Online consultation/prescription services UK

[Bioshockszz]

Being above board doesn't mean it's necessarily 'right', though I do apologise as I know that's such a subjective thing to say.

NHS GPs can be a pain in the arse, but on the other hand, they probably play an important role in restricting the supply of highly addicting or unnecessary drugs because they have no (or very little) financial incentive to prescribe anything (eg my GPs refuse to prescribe benzos or anti-biotics without a very crystal clear need and/or a specialists request), unlike private doctors.

As soon as money and profit become involved in health, health tends to get put on the back-burner a little more.

Im not sure that’s true. I’m pretty sure NHS GPs have some incentive to prescribe meds and they actually over-prescribe: https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp....eb/19/nhs-weighs-report-to-cut-medicine-waste

 

[Forever Changes]

it really depends on the GP. Particularly NHS GPs can vary so much in their approach, knowledge, how open minded they are, willingness to prescribe. I've seen some old, very set-in-their-ways GPs who probably last looked at a medical book 40 years ago.

With some, you just need to turn up and say 'I feel down' and they'll reach for the script and put on you an an anti-depressant immediately!

 

[BecomingJulie]

I think it's wrong that anyone can get any better service by going private than though the NHS. There are some things that money simply should not be able to buy.

Why should person A be allowed a prescription from a broader range of drugs than, or a procedure not available to, person B? Why should person A be triaged before person B who arrived at exactly the same time? Why should person A not be forced to stop smoking / drinking / lose weight before being allowed access to a particular treatment, when person B is bullied into doing exactly that?

If person B was black, this would be called racism. If person B was a woman, this would be called sexism. If person B was disabled, this would be called ableism. If person B was a redhead, this would be called gingerphobia, and so forth. Well, it's no more acceptable if the difference between A and B is a few shiny round pieces of metal. Discrimination against the poor is still discrimination, and is still wrong. If we even allow private healthcare providers at all, they must not be allowed to provide a better service than the NHS.

 

[F.U.B.A.R.]

I think it's wrong that anyone can get any better service by going private than though the NHS. There are some things that money simply should not be able to buy.

Why should person A be allowed a prescription from a broader range of drugs than, or a procedure not available to, person B? Why should person A be triaged before person B who arrived at exactly the same time? Why should person A not be forced to stop smoking / drinking / lose weight before being allowed access to a particular treatment, when person B is bullied into doing exactly that?

If person B was black, this would be called racism. If person B was a woman, this would be called sexism. If person B was disabled, this would be called ableism. If person B was a redhead, this would be called gingerphobia, and so forth. Well, it's no more acceptable if the difference between A and B is a few shiny round pieces of metal. Discrimination against the poor is still discrimination, and is still wrong. If we even allow private healthcare providers at all, they must not be allowed to provide a better service than the NHS.

Word!

 

[spacejunk]

totally agree julie.
australia's medicare system is under constant attack from the tories over here. death by a thousand cuts (cunts).
fucking sickens me; we get punished with higher premiums for life if we don't have private cover by the time we're 30, and i think it goes up again at further milestones? i ignore it because they can go fuck themselves.
but yeah - they "reward" you for taking out private hospital care when you're young and don't generally need it as much as your later years.
in other words, they punish you if you don't. fucking scummy.
i hope you brits are able to keep the conservatives from doing any more damage to the NHS. our system is being slowly americanised, and it's awful.

i think there is only one type of person that i wouldn't have a problem denying medical care to, and that's the neo-liberal fucks who sabotage public health.

it means that for lots of people, health problems become a physical problem combined with a financial disaster, to paraphrase a former PM, whose personal trademark these days is to down a beer in one go. he's 88 and still does it at the cricket - which is just playing up to the yob crowd, but i like that a lot more than the toffs who would never condescend to mix it with the commoners. either way - he made the point that it's not right, so he created our universal health system.
i think he also negotiated with the unions to get workers to agree to taking a pay cut to help fund medicare. which is pretty much unthinkable nowadays.

 

[Bioshockszz]

I think it's wrong that anyone can get any better service by going private than though the NHS. There are some things that money simply should not be able to buy.

Why should person A be allowed a prescription from a broader range of drugs than, or a procedure not available to, person B? Why should person A be triaged before person B who arrived at exactly the same time? Why should person A not be forced to stop smoking / drinking / lose weight before being allowed access to a particular treatment, when person B is bullied into doing exactly that?

If person B was black, this would be called racism. If person B was a woman, this would be called sexism. If person B was disabled, this would be called ableism. If person B was a redhead, this would be called gingerphobia, and so forth. Well, it's no more acceptable if the difference between A and B is a few shiny round pieces of metal. Discrimination against the poor is still discrimination, and is still wrong. If we even allow private healthcare providers at all, they must not be allowed to provide a better service than the NHS.

Sorry but this is Marxist ldeological nonsense.

where do you draw the line? Are restaurants and high end supermarkets discriminating against the poor because they can’t afford their food? Food is a more fundamental need than medicine remember?

The NHS provides free healthcare to everyone. That is an amazing thing. However it comes with issues such as limited resources limited budget, waiting times etc.

Private Medical Treatment DOES NOT STOP ANYONE getting free healthcare. If you pay a premium in any aspect of life you get a better service or product. Some people pay a premium for better food, some for better holidays, some for better healthcare. It does not impact free healthcare negatively but actually IMPROVES it because there is less strain and burden on the NHS.

 

[BecomingJulie]

Ever having used a private alternative to a Government service should disqualify anyone from standing for election. If you don't think comprehensive schools and NHS hospitals are good enough for you, you have no business being in charge of them.

Sorry but this is Marxist ldeological nonsense.

Well, I'd rather be called a Marxist than the kind of person that thinks a two-tier healthcare system is in any way acceptable.

Private Medical Treatment DOES NOT STOP ANYONE getting free healthcare. If you pay a premium in any aspect of life you get a better service or product. Some people pay a premium for better food, some for better holidays, some for better healthcare. It does not impact free healthcare negatively but actually IMPROVES it because there is less strain and burden on the NHS.

My point is there should not even be such a thing as "better healthcare" than what the NHS provides.

 

[CFC]

Im not sure that’s true. I’m pretty sure NHS GPs have some incentive to prescribe meds and they actually over-prescribe: https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp....eb/19/nhs-weighs-report-to-cut-medicine-waste

What I said wasn't without context. Sure, GPs make mistakes, and some prescribe incorrectly. Others feel pressured by patients, or feel a duty to prescribe something when pushed (I personally think they should have a range of placebos to prescribe for difficult patients).

However a profit system by its very design is inherently and fundamentally driven to over-prescribe and over-treat those who are prepared or able to pay, and to ignore the rest.

 

[Forever Changes]

The debate about the NHS has become so toxic here I try to avoid it when it comes on the news. I do believe in socialised healthcare, to an extent. The peace of mind we get from knowing if we ever get seriously ill or have an accident we will get care an not have to worry about whether we can afford to pay for it, is invaluable

But the universal healthcare NHS model has some serious flaws - and increasingly so. Not that I'd want us to adopt the American-style system, but there are reasons why in 70 years no other country has exactly copied the NHS model. Most European countries have some kind of socialised + insurance contribution-based hybrid

Paying to go private won't necessarily get you a better doctor, but you will likely get a faster, more efficient service. Nothing wrong with that IMO. I've had some good NHS GPs, and some bad ones, but if you get referred for specialist treatment on the NHS you usually get no choice and it's pot luck how competent they are.


Clearly doctors in the UK are legally allowed to write prescriptions without actually seeing the patient in person, strange as that sounds. Years ago I got an NHS GP to write me a private prescription for Propecia D) without meeting him in person. He just asked me a few questions over the phone and I wired him the money. I don't believe most doctors would risk ruining their careers just to make a bit of cash on the side

incidentally, on one of the online pharmacy sites you can request that your NHS GP isn't informed about your consultation/purchase from them

 

[spacejunk]

Sorry but this is Marxist ldeological nonsense.

it's ideological, certainly - but i wouldn't call socialised medicine nonsense. it saves lives, and the NHS is a genuine national institution (unlike a lot of the idealised markers of national identity) and is among (i'm lead to believe) one of the better systems in the world.
throwing around labels like 'Marxist' is inaccurate, because universal healthcare is not specifically a Marxist idea. i'm sure its architects include some decidedly anti-communist political figures.
the alternative is a tiered system, as julie says - or a fucking nightmare like america's health system, to use an extreme example.
i don't think it is especially radical to think medical care should not be divided according to means. healthcare is fundamental, it's not a consumer status item for the middle classes - or, it shouldn't be.

 

[CFC]

The debate about the NHS has become so toxic here I try to avoid it when it comes on the news. I do believe in socialised healthcare, to an extent. The peace of mind we get from knowing if we ever get seriously ill or have an accident we will get care an not have to worry about whether we can afford to pay for it, is invaluable

But the universal healthcare NHS model has some serious flaws - and increasingly so. Not that I'd want us to adopt the American-style system, but there are reasons why in 70 years no other country has exactly copied the NHS model. Most European countries have some kind of socialised + insurance contribution-based hybrid

Paying to go private won't necessarily get you a better doctor, but you will likely get a faster, more efficient service. Nothing wrong with that IMO. I've had some good NHS GPs, and some bad ones, but if you get referred for specialist treatment on the NHS you usually get no choice and it's pot luck how competent they are.


Clearly doctors in the UK are legally allowed to write prescriptions without actually seeing the patient in person, strange as that sounds. Years ago I got an NHS GP to write me a private prescription for Propecia D) without meeting him in person. He just asked me a few questions over the phone and I wired him the money. I don't believe most doctors would risk ruining their careers just to make a bit of cash on the side

incidentally, on one of the online pharmacy sites you can request that your NHS GP isn't informed about your consultation/purchase from them

All healthcare is 'socialised'. Insurance is a socialist scheme by definition. Properly funded 'socialised' healthcare with minimal private involvement (ie a Labour-funded NHS) is the best system there is. Most private and part-private systems are inefficient and excessively costly, for obvious reasons related to profit incentives.

 

[Bioshockszz]

Ever having used a private alternative to a Government service should disqualify anyone from standing for election. If you don't think comprehensive schools and NHS hospitals are good enough for you, you have no business being in charge of them.Well, I'd rather be called a Marxist than the kind of person that thinks a two-tier healthcare system is in any way acceptable.My point is there should not even be such a thing as "better healthcare" than what the NHS provides.

Well you haven’t disputed any of my points and the fact you think there shouldn’t be better healthcare than the NHS is mind-blowing considering the quality is pretty damn poor.

It’s a fundamental of economics that competition produces improved quality in Organizations. Get rid of private medical care and you have two problems: quality of healthcare isn’t improved through lack of competition and the NHS becomes massively strained as it now has even more patients, the ones who would have PAID, to be seen privately.

I understand you think NHS healthcare next should be as good as private healthcare. But it can’t be. It’s impossible. You know how I know? Because it ISN’T now and if it could be it would be.

 

[F.U.B.A.R.]

There's definitely a need for private healthcare...

To keep all the fuckin cunts out of the NHS beds.

 

[Bioshockszz]

it's ideological, certainly - but i wouldn't call socialised medicine nonsense. it saves lives, and the NHS is a genuine national institution (unlike a lot of the idealised markers of national identity) and is among (i'm lead to believe) one of the better systems in the world.
throwing around labels like 'Marxist' is inaccurate, because universal healthcare is not specifically a Marxist idea. i'm sure its architects include some decidedly anti-communist political figures.
the alternative is a tiered system, as julie says - or a fucking nightmare like america's health system, to use an extreme example.
i don't think it is especially radical to think medical care should not be divided according to means. healthcare is fundamental, it's not a consumer status item for the middle classes - or, it shouldn't be.

You have not read my post: I did not call the NHS Marxist. I called the idea of not having private healthcare Marxist. That’s a big difference and is an ideology that could fall under Marxism.

Private healthcare isn’t dividing medical care according to means. If you are poor you still have access to private Care proving you can pay the fee, which is exactly the same as the fee a rich person pays. Dividing according to means would be saying “okay you’re on benefits we won’t treat you for anything”. “Your earning under 30K we won’t give you cosmetic surgery”. Granted it’s harder for the poor person but it’s not mean tested.

The fact is, with all due respect, “Becomingjulie” has admitted that private healtcare doesn’t stop anyone’s receiving free healthcare and hasn’t disputed that it actually lessens the strain on the NHS. Her argument is “you can’t have something I can’t have, even if that then means what I can have significantly deteriorates in quality, because as long as you have to have that as well, I’m happy”.

That is massively illogical and called cutting of your nose to spite your face.

NHS is a fantastic resource and so is having the option to pay for superior, quicker service. Julie I’m sure if you had a million pounds in the bank and had to pay 750k private treatment to save a loved one or yourself or wait months to do so on the NHS,you wouldn’t hesitate to go private

 

[BecomingJulie]

It’s a fundamental of economics that competition produces improved quality in Organizations. Get rid of private medical care and you have two problems: quality of healthcare isn’t improved through lack of competition and the NHS becomes massively strained as it now has even more patients, the ones who would have PAID, to be seen privately.

No it isn't. Competition is a supremely inefficient way of making things appear better; and in any case relies on an oversubscribed market where not all demand can be satisfied. This is not the environment in which the NHS operates. We want all demand for healthcare to be satisfied.

I understand you think NHS healthcare next should be as good as private healthcare. But it can’t be. It’s impossible. You know how I know? Because it ISN’T now and if it could be it would be.

The NHS right now isn't as good as it could be, for precisely two reasons: Pounds and pence. There are far to many administrative staff and not enough frontline staff (i.e.,nurses, paramedics and doctors).

But if as you say the NHS really cannot be brought up to the standards of private healthcare, then the only other way to ensure that nobody gets better service than anybody else is for private healthcare to be brought down to the standards of the NHS.

Private healthcare isn't dividing medical care according to means.

Yes it is. If the service you have to pay for is better than the service you don't have to pay for, then that is absolutely dividing medical care according to means, in spite of whatever weasel words you may use to try to pretent that it isn't.

[Julie's] argument is ?you can?t have something I can?t have, even if that then means what I can have significantly deteriorates in quality, because as long as you have to have that as well, I?m happy?.

Whereas you seem to be saying In yer face, peasant! I've got more money than you, so the doctor is going to see me instead of you. Nyah

NHS is a fantastic resource and so is having the option to pay for superior, quicker service.

Yes,the NHS is indeed a fantastic resource; but no, there should not be any "superior, quicker service" to pay for. There should be one standard, and only one standard, of healthcare service. Paying money should not get you triaged any sooner than someone who is not paying, and should not entitle you to any drug, device, procedure or therapy not available to someone who is not paying.

Julie I?m sure if you had a million pounds in the bank and had to pay 750k private treatment to save a loved one or yourself or wait months to do so on the NHS,you wouldn?t hesitate to go private

It would feel too much as though I was trying to cheat my way through. The knowledge that other people were receiving a lesser standard of care would be too much for my poor little conscience.

 

[CFC]

Well you haven’t disputed any of my points and the fact you think there shouldn’t be better healthcare than the NHS is mind-blowing considering the quality is pretty damn poor.

It’s a fundamental of economics that competition produces improved quality in Organizations. Get rid of private medical care and you have two problems: quality of healthcare isn’t improved through lack of competition and the NHS becomes massively strained as it now has even more patients, the ones who would have PAID, to be seen privately.

I understand you think NHS healthcare next should be as good as private healthcare. But it can’t be. It’s impossible. You know how I know? Because it ISN’T now and if it could be it would be.

It looks like you swallowed a book on economic modeling and theory without actually testing it for proof.

If your proof is based on an assumption about private healthcare in the UK, then it's flawed because we don't truly have a private system. We have a parasitic private adjunct to the NHS that provides no emergency care (there are no private A&Es because they aren't profitable), borrows (at great cost to taxpayers) most of its workforce from the NHS, and that cherry-picks profitable services while handing any procedure that would prove costly back onto the NHS. Private providers don't even pay to train nurses or doctors, the NHS does, then BUPA or whoever nabs them after. Pure parasitism.

As for the idea of competition in healthcare: lol. Healthcare isn't a market with simplistic inputs outputs and processes where one supplier undercuts another. If I sell you cheap tainted blood, cut corners not fixing you up after an operation, or insert a dodgy but cheaper replacement joint, you may simply die. Hence the realisation 70+ years ago that profit and traditional market 'competition' have no place in healthcare or in improving the provision of those services.

 

[EP158207]

I am a front line NHS staff member, and while I also belive in socialised medicine to some extent I don't agree with how the NHS is run. I am often made fun of by my co-workers when I insist on asking patients to give me their proof of address and their picture ID so I can check their immigration status. It seems like no-one (aoaprt from my self) feels comfortable to deny treatment to someone who has never paid tax, or contributed in anyway. I feel it is important as I work closely with transplant team and I have known of one case where a patient was given a transplant organ even though his asylum was denied, and was about to be deported.

 

[BecomingJulie]

It seems like no-one (aoaprt from my self) feels comfortable to deny treatment to someone who has never paid tax, or contributed in anyway.

Better a hundred "undeserving" cases treated for free, than one sick person turned away.

 

[EP158207]

I'm becoming used to holding unpopular views; at the end of the day I am a right wing ethnic minority that works for the NHS so its automatically assumed that I am left wing or a labour luvvie. But Julie, I am sick and tired of paying large amounts of tax so that immigrants that hate the west can come and get free treatment and then bomb us. My parents were immigrants too came over int he 70s with a skill and intergrated, and never attached the country.

 

[Bioshockszz]

Julie, you need a hobby or a job so you can afford private healthcare. Pretty sure that perfect competition is the opposite to a monopoly and is a fundamental of Keynesian economics which I studied as part of my degree, and results in lower inflation and lower consumer prices as well as higher quality, but your opinion and google searches are highly valued.

”it makes things appear better”. That’s delusional nonsense. What happens when customers start shopping increasingly at aldi and Lidl? Tesco, Asda reduce their prices - that’s the fact behind the theory - are lower prices better for the consumer or not? /debate

private healthcare IS NOT means tested. That’s not weasel words that’s FACT. Get off Google and the internet and do some proper learning.