FlyTheNest

New page?

Don't mind if I do.

HindleA wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... s-miss-out

NHS chiefs look to scrap four-hour A&E maximum wait


Having stick a banana up your whatsit put your advert here Hancock as S of S I expect more of this

We have a minor injuries walk-in centre at the community hospital up the road and it's brilliant. They do stitches, treat burns and have an x-ray machine to check for broken bones. The kind of injuries you can't treat at home but don't require a hospital admission. Being seen by qualified nurses, with a doctor available if necessary, five minutes up the road instead of a 20 minute journey to A&E is a service I would like to see everyone have. I've never waited longer than 45mins either.

Our hospital is permanently under threat, however, with cuts to maternity services looming and reductions to the out of hours GP services which have previously always been based there but are being centralised many miles away, initially for overnight care but eventually potentially for all out of hours care. The point being that seeing a GP for an urgent condition may be a logical first point of call if the GP is easily accessible 5mins up the road, but if you're having to make the 20/30min journey into town anyway you might be tempted just to head straight to A&E, which everyone knows how to find, rather than try and find some obscure GP out of hours clinic in an unfamiliar part of the city no one from out of town has ever heard of.

Which brings us back to Cameron's "top down re-organisation". Just a few years ago this massive, expensive shake-up of services was said to be necessary to save the NHS and make it fit for purpose for the future. Yet here we are with A&E in crisis, with little to no plans of how to better deliver the very varied types of urgent care needed, almost as if Cameron's "top down re-organisation" completely failed to save the NHS or future proof it at all, yet no one in the media ever seems to raise this. The Tories need to be held accountable for this. Their re-organisation directly impacted on primary care, the bit that's a gateway to hospitals, the bit that could reduce pressure on A&E if done right and yet ever since their re-organisation pressure on A&E has, in fact, worsened and targets have been lowered and still missed. If we are to wake people up to the danger the NHS faces under the Tories we need to get this connection between what the Tories did and the problems we are now seeing across to the voting public.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... c-collapse" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Councils appeal for cash injection to avoid ‘catastrophic collapse

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... -privilege" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


A new council in London’s East End: a bid for democracy or island of privilege?

"If only Norris the Belisha beacon was the Labour Leader I would be six foot six and carry my member around in a wheelbarrow"

The IDSification from all sides continues apace.

HindleA wrote:FWIW we were advised by the GP to go to A & from an appt.not irregularly,I dislike the it's the patients' fault misrepresentation.

I do wonder if there's scope for GPs to be able to bypass A&E for patients they refer, given they often have a detailed understanding of the medical issue and what they need to be in hospital for. It's such a different scenario to someone who is taken to hospital after an accident, it seems strange that these two very different types of patient are funneled through the same triage system. Would some kind of urgent referral admissions centre be able to operate in addition to A&E? A&E was originally designed around accidents and sudden onset of life threatening conditions. Yet lots of people being directed to A&E don't fit that criteria at all.

My brother-in-law was sent to A&E with symptoms of a migraine by 111, for instance. Yet when I had my first migraine with aura there was no 111, I rang the GP surgery, got an urgent appointment and was diagnosed with probable migraine with a non-urgent referral to the eye clinic to confirm the diagnosis. Both of us were properly looked after, seeing a trained professional able to rule out urgent conditions with similar symptoms within a few hours. My experience of GP + eye clinic was less stressful than my brother-in-law's trip to A&E but only because we both ended up only having migraines. If it had been an urgent eye condition, I would have had to have made the trip to A&E from the GP surgery whereas my brother-in-law was already in the right place.

Which is a long winded way of saying making sure people get the right care at the right time in the most appropriate and cost effective way is ruddy complicated. Moaning about there being too many people with too minor conditions in A&E is not helpful. Ensuring every one ends up with the right care, whatever their first contact with the healthcare system - whether that's GP, pharmacist, 111 or A&E - is what's important. That means all these gateways being part of a cohesive whole and you achieve that by all of them being seamless parts of our national health service, not separate, privatised entities with separate myriad ways of doing things that don't properly link up. What's really the problem with our NHS? "Too many people" in our A&Es because only doctors can tell the difference between migraine aura and sight-threatening urgent eye conditions? Or private ambulances having to spend 15mins filling out a form every time they transport an ill person to hospital for billing purposes?

My point was the people putting unnecessary pressure stuff on in lieu of alternatives when we were referred from taking the alternative.

So was it an unnecessary GP appt?

And how the f do you know.

HindleA wrote:And how the f do you know.

You don't, obviously. That's why you seek medical help in the first place. And sometimes people go to the wrong place and it's no one's fault.

The longest delays I've experienced at the doctor's surgery has been when the previous patient has been so ill they've needed an ambulance to take them to hospital and the GP to keep them alive until the ambulance arrives. We don't hear about these cases so much, though, even though they surely also put extra pressures on services.

Good-afternoon, everyone

citizenJA wrote:Good-afternoon, everyone

I'm starting my Spring clean

I've spent a quarter of an hour attempting a response to PfY's post regarding potential scenario(s) on the upcoming vote in the Commons.
There's nothing wrong with Paul's post but I'm unable to evaluate it. I'm confused.

I've read the transcript between May and the Liaison Committee and remain disturbed by her irrational responses.
Liaison Committee Oral evidence from the Prime Minister: Brexit Thursday 29 November 2018 pdf
Where are we going here?

citizenJA wrote: Where are we going here?

My only answer to that is "f*** knows"

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:How about this for an optimistic scenario?

May loses Meaningful Vote.
Vote of no confidence fails (this is the pessimistic bit).
May proposes a Peoples Vote. Her deal vs Remain.
Labour successfully amends the Referendum Bill to change Remain to Remain and Reform in a way that the EU explicitly supports.
Referendum takes place and Remain and Reform comfortably defeats May.

CJA Just sticking up for ease of reference . On the Full Legal Advice,for example :is it correct that the UK cannot leave the purgatory system without EU permission?

frog222 wrote:

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:How about this for an optimistic scenario?
May loses Meaningful Vote.
Vote of no confidence fails (this is the pessimistic bit).
May proposes a Peoples Vote. Her deal vs Remain.
Labour successfully amends the Referendum Bill to change Remain to Remain and Reform in a way that the EU explicitly supports.
Referendum takes place and Remain and Reform comfortably defeats May.

CJA Just sticking up for ease of reference . On the Full Legal Advice,for example :is it correct that the UK cannot leave the purgatory system without EU permission?

I don't know. I'd be willing to find out by making an earnest request to do so.

” After all, everyone has feet, or knows someone who has,

whereas not everyone knows someone who has benefited from the work of the European Space Agency"

"Rees-Mogg’s claim that Brexit would result in cheaper footwear tipped the scales for Leave voters"

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... -with-feet" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

" Had he not stated – when an American missile had blown up an Iranian aircraft with 290 innocent civilians aboard in 1988 – that he would “never apologize for the United States of America. Ever. I don’t care what the facts are.” "

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... ush-family" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

But he represented a LOST AGE OF CIVILITY!

frog222 wrote:---"Rees-Mogg’s claim that Brexit would result in cheaper footwear tipped the scales for Leave voters"
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... -with-feet" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

(cJA edit)

...Michael Gove...now chooses to attach himself, the limpet of regret, to the hulls of various blameless environmental causes, in an attempt to disassociate himself from the national catastrophe his pitiful vanity has initiated. Michael Gove hopes to be remembered, instead, as the Dian Fossey of Surrey’s hedgehogs.

This is a humourous example of something I've noticed. Some get away with whatever the hell they want in mainstream media.
They can disappear when convenient or get showboated nightly; whatever works best for them. Others lives' get torn apart by relentless media scrutiny.

AnatolyKasparov wrote:But he represented a LOST AGE OF CIVILITY!

I recognise 1984 as a masterpiece but it troubles me much in the same way as does news coverage of any disaster

It feels as though it's been nighttime for days

Would you get away with this in England ?

Don't know about France either, but it's an interesting idea

" “We suggest renaming the street address of the Saudi embassy into Jamal Khashoggi Way to be a daily reminder to Saudi officials” that such killings are “totally unacceptable and as an expression of Washington’s unstinting support for freedom of the press”, the petition states.

A similar action was taken outside the Russian embassy, where a street was this year renamed in honour of prominent Vladimir Putin critic Boris Nemtsov, who was assassinated in Moscow in 2015.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/ ... ssy-street" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thinking of Bush41's murky past ...

there are plenty of Lycées and other buildings here named "Salvadore Allende"

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... al-cartoon" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

So it turns out my MP was one of the two at the meeting of the shadow cabinet who spoke out against having another referendum. Apparently because he agrees that this would be betraying Labour leave voters in the the North of England.

This constituency voted to remain by an estimate of 68%, so who is betraying who? Why is he arguing against my and the majority of the people who live here's wishes and interests? We're his constituents for fuck's sake. Why should we pay because some fuckwits in Hartlepool are pig ignorant dickheads?

All of this I shall incorporate into an email once I've calmed down and sobered up.

In other news I got pissed on by a massive dog today. It was a Leonberger, one of these...

https://s3.amazonaws.com/cdn-origin-etr ... ite-06.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It ran up to me and my primitive hindbrain couldn't work out if it was a dog or a bear so I just made a weird whimpering noise as it jumped up and almost put its paws on my shoulders, then when chatting to its owner my left leg began feeling somewhat warmer than usual and this huge dog was pissing on my leg.

To be fair the owner was extremely apologetic and I pretended to find the whole incident hilarious. Which of course I didn't and shall be seeking revenge against said breed of dog/bear forthwith.

Rawnsley summing up "" Minds have been concentrated by Mrs May’s suggestion of a TV debate between herself and Mr Corbyn. This has forced Labour people to confront the truth that their Brexit fudges are crumbling before everyone’s eyes. No one thinks Labour could negotiate all the benefits of being within the EU for Britain while no longer being a member. Labour spokespeople struggle to defend that posture through short interviews. Ninety minutes of sustained scrutiny of Mr Corbyn about Brexit on primetime TV comes with substantial perils for Labour, especially if its leader is left exposed on whether the people should have the final say. ""
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... lly-labour" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It doesn't bear thinking about

PS Glad to say that Clive Lewis did well on Any Questions on Friday . Also there were no difficult brexi-questions, the only one being on a no-deal departure .

nn

Ah yes, that well known objective and balanced observer of left wing politics Mr Rawnsley

I’m on holiday at the moment, didn’t mention it because I knew I’d be checking in regularly to see what Brexit hideousness was going on.

Slightly surreally, Peter Hain was lunching at the next table to us today. At one point he said to his companion ‘when I became a MP’, which made me look round and think he looked familiar, took until a little later for me to put a name to him. The bits of the conversation we overheard made me wonder if all MPs talk to their wives as if they’ve just met them?

We’ll be home on Friday, in good time for the meaningful vote.