Forum Topic

The NHS costs £10,000 per household per year

This is an article, among others, published by the Telegraph.  As it is behind a paywall, I cannot copy-paste it, other than the initial paragraphs:"UK health spending is costing around £10,000 per household, with the third highest share of GDP in Europe, a major report has found.It shows that Britain has one of the most costly health systems – and some of the worst outcomes.The study by think tank Civitas suggested almost 50,000 people a year are dying in the UK for want of effective medical intervention.The research tracking 19 wealthy countries found that only the United States fared worse.Britain also came second worst for life expectancy, having seen a fall in the last decade while the average lifespan rose across the rest of the developed world.The findings examine funding levels even before the Government raised National Insurance by 1.25 percentage points in April, raising billions more from the taxpayer.The report’s authors said the trends were evidence of “runaway” spending, and called for reforms to ensure resources were used wisely."The noises are getting louder on this and it seems to me that steps are being taken to have insurance-style healthcare more likely every day!

Ivonne Holliday ● 1058d17 Comments

Was taking the whip away from 21 MPs in the 2019 rebellion where we lost so many good MPs a limit.

Philippa Bond ● 1053d

https://www.ukri.org/what-we-offer/our-main-funds/industrial-strategy-challenge-fund/ageing-society/healthy-ageing-challenge/

Philippa Bond ● 1056d

Union bashing is still a Tory sport.  Yet we know that a lot of medical staff get a poor deal with the excessively long hours that they work (which invariably end up even longer before they finish let alone get home).The lack of discussion with the unions as the BMJ says is just another reason why some will not bother to stay any longer.A friend was urged to move away and on into a private job because she was being told to go to visit people when she had Covid.

Philippa Bond ● 1056d

I totally agree Michael W.There is an ageing population, there has been for years, because couples tend to have one child or two at the most because of cost.  The difference between the 1940s and now is that more women have to and/or want to, go to work.It is the government who is in charge of the NHS, not the other way around. They cannot delegate responsibility for that.What was it that John Major said?  The NHS is as safe as a pet hamster in the presence of hungry python if Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and Iain Duncan Smith rose to power following Brexit.

Ivonne Holliday ● 1056d

Isn't the point about population growth that we need to compare GP numbers per head of population rather than as an absolute number.I would add that the population is ageing and thus the increasing demand upon the healthcare system (GP numbers included) is greater than that due to population increase alone.Looking at trends over time though, the number of GPs, even per capita, is not a very helpful statistic. The working patterns of GPs change (hours worked), as does the range of services they are expected to provide. The NHS can, and does, shift the balance of demand between primary (GP) and secondary (hospital) healthcare.You are better to look at service indicators, such as time waiting for an appointment, or hospital waiting times.Unfortunately, these don't look too good either.At the end of the day, the NHS is a state owned and controlled service and it is pointless, as some do, blaming the NHS for its shortcomings. Who is in charge of the NHS? Ultimately the government of the day. Who is responsible for deciding on the number of doctors to train 10 years ago - the ones who would now be becoming qualified as GPs? Ultimately the government. Back then the UK was reducing the number of medical school places available due to a perceived over-supply of medicine graduates!

Michael Winstanley ● 1056d

Hello Sue,I do not think that population growth is the reason for putting doctors off from becoming GPs.  The same would apply to nurses.There is, however, a culture of favoring American style of medical care over the NHS, hence belittling it - not openly of course.The press does not help by "complaining" that GPs earn £100,000 a year, but it is OK for professional footballers to earn that - and more - per week.There is a problem of education and respect in the UK at the moment.  Please read the article below and the second paragraph alone, it gives the perfect descriptionhttps://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-nurse-jenny-mcgee-b1849430.html

Ivonne Holliday ● 1056d

I thought there weren't enough places to study medicine:https://www.bmj.com/content/377/bmj.o1210

Philippa Bond ● 1056d

So why do the tories keep promising more GP's if there's no chance of meeting the promises.Next thing they'll be promising 40 new hospitals!oh.

Matt Palmer ● 1056d

@MichaelYes I agree that the NHS would be in dire straits without the immigrants who make up much of its workforce.  I attend Kingston Hospital every 4 weeks (since 2012) for a drug infusion and all the nurses are from the Philippines, and all the consultants and nurses I saw in the Eye Unit were predominantly Asian, and I am grateful they are all here doing what they do.  I assume many of them applied to come to the U.K. because it improved their life and good for them because them being here benefits ours too.

Sue Hammond ● 1056d

It is also stuff like this:https://www.bmj.com/content/376/bmj.o560There are an awful lot of part-time GPs and one of the main reasons for this is sure to be the fact that working hours have got completely out of control.  Somebody has to look after the children and it is easier if one person has a part-time job.  I'm sure the long hours (always longer than those stipulated by contract) is a reason for so many part-timers.

Philippa Bond ● 1056d

An interesting observation in the light of Sue's comment about immigration adding to the UK's population. Although my GP practice doctor and nurse are what the forms would describe as white British I think in all my visits to Queen Mary's or Kingston Hospitals during the past five years all of the nurses, doctors or consultants I've seen (with possibly one exception) have been first or second generation immigrants, mainly from Europe or Asia. Would the NHS collapse without immigrants?

Michael Ixer ● 1056d

@Ivonne 15.42Don't worry I'm not going to say anything about your harping on Brexit ...GP recruitment has been falling for years and it will only get worse for a variety of reasons.  These are highlighted in the National Health Executive article below which was published in February 2015, so nothing to do with Brexit:Why don’t doctors want to become GPs anymore?https://www.nationalhealthexecutive.com/Comment/why-dont-doctors-want-to-become-gps-anymoreIt's a long article but worth reading. The NHS has also been haemorrhaging existing GPS for years because of the pressures their workload puts them under which are becoming unbearable and unsustainable.  An ageing population plus out of control immigration has undoubtedly increased these pressures and many GPs have had enough. Population (growth) data over the last 70 years: 1950 ~ 50,055,0651960 ~ 52,543,017 1970 ~ 55,650,1661980 ~ 56,326,328 1990 ~ 57,210,4422000 ~ 58,850,043 2010 ~ 62,760,0392020 ~ 67,059,474  Full data here: https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/GBR/united-kingdom/populationOffice for National Statistics figures suggest the UK population will surpass 69.6 million by mid-2029 and reach 72 million by mid-2041.  Looking at the existential growth over the last 20 years I think the ONS forecast is probably much too low.  So if you think getting a GP appointment is difficult now ...🙀

Sue Hammond ● 1057d

I think, Phillipa, that the number of GPs plummeted after Brexit that is why they were asking retired medical personnel to come up and assist with the pandemic.  Please check the dates.  Officially, on 31 January 2020 the UK left the EU.  The first lockdown started in March 2020.

Ivonne Holliday ● 1057d

The number of GPs has most definitely plummeted post pandemic.  Practising and retired medical personnel were called upon to step forward and roll out the vaccines.  Clapping on the doorstep for those who were taken advantage of and guilt-tripped to work without all the PPE and back up necessary for an expected sometime pandemic is just not enough of a thank you when the NHS has been so systematically stretched and underfunded for such a very long time.And what is the point of an Inquiry if there are attempts to block all the information being put before it and to stop or discourage everyone concerned to speak about it?  There are reports of this happening already.

Philippa Bond ● 1057d

Thank you Michael W and Matt,I agree that the report based on information from Civitas is confusing - not sure if it is wanton confusing.I had not heard from the Kings Trust, thank you Michael W.But as you say, c) is worrying...And I agree with you Matt, the number of GPs has plummeted, particularly so (if I may say this without a barrage of criticism and/or anger) post Brexit...

Ivonne Holliday ● 1057d

In 2015 Jeremy Hunt promised to recruit 5,000 more GP's by 2020In 2018 Matt Hancock dropped this pledge as it was unachievable.In 2019 Boris Johnson promised to recruit 6,000 more GP's by 2025Currently GP numbers are down around 1,500 from where we were in 2015. That's why people can't access a GP, not because of an inefficient NHS.

Matt Palmer ● 1057d

Civitas is a spin-out from the so-called "Institute of Economic Affairs". Both are right-wing propaganda outfits (self-styled as "think-tanks") and their so-called research isn't worth reading.If you want to look at international healthcare comparisons, better to look at what The Kings Fund produces. TKF is a very-long-standing charity which grew out of London hospitals rather than a political soap-box outfit like Civitas.The last time  I looked, which was pre-pandemic (all the figures are confounded by that at the moment):a) We spent less on healthcare than comparator nations;b) We got better value for our money - ie our health service was more efficient; butc) Even so, due to the lower spending, our health outcomes were worse.As regards c), there is thus some truth in the Telegraph article - for a change.

Michael Winstanley ● 1057d