Wednesday - September 09, 2009

Ramirez!

Posted by Drew458     on 09/09/2009 at 10:55 AM   
Filed Under: • Health-Medicine • Obama, The One •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Monday - September 07, 2009

Frost over Terry Prachett

It’s 5:00 AM, there’s a nasty thunderstorm overhead, and I’m posting about Terry Pratchett.

God will get me for this.

An interesting interview with Terry Pratchett.

A) I believe this is the first time I’ve seen him without his hat.

B) the interviewer is David Frost, who I’d assumed was long dead. [If I were Richard Nixon, I’d have made sure of it… (just kidding, maybe…)]

Well, here you go: David Frost’s interview with Terry Pratchett.

One of my favorite Pratchett quotes: Granny Weatherwax on ‘progress’: “Progress just means bad things happen faster.”

I like to quote that to liberals who try to use the ‘progressive’ moniker.

Appears to be quite true under the Obama regime.

Methinks the USA needs regime change now!

UPDATE: embuggerance-a very minor problem - not the end of the world, but the world would be better without it.

Source: Urban Dictionary

Posted by Christopher     on 09/07/2009 at 04:59 AM   
Filed Under: • Celebrities • Health-Medicine • Literature •  
• Comments (5) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Tuesday - September 01, 2009

good grief, is this an epidemic?  lady has heart attack, paramedic doesn’t help. she’s scared. wtf?

Well I guess the lawyers will be all over this quite soon.  And why not?  Damn what a sad story.  I can understand a lone paramedic and especially female, being a bit concerned going into a place where there’s drinking and maybe a rough crowd. I mean to say, I can understand her fear as lets face it, generally women in these situations become victims themselves.  So then why was she sent out alone to begin with? What sort of hiring standards and training are paramedics getting? 

Mother-of-three died in pub as solo woman paramedic ‘stood outside and refused to help’

By Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 12:14 PM on 01st September 2009

The family and friends of a woman who died after collapsing in a pub have called for action to be taken against a paramedic who they say refused to help her.

Melissa Procter-Blain, 32, suffered a heart attack at The Crown in Spondon, Derbyshire.

The pub’s manager has told how the lone woman paramedic who first responded to the 999 call initially parked outside the wrong premises and then refused to enter the bar.

The woman then allegedly refused to try to resuscitate the mother-of-three on her own and that one of the pub’s customers had to step in until back-up arrived.

Landlady Michelle Doherty, 34, is now calling for the paramedic to be suspended while an investigation into the incident is conducted.

She said: ‘We were waiting outside for the ambulance and we saw the paramedic had parked outside a garage down the road.

‘A young lad ran from the pub down to tell her she was in the wrong place but came back and said she wouldn’t come in.

‘My partner Kevin then ran down to talk to her and she said she wasn’t authorised to go into a pub alone and would only come in if he could guarantee her safety, which he did.’

East Midlands Ambulance Service had logged the incident as a category A - potentially immediately life-threatening - and sent a fast-response vehicle, which arrived within six minutes, and an ambulance, which arrived within ten minutes.

A spokesman said the solo responder paramedic took the life-saving kit from her vehicle into the pub but had described the atmosphere as tense and intimidating.

But witnesses in the pub dispute this claim. Ms Doherty said that while her partner spoke to the paramedic, one of her customers, Leanne Dono, was on the phone to a 999 operator.

She claimed the controller told her the sole responder would begin trying to resuscitate Miss Procter-Blain.

Miss Dono said she then spoke to the paramedic, who said she was not authorised to carry out cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) on her own.
Enlarge The Crown pub in Spondon, Derbyshire

Local: Miss Procter-Blain suffered a heart attack in The Crown pub in Spondon, Derbyshire. She had been enjoying soft drinks

Miss Dono added: ‘I was talking to the 999 lady and she said I had to count Melissa’s breaths. I counted one, then there was a long gap, then I counted another. By the time I got to the fifth breath, her face had turned grey and there was foam coming out of her mouth. I told the lady on the phone I thought she was dead.

‘That was when the paramedic came. I told her that the 999 lady was saying she should try to resuscitate Melissa but she said she couldn’t on her own, so my boyfriend Scott started doing CPR instead.

‘It was horrible. Everyone was standing around and crying, but it wasn’t threatening. Everyone was just really upset.’

Pub manager Kevin Pearson, 35, said everyone had been ‘disgusted’ by the actions of the paramedic.

He said: ‘We were begging her to come in and help but she just said she couldn’t do anything on her own. What was the point in sending someone on ahead if they can’t do anything once they get there?

DAILY MAIL

Posted by peiper     on 09/01/2009 at 08:13 AM   
Filed Under: • Daily Life • Health-Medicine • UK •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Monday - August 31, 2009

“Stay away from my kids…”

I’ve been trying to catch up on my 24/7 Rush Limbaugh podcasts.

The first hour on 24Aug09 Rush carried the audio of this Marine’s challenge to his congressman. His name is David Hedrick and he really made plain what is at stake in government ‘deathcare’.

Honestly, when ARE our elected officials, from Obama on down, going to fulfill their oath of office?

Posted by Christopher     on 08/31/2009 at 09:45 PM   
Filed Under: • Commies • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists • Government • Corruption and Greed • Health-Medicine •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Sunday - August 30, 2009

CLARKSON ON HEALTH CARE … CANADA

The health care debate has really caught fire lately. First comparisons started to be made with UK’s NHS and the care in the USA.  That isn’t entirely fair btw, coz while nobody argues that NHS here is perfect, quite naturally many Brits who are quite happy with their system couldn’t understand why they were being used as the example to be avoided. So an argument of sorts got started back and forth and now Jeremy Clarkson in the Sunday Times writes about his experience in Canada, with health care there.  Of course, he’s writing about one part of Canada where the system is probably far different then in other parts.
And what he writes here doesn’t look too good.  Of course Clarkson being Clarkson, those familiar with him know he says lots of things and manages to get lots of folks angry with him.  Which of course he much enjoys.

I would greatly appreciate anyone from Canada seeing this would comment on what he has to say.

You may recall only a month ago there was a video posted here at BMEWS on the topic, and it did not paint a pretty picture of Canadian care.
So I sent a copy to the wife’s cousin who lives there, and also a close friend from Canada who has moved back there.
Both told me that there can be waits but said they didn’t recognize the problem as being quite so stark, at least in their area, as the video portrayed.
Which reminds me.

For many days now there have been horror stories about failed health care here in the UK. And I do not doubt what’s been written.  Even I have had an issue or two but NOTHING at all like the descriptions the papers are reporting on. At least not in the Winchester area. Now that’s just me personally.  There might be many out there who have had serious problem.  But I fear that Americans might be getting only one snapshot on which to base an opinion, if you read Brit newspaper reports. But then, you know, if it bleeds it leads.

What’s the Canadian word for ‘lousy care’?

Jeremy Clarkson
The Sunday Times
August 30, 2009

While I was away, there was a big debate about how Barack Obama might sort out America’s healthcare system, which, say the critics, is chronically awful and fantastically unfair.

It’s also bonkers. I was once denied treatment at a Detroit hospital because the receptionist’s computer refused to acknowledge that the United Kingdom existed. Even though I had a wad of cash, and a wallet full of credit cards, she was prepared to let me explode all over her desk because her stupid software only recognised addresses in the United States.

Some say America should follow Canada’s lead, where private care is effectively banned. But having experienced their procedures while on holiday in Quebec, I really don’t think that’s a good idea at all.

A friend’s 13-year-old son tripped while climbing off a speedboat and ripped his leg open. Things started well. The ambulance arrived promptly, the wound was bandaged and off he went in a big, exciting van.

Now, we are all used to a bit of a wait at the hospital. God knows, I’ve spent enough time in accident and emergency at Oxford’s John Radcliffe over the years, sitting with my sobbing children in a room full of people with swords in their eyes and their feet on back to front. But nothing can prepare you for the yawning chasm of time that passes in Canada before the healthcare system actually does any healthcare.

It didn’t seem desperately busy. One woman had lost her face somehow — probably a bear attack — and one kid appeared to have taken rather too much ecstasy, but there were no more than a dozen people in the waiting room. And no one was gouting arterial blood all over the walls.

After a couple of hours, I asked the receptionist how long it might be before a doctor came. In a Wal-Mart, it’s quite quaint to be served by a fat, gum-chewing teenager who claims not to understand what you’re saying, but in a hospital it’s annoying. Resisting the temptation to explain that the Marquis de Montcalm lost and that it’s time to get over it, I went back to the boy’s cubicle, which he was sharing with a young Muslim couple.

A doctor came in and said to them: “You’ve had a miscarriage,” and then turned to go. Understandably, the poor girl was very upset and asked if the doctor was sure.

“Look, we’ve done a scan and there’s nothing in there,” she said, in perhaps the worst example of a bedside manner I’ve ever seen.

“Is anyone coming to look at my son?” asked my friend politely. “Quoi?” said the haughty doctor, who had suddenly forgotten how to speak English. “Je ne comprends pas.” And with that, she was gone.

At midnight, a young man who had been brought up on a diet of American music, American movies and very obviously American food, arrived to say, in French, that the doctors were changing shift and a new one would be along as soon as possible.

By then, it was one in the morning and my legs were becoming weary. This is because the hospital had no chairs for relatives and friends. It’s not a lack of funds, plainly. Because they had enough money to paint a yellow line on the road nine yards from the front door, beyond which you were able to smoke.

And they also had the cash to employ an army of people to slam the door in your face if you poked your head into the inner sanctum to ask how much longer the wait might be. Sixteen hours is apparently the norm. Unless you want a scan. Then it’s 22 months.

At about 1.30am a doctor arrived. Boy, he was a piece of work. He couldn’t have been more rude if I’d been General Wolfe. He removed the bandages like they were the packaging on a disposable razor, looked at the wound, which was horrific, and said to my friend: “Is it cash or credit card?”

This seemed odd in a country with no private care, but it turns out they charge non-Canadians precisely what they would charge the government if the patient were Céline Dion. The bill was C$300 (about £170).

The doctor vanished, but he hadn’t bothered to reapply the boy’s bandages, which meant the little lad was left with nothing to look at except his own thigh bone. An hour later, the painkillers arrived.

What the doctor was doing in between was going to a desk and sitting down. I watched him do it. He would go into a cubicle, be rude, cause the patient a bit of pain and then sit down again on the hospital’s only chair.

Seven hours after the accident, in a country widely touted to be the safest and best in the world, he applied 16 stitches that couldn’t have been less neat if he’d done them on a battlefield, with twigs. And then the anaesthetist arrived to wake the boy up. In French. This didn’t work, so she went away to sit on the doctor’s chair because he was in another cubicle bring rude and causing pain to someone else.

Now, I appreciate that any doctor who ends up working the night shift at a provincial hospital in Nowheresville is unlikely to be at the top of his game, and you can’t judge a country’s healthcare on his piss-poor performance. And nor should all of Canada be judged on Quebec, which is full of idealistic, language-Nazi lunatics.

But I can say this. If private treatment had been allowed, my friend would have paid for it. He would have received better service and in doing so, allowed Dr Useless to get to the woman with no face or ecstasy boy more quickly. Though I suspect he would have used our absence to spend more time sitting down.

The other thing I can say is that Britain’s National Health Service is a monster that we can barely afford. But in all the times I’ve ever used the big, flawed giant, no one has ever pretended to be French, no one has spent more time swiping my credit card than ordering painkillers and there are many chairs.

SOURCE

Posted by peiper     on 08/30/2009 at 01:24 PM   
Filed Under: • Health-Medicine •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

HEALTH CARE.  UK vs USA.  UK free, even for those who CAN PAY. How nice.

I hadn’t intended to get into the health care thing at this point in the evening but I noticed some comments on the subject here and then there was this from the Mail this morning.

I think you will find it interesting because the reporter had been living in the states and works for the BBC.  I’m pretty sure you’ll see a flaw or two but what’s amazing really is, he doesn’t.

I do think there’s a real problem back home, nobody will say with certainty that our health care is perfect.  And much of his criticism with regard to ins. companies is I believe valid, as I know from personal experience. 
He seems to have a problem with the profit motive as if it’s somehow immoral.  He had the money, as one commenter points out in the comments section of The Mail, to have a nice vacation and then comes home to the UK and immediately wants his medical freebees for his son. I guess he’s entitled and if that’s so, and it appears to be the case, well.  Can’t argue with the guy.
But here ... you read it and give us your take.

NHS vs USA: The great healthcare face-off as seen by the BBC’s former man in Washington
By JUSTIN WEBB

We can prick Sam’s fingers for free. This, for me, is the true glory of the NHS. For the parents of a child with a life-threatening auto-immune disease - type 1 diabetes - the relentlessness of the task of keeping his blood sugar under control can be overwhelming. Doubly so when - on top of everything else - stony-faced pharmacists are telling you that you have used your allocation of test strips.
But that, until we left America to return to the UK this summer, was normal life.
‘I am not doing this for fun,’ I felt like yelling. ‘We got through a box of strips last night because we couldn’t get him under control. He is not bleeding on your precious strips for the hell of it.’

Sam himself, as a nine-year-old student of drama, used to be amused by our adult tantrums at American pharmacy counters.
But for us it was no joke. We had good insurance, which in theory guaranteed us any healthcare we needed with no questions asked. So the initial hospital bills when Sam was diagnosed - thousands of dollars’ worth - were eventually paid.

But there’s small print. And in the small print there are annual limits on expenditure and constant payments that the ill person needs to make before any service is provided. If you need a weekly supply of drugs and kit, as Sam does, you have what amounts to a constant battle to get it.
So we were in combat with the organisation that, in theory, was looking after our son’s health. The view of the insurance company was that Sam was a nuisance. A perfectly healthy little fellow, who cost them no more than the odd flu shot, suddenly became a major expense. And, as in any other business, expenses are to be minimised.

So when our eight years in America came to an end this summer, our final holiday in California had to begin with a call to the insurance company. May we please - pretty please - have extra supplies of the insulin that keeps Sam alive and the testing paraphernalia that goes with it?
We were going to be on the road for a few weeks and then return to the UK. All right, came the answer, after a morning on the phone. But we were made to feel really rather lucky. ‘Just this once’, was the unspoken warning.

California was stunning. Big Sur, Lake Tahoe, Los Angeles: there is no finer place on Earth. So when we flew from San Francisco to start our new life in South London, we were not exactly throwing our hats in the air.
Until the news about the test strips. For despite reports this week that the NHS is so underfunded that women are giving birth in hospital corridors, the situation is not all grim.
Presenting ourselves at the local NHS GP clinic we signed on and explained Sam’s condition. Not an eyebrow was raised. Prescriptions were written there and then.
‘Have what you need.’ Those were the words the doctor used. I will remember them for ever. We can prick Sam’s fingers as often as we deem it to be necessary. We are free of the tyranny of the insurance company.

And this is not profligacy, either - better control of diabetes (any type of diabetes) reduces the complications that maim and cost huge sums to treat - so the NHS, by encouraging Sam to test his blood often, is doing him and future taxpayers a favour.
Rule Britannia. And yet ... There is another side to the American healthcare system that any fair-minded assessment must include. Mine certainly should because Sam benefits from it every day.

AN AMERICAN HEALTH BENEFIT

Boon: Sam Webb kayaking this summer while wearing his insulin pump, only available in the U.S.
There is a company based in New England that makes his life a million times more enjoyable than it would otherwise be. The company makes a special kind of insulin pump that has no tubes. Sam forgets it is there. In California he went kayaking with it on.
Guys, as the Americans would say, this company is not a charity. It is run for profit. In fact, I saw it tipped recently as a smart move for investors playing the markets.
In other words, the same profit motive that is such an upsetting part of the insurance industry (those bloody test strips) leads to innovation that, in the UK, just does not exist.
I rang the boss of the company and asked him about the chance of a UK launch. Zero. No money to be made here.
The NHS spends its money on test strips and basic care. Fancy American pumps are out. In fact, pumps of any kind are out for many British children. Injections are cheaper.
So to spell it out: the British system provides the basic care and does it with no fuss and no cost to the hard-pressed family. Having a child with type 1 diabetes will make you sadder, perhaps wiser, but it will not make you poorer. And, medically, Sam is as well looked after here as he would be in any fancy American hospital.

But American technology and zest for lifestyle improvements in the area of diabetes, as in every other area of human endeavour (a zest born out of zest for profit), add something to Sam’s life. That something is denied to those who depend wholly on the NHS.
So the argument goes on and as a family who have lived with both systems we can only say that we are grateful to the doctors and nurses on both sides of the Atlantic who devote their efforts to making Sam - and hundreds of thousands of other children with type 1 diabetes - healthier and happier than they could otherwise be.

When I went to the White House earlier this year for Barack Obama’s first interview with a British broadcaster, we talked while the cameras were being set up. Not about the Middle East, which was the big topic of the moment, or the world economy, or even the whereabouts of the bust of Winston Churchill that used to sit in the Oval Office.

We talked instead about type 1 diabetes. Mr Obama has friends whose children suffer from it. He was knowledgeable and sympathetic. He wrote a note to Sam and to his sisters, Martha and Clara. ‘Dream big dreams,’ he wrote.
His dream for America’s health service is that it resembles the NHS when it comes to fairness. Test strips for all who need them.
But he claims as well that the best of the American system - the innovation and the choices available to well-insured Americans - will not be put in jeopardy.
Is that a realistic dream? This is the question at the heart of America’s debate.

MAIL on SUNDAY

Here are just a couple of Sunday Mail replies.

Posted by peiper     on 08/30/2009 at 12:40 PM   
Filed Under: • Health-Medicine •  
• Comments (5) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Friday - August 21, 2009

crowder time

I’d call this a small step in the right direction. When I see my Senators burning the health “reform” bill on the steps of the Capitol, then I’ll celebrate.

Posted by Drew458     on 08/21/2009 at 05:58 PM   
Filed Under: • Health-Medicine • Humor •  
• Comments (2) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Thursday - August 20, 2009

It has to be worth a try

Liberal Lies About National Health Care: First In a Series
by Ann Coulter
08/19/2009

(1) National health care will punish the insurance companies.

You want to punish insurance companies? Make them compete.

a federal law allows states to ban interstate commerce in health insurance

It’s the famous liberal two-step: First screw something up, then claim that it’s screwed up because there’s not enough government oversight (it’s the free market run wild!), and then step in and really screw it up in the name of “reform.”

You could fix 90 percent of the problems with health insurance by ending the federal law allowing states to ban health insurance sales across state lines.

Ok, one downside to this idea might be that every insurance company doing business in a state will need to have claims adjusters/inspectors in that state - hey, wait a minute, that’s home and car insurance. Thanks to HIPPA, for health insurance all we have to do is fill out the same forms and submit them. Never mind. But you would have to have a big meeting of all the insurance companies from all the states so that they could all get on the same page and all use the same insurance codes. Ok, that ought to take about a week I’d think. The codes are just numbers, no big deal. So who really cares if “123” or “8611” means “removed paperclip from kid’s ear”? But, as anyone in the health provider industry knows, there are a huge number of insurance codes.

The cost to the government of opening up the market is just about nothing. The cost would be born by the insurance companies. But they could easily eat it, because they would all be able to expand their business areas 50 times over, and that means an opportunity for millions more customers. That kind of gain is worth the investment.

So I agree with her. As long as certain standards are kept, then let the free market solve this “crisis”. And setting basic minimal standards is all the legitimate involvement that any level of government has, MAYBE, in the insurance industry. And it is very easy to argue that no government has any business being involved AT ALL.

But read her essay. She has more solutions, and points out more lies from the left. Which everyone else is doing, along with flaws in the bill. Here is yet another news source/blog that points some of those flaws out:

Note that this list only extends to page 498, and the bill is over 1000 pages.

Pg 22 of the Health Care Bill mandates that the Govt. will audit the books of all employers that self insure

Pg 30 Sec 123 of HC bill - Establishes a Govt. committee that decides what treatments/benefits you get

Pg 29 lines 4-16 - Rationing of health care

Pg 42 - The Health Choices Commissioner will choose your benefits for you. You have no choice

PG 50 Section 152 - Health Care will be provided to all non US citizens, illegal or otherwise

Pg 58 - Govt. will have real-time access to individuals’ finances & a National ID Health card will be issued

Pg 59 lines 21-24 - Govt. will have direct access to your bank accounts for elective funds transfer

PG 65 Sec 164 - This is a payoff subsidized plan for retirees and their families in community orgs (ACORN).

Pg 72 Lines 8-14 - Govt. is creating an Health Care Exchange to bring private plans under Govt. control.

PG 84 Sec 203 - Govt. mandates all benefit pkgs. for private plans be in the Govt. health care exchange
...
PG 425 Lines 22-25, 426 Lines 1-3 - Govt. provides approved list of end of life resources, guiding you in death

PG 427 Lines 15-24 - Govt. mandates program for orders for end of life. The Govt. has a say in how your life ends
...
PG 429 Lines 10-12 “Advance care consultation” may include an order for end of life plans.

Pg 429 Lines 13-25 - The Govt. will specify which Doctors can write an end of life order.

PG 430 Lines 11-15 - The Govt. will decide what level of treatment you will have at end of life

[gosh, no Death Panel at all in the last 5 listed items! Stupid Palin!]

These lists go on an on. And they are everywhere. Maybe, just maybe, people are waking up to the awareness that Hillary Care II / ObamaCare is a totalitarian takeover. And it must not pass.

Posted by Drew458     on 08/20/2009 at 10:52 AM   
Filed Under: • Health and Safety • Health-Medicine •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Wednesday - August 19, 2009

Family told by NHS: Alzheimer’s is not a ‘health condition’ Nah … it’s a stroll in the park

How’s that for bizarre? 

Longer I am here, the scareder I get. I can’t think of anything to say and so I’ll simply share this loony tune while my computer is still running. For now.

Hey, anybody know what a puter is telling us when we get a blue screen with white lettering and a statement saying that if this is the first time you’ve seen this restart or if it’s happened before ,,, and a whole bunch of instructions I can’t follow and am doing nothing about. But I can hear my fan at times. Like now.

Family told by NHS: Alzheimer’s is not a ‘health condition’
A family has won £130,000 from an NHS trust after it refused to pay for their mother’s care fees, claiming her Alzheimer’s was not a health issue.

By Nick Britten

NHS Worcestershire ruled that Judith Roe, 74, did not qualify for NHS funding because her condition was a “social” rather than “health” problem, even though she was so ill she could not make a cup of tea and regularly left the stove on.

She was forced to sell her £200,000 home to pay her £600-a-week nursing home fees, which would have been funded if she had been categorised correctly.

Mrs Roe’s family appealed to the Health Service Ombudsman, which ruled that Mrs Roe’s assessment had been incorrect and her treatment should have been funded by the NHS. NHS Worcestershire has now reimbursed them for six years of care.

Her son, Richard, 40, urged other families in a similar situation to fight for the care they are entitled to.

He said: “The way the health trust behaved was scandalous. It has been very stressful.

“All the time we were told we were wrong while believing we were right.

“They told me I should count myself lucky because there are people that are more ill than my mother, which was an outrageous thing to say.

“I want anyone else going through a similar experience to know they may be entitled to care. Even if they’re being told they’re not entitled, they should fight for it.

“With us, they made a mistake. They did not carry out their duties properly.”

Mrs Roe, a retired church warden and school teacher, was diagnosed in 2002 with severe Alzheimer’s and Parkinsons.

Under English law, elderly people must pay for their own residential care unless their needs are deemed health-related.

She was assessed but her needs were regarded to be social rather than health, meaning she did not qualify for funding.

In August 2003 her family paid for a social worker to visit her twice a day and in 2004 she moved into a nursing home because she was too ill to stay at home.

In 2007 she was moved into another home because her condition had deteriorated.

Despite being bedridden and requiring round-the-clock care, NHS Worcestershire PCT refused to pay a penny towards her fees.

Throughout this time Mr Roe wrote dozens of letters to the PCT asking them to re-assess his mother.

He said: “I wanted to know just how ill my mother had to be before her condition was deemed a health issue.

“The NHS doesn’t want to admit elderly people have health issues because then it falls to them to pay for their care.”

He added: “We made the difficult decision to sell her home because we were under the assumption that older people sell their houses to pay for care.

“It was only when we started to look at funding and ask the PCT what funding was available that we realised that she shouldn’t have had to self-fund.”

Finally, in May 2008, on the recommendation of the Ombudsman, two social workers from the PCT assessed Judith and agreed she qualified for continuing care and paid for her fees at the home until she died in October.

However, the Health Services Ombudsman said she should have had continuing care from 2002 and NHS Worcestershire agreed to pay.

He said: “It should never have got to the point where I had to write to the Ombudsman.

“The PCT did not follow the correct procedures and as a result we had to sell the family home and use her savings for care which should have been funded by the NHS.

“We became very angry because the primary care trust was very arrogant and unhelpful.”

Paul Bates, chief executive of NHS Worcestershire, said: “Decisions around eligibility for continuing NHS care are extremely complex and difficult even though we have national guidance to assist us.

“The line between the need for healthcare and social care is a very thin one indeed, but the impact for the individual is the difference between free care and care which is means tested.

“We would not wish to see Mr Roe’s experience repeated and there are clearly lessons for us to learn.”

Each NHS trust has its own criteria for interpreting the Government’s guidelines on who qualifies for free nursing care.

Andrew Harrop, Head of Policy for Age Concern and Help the Aged, said: “The system for deciding where the line is drawn between free NHS Continuing Care, and paid for social care has been a mess for years.

“We are still very concerned that older people may wrongly be forced to pay for their care when it should be free.

“We strongly encourage anyone who believes they are unfairly missing out on NHS support to fight for their rights.”

The Health Service Ombudsman concluded 53 cases of continuing care last year having investigated them. 75 per cent of cases were either fully upheld or partly upheld.

A spokesman refused to comment on the case, other than to say its role is to assess whether the strategic health authority’s decision was based on following correct procedure, rather than the need of the patient.

In 2006, a government review revealed that one in five elderly people were being wrongfully denied free care.

SOURCE

UPDATE

Three families looking after relatives with Alzheimer’s have been awarded more than £300,000 after the NHS refused to pay for their care costs.

REVU PLUS UPDATE

Posted by peiper     on 08/19/2009 at 09:27 AM   
Filed Under: • Health-Medicine • UK •  
• Comments (0) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Monday - August 17, 2009

Socialized Health Care: A Ex-Pat’s Russian Perspective

Our new Moscow correspondent JA gives his views on Obamacare. JA is a diabetic, living in Moscow and working as a teacher.

Just how in hell I ended up in Russia, I really do not know, maybe the pretty girls, maybe the good Russia beer (pivo), I think the biggest reason is that Russia is a country closed off to the outside world so long for so many people.  Maybe I think of Russia as a land of contradictions, a church built in the 1400s with a Hummer limo parked in from waiting for the newly weds to come out from the church.  I like to think maybe I’m helping Ronald Reagan put the final nail in the coffin of Russian communism by coming here and teaching business to adults and American history (not the white washed political correct history taught in US schools today) to school children.

Since I’m a legal resident of Russia and pay Russian taxes and qualify for the socialized Russian health care, so I can share my experience with it.  Its good in that Russian medical health care is big on preventive measures.  I can go to a hospital for two weeks, twice a year for free and have tests done, laser and ultra sound treatments to my legs, my blood cleaned of cholesterol by IV, but and this is what the democrats forget to tell people in the US, everything is free as long as there is a supply of medicines, if they run out that’s it.  If you want to continue treatments, you have to do to a drug store and buy the medicines and IVs yourself.  If you’re able to go to a drug store in Moscow or have family who can pick up the medicine to you, no problem.  If you’re too sick to leave and have nobody who can buy and bring the medicine to you, then your SOL.  Also expensive medicines are not provided free, you have to buy them, I’m fixing to start treatments on weak bones and have to buy an IV I need to take every year, this IV costs around $700 per pop.  If you can not afford it, you do without.

I can get free insulin and test strips, but no where close to what I need, only a little.  Now this can be because I’m not a Russian citizen, but it could apply to Russians also.  I have to get up at 4:00 am on the day they give out the free medicines so I can get in line before they run out.  To be honest, I have never heard of them running out before, but the lines stretch for a couple of city blocks, they start at a certain time and stop at a certain time, if your not waited on by closing, you come back another day.  Most public hospitals here are not very good, there are a few good public hospitals here, but not many.  I can buy medical insurance here for $15.00 per month verses $400 plus per month in the US.  My insurance allows me to go to a private clinic and private hospital if needed, but my contacts have fixed it where I can go to one of the better public hospitals here.  But the fact of the matter is that private health care is the best and there is no way the public socialized health care here can compare. Private hospitals, doctors and clinics are big business here now.  It will be the exact same thing in the US, Obama does not bother telling people that. 

But what I have against Obama’s so-called health care is that it will destroy the finest health care in the world.  No, I am not rich, was out of work awhile and did have to go to the doctor a few time back home.  I was never turned away or refused treatment, but Obama’s health care will ration health care because like here in Russia, Canada and the UK, there just is not enough to go around.  Instead of trying to place everybody under the same system, he should set it up where only those who can not afford medical coverage (I’m not talking about lazy people who sit on their tails waiting for more handouts), but people with chronic illnesses or serious illnesses that medical insurance companies would rather not cover, these people could be place under something like medicare or medicaid.  But you think about it, you think Obama, Howard Dean and the rest of teh big shot democrats and their families will have to go through Obama’s so-called health care, no way, they will have their highly paid specialists and only the best while everybody else gets nothing and they know it!

Posted by Drew458     on 08/17/2009 at 04:59 PM   
Filed Under: • Health-Medicine •  
• Comments (0) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Thursday - August 13, 2009

THE FIGHT OVER HEALTH CARE IN AMERICA.  THE NEW UNCIVIL WAR?

I try to be scrupulous with regard to my postings and not do the same thing at BMEWS, as I do over at Vilmar’s blog.  I think there’s so much out there, that there’s enough to cover a dozen blog sites and do a hard copy newsletter as well. ( which I don’t) You know that from the headlines in your local papers come to think of it.
In fact, often times I will present something that happens here, and some of you write and say not to feel like the Lone Ranger and give examples of lunacy at home too. 

Well gang, this is one of those times I have to post the same thing at both places because I’ve been listening to the radio and reading the papers with reports from America on health care.  I’ve been hearing things and thinking about what I’ve been listening to and wanted to express my feelings but mostly all of you have been doing that for me.  Until last night and again this morning.

Last night I heard a radio report on the fight over health care in the USA.  Both sides were being interviewed by reporters over there. AND ... they broadcast here what you folks have been hearing and seeing on the media in the USA.  But when I read a piece in the morning paper by one of their ppl, I just had to write something no matter how awkward to say hey, wait a minute. And so I was going to post the article with a brief intro from me. But I ended up writing a lot more then I expected to, and honestly feel the need to share it with BMEWS as well.

AMERICANS ARE BETTER OFF WITHOUT AN NHS

That’s the headline in our morning paper on the comments page by one of their reporters who is covering the heated and it seems vitriolic argument on the subject back home.
He makes some good points I believe, and especially with this as his closing paragraph.

Americans are much less tolerant than Britons of being told what to do. Although most do not like the health system, they view the alternatives with alarm. Ultimately, the Right’s overheated rhetoric about the NHS might damage a perfectly valid case against a partial state takeover of health care that could limit choice, stifle innovation – and still do little to tackle costs.

Wow, what an explosive issue this has become.  As I have mentioned
in the past, things that happen in America, and not just crime stats, get a lot of coverage in the UK.  Lately, our health care issue is making the news because of reports in the states that have used the NHS here, as an example of things that do not work.  Well guys, I live here. I have been in hosp. I have had to have tests for possible cancers. I hate to tell ya but the care I got the one night and a day stay in a Brit hosp. FAR exceeded the care I ever got back home in Riverside,CA. on a personal level.  I’m referring to the hospital staff, nurses etc. 

I have issues with some things to be certain, on a doctor patient level.  Hell I can think of other things as well that may or may not be due to NHS, that we do far better in the states.  I think the result of one test I had was false but that was due I think to an individual rather the the system itself.  Now then, I could be wrong about that.  I did get the feeling in one case that they were using a one size fits all method with regard to my case.

I am not mounting a soapbox in favor of NHS for America, so please do not mis-understand.  But from what I have heard here on the radio where they are broadcasting American commercials about How Things Are In The UK, well.  There’s a bit of exaggeration I can tell ya and the thing of it is, ppl at home with zero experience of things here listen and believe it. And I think that is wrong.

One other thing I should say. Re. the Stephen Hawking thing in IBD.
Or maybe Hawking said it as well.  Fact is ... although he may have needed NHS to survive in his early years, and survive he did with NHS, just what the heck is he still doing on it?  This guy now has oodles of money.  He should surely not be on NHS today. 

I believe further that NHS is paying for things they shouldn’t pay for, but I suppose that once things become entrenched they tend to stay that way.  The old expression, “there’s nothing new” or “nothing ever changes” comes to mind.

Nothing makes me angrier then hearing some would be expert on my country spouting off on “how things are there” (meaning USA) when they’ve spent little or no time in the states.  Or got their info from a cousin whose friend’s friend just came back from the states.
Well, I imagine there might be a few Brits who are shaking their collective heads at what some of our people are claiming about the NHS .  It isn’t perfect by any means.  It can be very wasteful as well.  But it works for these ppl. Sure it does.  The population is what?  Some 60 or so million? And America is .... ?  And those long wait times you are reading and hearing about are not exactly true as presented.  Sure, there’s always some truth to build a case around. But must we sacrifice accuracy? 

It is far too easy to get on the welfare and NHS rolls here.  The left is great at that.  And the left has been in power since ‘97.

I am not saying it can’t be overhauled or improved. And hell, maybe it can’t.  But I really do wish that if my people on the right and heaven knows I am on the right of things, I wish they wouldn’t use the NHS here as the example in the the manner they do.
Because they are NOT telling the whole story. Or at least, they aren’t being wholly accurate in what they do convey.
And that only shoots ourselves in the foot.

I’ve had my say, I guess now I’ll stand by for the flames.

Posted by peiper     on 08/13/2009 at 08:45 AM   
Filed Under: • Health-Medicine •  
• Comments (5) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Monday - August 10, 2009

Funny how things work out. For example:  Only yesterday Drew made the following comment ….

“I gather the Brits need tremendous sexual stimulus just to make it through the news. And I have noticed, over time, that they seem to have some rather different standards than we do over here.” Drew

This morning my eyes fell on this article.  It’s funny, I guess.  Um ,,, maybe not if you’re a Brit.

I’m gonna file this under humor anyway. 

Brits too lazy to have sex, let alone run for a bus

By Fiona Macrae
Last updated at 10:08 AM on 10th August 2009

We’re too tired to play with our children, balk at the idea of climbing two flights of stairs and regularly choose sleep over sex, according to a report which lays bare the full extent of ‘couch potato Britain’.

A third of Britons are so lazy that they wouldn’t run to catch a bus, it is claimed.

And almost two out of three are so unfit they won’t countenance walking up two flights of stairs and will opt to take the lift instead.

Once at home, one in six say that if the remote control was broken, they would prefer to watch a TV programme they didn’t like rather than get up to change the channel, according to a study.

The poll, carried out on behalf of private healthcare chain Nuffield Health, also found that lazy lifestyles are having a devastating effect on our sex lives.

Three-quarters of couples surveyed admitted to having trouble mustering enough energy at the end of the day for a night of passion with their partner.

More than half (58 per cent) of those blamed their barren sex lives on a lack of fitness.

Children are also suffering, with two-thirds of parents questioned owning up to regularly being too tired to play with their youngsters.

The study of 2,000 adults concludes that it is no wonder one in six children are classified as obese before they even start school.

Even the health of our pets is at risk. Despite our reputation as a nation of dog-lovers, half of the owners questioned saying they often can’t be bothered to take their dog for a walk. Sarah Dauncey, medical director at Nuffield Health, urged Britons to get off their sofas and shape-up.

She said: ‘Ready-meals, remote controls and even internet shopping are all contributing to a dangerously lazy and idle Britain.

‘People need to get fitter, not just for their own sake, but for the sake of their families, friends, and evidently their pets, too. If we don’t start to take control of this problem, a whole generation will become too unfit to perform even the most rudimentary of tasks.’

A sedentary lifestyle raises the risk of a host of health problems, including heart disease, obesity, joint problems, some cancers and type 2 diabetes.

Dr Dauncey said: ‘There are two million Britons with mature-onset diabetes, many because of their lifestyle and lack of exercise.

‘But it is a vicious circle. Sometimes because you are unfit you feel tired and so you don’t exercise and you become more unfit and lethargic.

‘No one is saying that everyone has to run a marathon. You can set aside 25 to 30 minutes three or four times week to do simple things such as walking, cycling or running. It doesn’t have to take hours and hours.

‘If you have tried and failed before, a fitness centre might provide the motivation you need.’

The survey revealed Glasgow to be Britain’s most slothful city, with 75 per cent of people admitting they don’t get enough exercise, followed by Birmingham and Southampton in joint second place with 67 per cent admitting their laziness. Bristol came in third, with London, Leeds, Newcastle, Norwich, Manchester and Cardiff making up the rest of the top 10.

A previous study by the healthcare chain found that one in 12 British adults is so overweight that they could qualify for obesity surgery.

Doctors blamed chubby celebrities for adding to the obesity crisis by showing that it is possible to be fat and famous.

SOURCE

Posted by peiper     on 08/10/2009 at 10:09 AM   
Filed Under: • Health-Medicine • Humor • Love-Marriage • Sex • UK •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Friday - July 31, 2009

Is it okay to help someone whose life has become unendurable, to end it all at their choosing?

This topic has raised a number of comments.

Here in the UK, a number of ppl have made the trip to Switzerland to help loved ones end it. Strictly speaking, that is against the law here. BUT, nobody has been prosecuted so far for assisting or enabling suicide.  The thinking is I suppose, that a jury would not convict in that circumstance. 

One problem I have with some opponents, is that many are churchmen and are speaking from a religious point of view.  That’s okay when they are trying to influence their own flock.  But I surely do not want them making a decision in law, based on their religious beliefs, that will eventually affect me.  I have a real problem with that.  I don’t want them minding my business along with theirs.

A bill has already been shot down here only last week. Or was it the beginning of this week?  That had to do with this subject. 
I’ve heard pointless debates on radio here with some pie in the sky dreamers talking about improved palliative care.  Yeah. Easy for them to preach. None are in a state of painful ill health wishing it could be over.

Then there’s the scare about how greedy people will talk old and sick relatives into killing themselves so they can make off with the family jewels a bit earlier.
Thing of it is, people that mean and that rotten are gonna do it anyway. 
There are folks being murdered in the streets here every day.  Youth gangs are everywhere and not just in the inner cities.  They’re stealing life from those who had years of healthy life ahead of them.  But the focus on assisted suicide always seems to run to the what if scenario re. doing away with the elderly and ill for gain.

Another thing to note.  I don’t agree with this feel right about it theory that it’s only okay if the person wanting a final exit, has reached a point where they only have months to go anyway.  Why should any very sick person be required to wait that long?  The lady in this particular case hasn’t asked (yet) for a change in law.  Not exactly that.  She quite rightly wants clarification on the penalty with regard to the person who might help her end it by traveling overseas with her.
As others have done.  There is a downside however to what she has done this day. In an editorial, here in part is what The telegraph has to say.
And they are quite right I think.

In reality, it is unlikely that the authorities would ever sanction a prosecution in such a case. A total of 115 British citizens are known to have ended their lives in the Dignitas clinic, yet there have been no prosecutions. The law’s very ambiguity has allowed this to happen. That ambiguity is now to be removed. And far from making assisted suicide easier, as
Miss Purdy and her supporters maintain, it could make it more legally fraught. For Parliament made clear this month that it does not want the law
changed, and the law says that aiding or abetting suicide is a crime.

Debbie Purdy case: MP David Winnick pledges to launch Bill calling for assisted suicide to be legalised in UK
An MP has begun a bid to legalise assisted suicide in Britain a day after Debbie Purdy won the right to have the law clarified.

By Martin Beckford, Social Affairs Correspondent
Published: 2:10PM BST 31 Jul 2009

A Bill is being proposed that would allow terminally ill people to end their lives with the help of loved ones in their home country, rather than having to travel to “suicide clinics” overseas.

It comes after five Law Lords ruled in the case of Ms Purdy, who has multiple sclerosis, that the Director of Public Prosecutions must state exactly when prosecutions would be launched against those who accompany people to commit suicide abroad.

Although aiding and abetting suicide remains a crime punishable by up to 14 years’ imprisonment, none of the Britons who have helped terminally ill people die at clinics such as Dignitas in Switzerland has been prosecuted.

David Winnick, the Labour MP for Walsall North, said: “The question arises from yesterday’s decision – should we recognise cases such as Debbie Purdy, should we change the law, should people have to go abroad?

“I’m not saying for a moment ‘let’s try and encourage people to die’ but if a person with a terminal illness does reach such a conclusion, that they don’t want to go on, and want assisted dying such a facility should exist.

“If the law was changed we would need to have absolute safeguards against abuse and to give the person who has made such a decision every opportunity to change their minds and to make it clear it would be limited to those suffering from terminal illness.”

He said the issue needs to be “debated thoroughly” in Parliament and will put forward a Private Members’ Bill suggesting “a measure whereby assisted dying could take place in this country”.

The proposal would be entered into a ballot in the autumn, along with an estimated 300 others, and a handful will be given some time for debate in the Commons.

Even if it were one of the few chosen, there may not be time for it to be voted on as the Government decides the timetable for legislation.

In addition, the forthcoming Parliament will be shorter than most as it must be dissolved in time for a general election by June at the latest.

However, even as a symbolic gesture it shows the determination of MPs to keep up public debate on the controversial issue of assisted suicide.

Just weeks ago Lord Falconer, the Lord Chancellor under Tony Blair, made a failed attempt to change the law on travel to Dignitas in the House of Lords.

SOURCE AND MORE

Posted by peiper     on 07/31/2009 at 11:33 AM   
Filed Under: • Health-Medicine • Miscellaneous • Scary Stuff • UK •  
• Comments (8) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Wednesday - July 29, 2009

ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF THE NANNY STATE MAKING DECISIONS FOR US. FOR OUR OWN GOOD OF COURSE.

And likely it’s also for the kiddies.

It bothers me not just because they (govt.) are taking away individual decision making. Not that alone.
It also bugs me because I can’t understand why people with more education( then what I got), can not figure out that folks who want it will simply double up and buy more.  Why can’t they see that?

They want the size of soda cans made smaller and candy bars to be cut from the present 57 or 58g, to 50g.  Will that 7g make that much difference? And will the candy makers drop their prices?  Uh huh.

Something else that is really bizarre. In an unscientific poll on the Daily Mail site, 22% of ppl think that the govt. is right.  Twenty Two percent of those polled would prefer to allow someone else to be responsible for their thinking.  Not a very good sign.

Chocolate bars could be made smaller to help fight obesity

By Sophie Borland
Last updated at 11:32 AM on 29th July 2009

Chocolate bars could be cut in size to help fight the obesity epidemic.

The Food Standards Agency wants the average bar to be reduced by up to a fifth to reduce daily calorie intake.

It has drawn up plans for confectioners to make voluntary changes to the size of their snacks.

By 2012 the watchdog wants all confectionary to weigh no more than 50g - currently Mars bars are 58g and Bounty bars 57g.

Manufacturers have also been asked to sell bite-size bars as single items rather than as part of multibags.

They will be discouraged from promoting large supersize items - such as the Maltesers ‘Big Bag’ and - Mars ‘Duo’ - and instead encouraged to offer healthier snacks as alternatives .

By 2050 up to 60 per cent of Britons will be obese and the cost to the National Health Service estimated to reach more than £8.4 billion.

The plans, drawn up in an FSA consultation, also propose that within six years, fizzy drinks should be sold in 250 ml containers instead of standard 330ml for most brands.

They propose that drinks’ ‘added sugar’ levels are reduced by 4 per cent within three years in the hope that consumers will be gradually weaned off very sweet beverages without noticing the lower sugar content.

Gill Fine, from the FSA said: ‘We are not telling people what to eat. We want to make it easier for people to make healthier choices — to choose foods with reduced saturated fat and sugar — or smaller portion sizes.’

‘We are committed to working in partnership with Government and its agency to help consumers eat more healthily - and reformulation is just one of the ways in which we will continue to make a real difference.’

FOR MORE

‘We are committed to working in partnership with Government and its agency to help consumers eat more healthily

What they’re committed to is playing health bully. 

Posted by peiper     on 07/29/2009 at 10:04 AM   
Filed Under: • Daily Life • Health and Safety • Health-Medicine • Nanny State • UK •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

DISCLAIMER

THE SERVICES AND MATERIALS ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE HOSTS OF THIS SITE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICE OR ANY MATERIALS.

Not that very many people ever read this far down, but this blog was the creation of Allan Kelly and his friend Vilmar. Vilmar moved on to his own blog some time ago, and Allan ran this place alone until his sudden and unexpected death partway through 2006. We all miss him. A lot. Even though he is gone this site will always still be more than a little bit his. We who are left to carry on the BMEWS tradition owe him a great debt of gratitude, and we hope to be able to pay that back by following his last advice to us all:

1. Keep a firm grasp of Right and Wrong
2. Stay involved with government on every level and don't let those bastards get away with a thing
3. Use every legal means to defend yourself in the event of real internal trouble, and, most importantly:
4. Keep talking to each other, whether here or elsewhere

It's been a long strange trip without you Skipper, but thanks for pointing us in the right direction and giving us a swift kick in the behind to get us going. Keep lookin' down on us, will ya? Thanks.

THE INFORMATION AND OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS WEBSITE ARE DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THIS WEBSITE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL PARTIES IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ACCESSED BY PERSONS FROM THAT COUNTRY AND ANY PERSONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLESS THEY CAN SATISFY US THAT SUCH USE WOULD BE LAWFUL.

Copyright © 2004-2015 Domain Owner