More bloody nagging…
In particular, the report emphasises the importance of the four main lifestyle risk factors – diet, physical activity, alcohol and tobacco.
They just won’t let up, will they? look, these matters are for the individual to decide. If the GP identifies a health problem that may be adversely affected by one or more of these factors, then, yes, discuss them with the patient. Leave the rest of us alone.
For example, it suggests that collecting medication from a pharmacy is a chance to offer help on cutting down on alcohol, or that a routine dental check-up could be used to discuss smoking.
No, I do not want the pharmacist nagging me about alcohol or the dentist hectoring me about smoking. I want both of them to do the job I pay them for and nothing else.
The coalition government has accepted the forum’s recommendations.
Which just goes to demonstrate that they are no better than the last lot.
Health Secretary Andrew Lansley said: “The NHS Future Forum has again provided invaluable feedback and advice on what the NHS needs to do to improve results and put the NHS truly on the side of patients.”
You will be assimilated, resistance is futile.
However Dr Clare Gerada, of the Royal College of GPs, says raising lifestyle risks routinely with patients, even if they are unrelated to their illness, could be counter-productive.
Dr Gerada is right on the money. It will be counter productive. People in general don’t take kindly to being lectured and having people poke about in their personal lifestyle choices.
When, I wonder, will the NHS start nagging people who come in with sports related injuries. Must cut down on the footie or the rugger, bad for your health, donchaknow?
Cut down on sports.
Cut down on having babies when you’re too young.
Cut down on having babies when you’re too old.
Cut down on having babies.
Cut down on illegal drugs.
Cut down on telling us to be obedient little servants of the State
And all that unprotected anal intercourse must create a bit of additional risk, eh? But they won’t tell you that.
The oddest idea was put forward by a Radio 4 interviewee this morning, who suggested that dentists could be involved in discussing ‘sexual health’ with teenagers who attend check-ups – this being the only point of contact some young people have with the NHS.
There’s a key note of the article which in my view demonstrates both how dangerous statistics are and how limited thinking is used to justify some decisions.
“The report points out that each day in England GPs and practice nurses see over 800,000 people, dentists see over 250,000 NHS patients, and 1.6 million people visit a pharmacy”
That may be true, but what proportion of the population see thier doctors regularly? The “sick” part of the population will be in the doctors and pharmacy regularly. There are a few million long term sick who will always be going too.
But I’ve personally only seen my own doctor twice in the last eleven years. I havn’t been to the dentist for some 20 years ever since my last dentist stopped seeing all his NHS patients following a rule change to the NHS payments.
I would contend that the statistic – although impressive sounding – is actually what is commonly known in statistical research circles as “irrelevant bollocks”. They use it to sound like it will make a huge difference, but a vast proportion of the public will never hear it as they aren’t in the doctors very often. Of those who go, many of them will probably tell any busybodying doctor to just fuck off.
Still… the jobs for the “experts” who sit on these pointless advisory groups will be safe. Job done I’d say.
“The oddest idea was put forward by a Radio 4 interviewee this morning, who suggested that dentists could be involved in discussing ‘sexual health’ with teenagers who attend check-ups…”
Brings a whole new meaning to ‘Now rinse and spit’, doesn’t it..? 😆
*Retch*…thanks Julia…gag-reflex nicely activated there.
My dentist (fabulous bloke and brilliant at his job) is one of the campest, effeminate blokes I’ve ever met and has a huge portrait of his wife and two children on the wall. I can’t stop the word “beard” popping into my head every time I look at it. I really didn’t need another inappropriate sexual thought about him to dwell on 😆
@Julia – I find your comment hard to swallow.
(IGMC)
“When, I wonder, will the NHS start nagging people who come in with sports related injuries. Must cut down on the footie or the rugger, bad for your health, donchaknow?”
As soon as they’re finished with their current targets I’d imagine.
And I’d guess, instead of outright saying you should do less sport, they’ll push for everyone to only attend state run sports events (for your safety, of course).
Then they’d want to license anyone running any sort of sport (again, for your safety).
And finally they’d tell the license holders “you’re working for the state, or going to prison…”
The whole thing would be similar to the current attack on smokers/drinkers/etc, done gradually over 10-20 years, and continue regardless of who’s running the country.
And of course the BBC would act as the willing mouthpiece for it all. The news would feature an ongoing propaganda campaign (like the current one)… with completely fabricated and heavily manipulated statistics (like they’re doing currently)… which if people actually paid attention to, would be immediately obvious as laughable (sadly, like very few are doing)…
“Sporting injuries cost the NHS £Xbn per year”
“33% of deaths of those under the age of 40 are due to poorly managed sports meetings”
“Up to 50% of unlicensed sports instructors abuse the children left in their trust”
Etc…
And then all the above will be repeated for their next set of targets until we all just mindlessly do what they say.
Do you smoke?
No
Do you drink?
No.
Do you eat take away food?
No.
Simples!
More deliberate lies.
We KNOW the “Safe” alchohol” limits are nothing of the sort – they are a lie.
So this is a lie built on a lie.
Rather like the way no dissent against the olympics can ever be allowed into the public domain.
Stalin & Dr Goebbels would both have approved.
What is this “democracy” anyway?
Damn! Mjolinir got there before me. Breeding just has to be a huge cause of ill health. There should be a law against it! Less people around to get ill would be great for the NHS targets.
Here are some points to consider. The vast majority of premature deaths follow consumption within 24hrs of H2O. Doctors will agree that dead people never get ill. Most people who die from malaria have owned a pet at some time. Most people who commit suicide show evidence of recent dental work. The vast majority of Alzheimer’s sufferers have voted for a political party at some point. The vast majority of terminal cancer patients in the UK have watched the BBC all their lives. The vast majority of British people who die in car accidents have a National Insurance number. Statistically speaking, the odd puff of baccy and a glass of Scotch seems quite safe in comparison. 😯
Everyone who has ever died has inhaled Oxygen all their lives. 😐
I take this opportunity draw the attention of Gentle Readers to the campaign to prohibit use of the dangerous chemical ‘Dihydrogen Monoxide’.
http://www.dhmo.org/
Macheath’s point made me smile. Dentist – sex-young people. Hmmm.