Technology1 min ago
nhs
4 Answers
There have been so many fantastic medical advances over the last few decades. So many things are now possible. However, are all these fantastic things possible at the expense (financial) of the normal day to day running of the NHS and routine medical treatment for the masses? What prompts my question is the announcement today that stroke victims are dying because they are not getting proper treatment in hospital (in fact they are often not admitted to hospital). Strokes are very, very common. What is better - scientific advancement in medicine to achieve what used to be impossible by way of transplant surgery, etc. or spending money on good GP services, keeping hospitals clean, providing adequate staff and generally getting back to the old fashioned system of patient care. The vast majority of patients would then benefit as opposed to the few who can take advantage of transplants, etc. We all contribute to the NHS. Although research is obviously very important does the balance need addressing?
Answers
1 to 4 of 4
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by TheGopher. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Decent patient care in the hospitals so clean units, a decent amount of staff so everyone isn't stressed to breaking point, no more bloody managers telling us there's nothing in the budget, stop putting all the easy crap out to the private sector cause we only end up having to fix it again on the NHS anywany and if the drug companies could stop charging a fortune for medicine, that would be nice too.... rant over, thanks for that Gopher.
I tend towards what I think you are, TheGopher, doing a lot more of the 'simple' stuff so as to improve a lot more people's lives. Reources are limited, and likely to become more so.
It's tough if you are one of those whose life depends upon having some expensive 'miracle' surgery, but 10-20 years ago, you'd have been dead anyway.
How many hip replacements = one heart transplant? Which gives the greatest benefit? It is a tough question.
It's tough if you are one of those whose life depends upon having some expensive 'miracle' surgery, but 10-20 years ago, you'd have been dead anyway.
How many hip replacements = one heart transplant? Which gives the greatest benefit? It is a tough question.
Apart from improving lives, Catso, I believe the old fashioned 'simple stuff' would also be saving many lives.
It certainly is a difficult question, but I tend to think the quest for more knowledge has led to a decline in the basic ethics of the National Health Service. It is a great shame that people are denied the most basic care for the most common problems whilst things like 'face transplants' are being researched.
Thank you both for your welcome answers.
It certainly is a difficult question, but I tend to think the quest for more knowledge has led to a decline in the basic ethics of the National Health Service. It is a great shame that people are denied the most basic care for the most common problems whilst things like 'face transplants' are being researched.
Thank you both for your welcome answers.
1 to 4 of 4
