what I've heard, though, the main problem seems to be that people expect the NHS to provide a magic fix for anything from the common cold to death. Doctors are only working within the realms of their own budget, equipment and - most importantly - human knowledge. If you come in with nothing but an irritable bowel, don't describe the symptoms to your doctor properly, and say you've been eating curry for the last week, don't be surprised if you get sent home with a "come back if it gets any worse".

Likewise (and I don't mean to pick on anyone here - it's just a point that was mentioned), if you go to the GP with symptoms of an allergy, don't be surprised if you get asked to try cutting a few things out your diet or surroundings first, since most people will go to the doctor before trying this. It may be that an allergy test isn't necessarily appropriate for you, or if they are trying to refine which chemicals should be tested based on your consultation, in which case ask your GP for information about whether or not this is the case.

Also, often the best option is the most expensive one. The NHS (for all its inefficiencies) is still working within a finite budget. Saving money on tests or drugs for one patient's minor health problem may mean that another patient can have dialysis so their blood doesn't become toxic. It's all about balance and fairness, but when people's health is at risk, they suddenly become (perhaps understandably) very demanding.

[donpablo]

That's beautifully illustrated Gubbins and a lot clearer than my rant about what the NHS is up against.

Doesn't help with everything in the media saying 'If you do x you are going to get cancer (and die). If you suspect anything go visit your GP.' Not to mention the sad case of the Jade Goody effect. It's quite irresponsible to whip up a frenzy of fear with everything in 'health news'. I'm all for educating people but to sell fear for ratings is one of the worst thing about the media. Even swine flu has been a bit of a farce. Everyone that I know that has had it or people I have seen interviewed on TV that have had it have all said it's nothing worse than a bad cold. While we slightly better educated, more intelligent people can just turn off the TV or get annoyed and post our outrage on forums, average Joe is booking an appointment with his GP because he coughed.

Ragamuffin you might be interested in this website if you don't already know about it.

http://www.badscience.net/

This man is an absoloute legend, genius and a credit to the NHS

[mhuzzell]

I know, however, that my personal experience with the health centre in St Andrews has been horrible. I don't know whether it is because one of the secretaries working there is incompetent, or because they have some bias against American students, but on multiple occasions (I've lost count) when I've showed up to my appointment, I have been told that I never made any appointment. This has also happened to a couple of my friends. So far I have had to wait 11 months for an allergy test, despite having told the doctor that I have lost consciousness and stopped breathing due to unknown allergic reactions. These 11 months have been filled with pointless appointments (each time I went in I was under the impression that they'd finally do the test) where I was given no new information and was simply referred on to the next person. I have to assume that the only reason I've been duped this way is that I am young (and maybe because I'm an American who doesn't pay taxes), because if such practice was universal all the old people around here would have died by now. In any case, my experience with American doctors has always been better than my experience here. That said I don't think my one isolated case really justifies denying treatment to large swathes of the American population.

Well, anecdotal evidence isn't really evidence, a principle you allude to in your final sentence, but I still feel compelled to counter your anectodal evidence with my own:

MY personal experience of the health centre in St Andrews (as another American student) has been unequivocally wonderful. I've always been able to make appointments for shortly after I've phoned, and have never had to wait in the waiting room longer than I'd expect to at any American doctor. The doctors and nurses were helpful and professional, and nobody bothered me with any fucking paperwork! (Also, of course, it was all free!)