Earlier quoted context omitted.
Morbid question, but if someone dies while waiting, are they included in the “average wait time” statistic?
The ambulance still shows up to declare someone dead.
Can a paramedic declare someone dead?
Why did 250k Britons die sooner than expected?
131–140 of 204 posts
Re: Why did 250k Britons die sooner than expected?
#132As a Brit I can't help but notice that on every axis, our country appears to be in decline at the moment. Even before Brexit, things hadn't been going well, as this article shows. It's making me seriously consider moving away. I want to have hope that as a country we can turn around this societal regression, but I fear it's a deeper problem than just the current government. The class system and an unhealthy nostalgia…
As a country we're going through a period where people don't WANT things to work. They want them to get worse. That's the Brexit vote and Boris "obviously incompetent" Johnson and 50 other similar examples. It's a very under discussed phenomenon.
Re: Why did 250k Britons die sooner than expected?
#133Earlier quoted context omitted.
How does something like that even happen...? All I can consider is the relatively small size of the UK, and how one can drive from one side of the other in the UK in just 15 or so hours...
My understanding after reading this article is that the problem has nothing to do with ambulances or medics. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/20/world/europe/uk-ambulance... First order problem, the hospitals have no beds. This means that ambulances end up waiting for hours and medics twiddling their thumbs at the ER until the staff can finally take the patient. Medics can't just abandon the patient because there lega…
My understanding is, to a large extent "beds" really means "physical bed and sufficient staff to support the patient in it" and the ingredient most missing is the latter.
Doctors tend to be ridiculously overworked in the UK. This is much worse recently - first doctors were off sick / isolating due to Covid. That means less doctors to do the same jobs having to work harder. That drives more doctors to either leave or take long term sick leave - goto 1.
Re: Why did 250k Britons die sooner than expected?
#134In my district in the UK, there were occasions when average wait times for an ambulance for a Category 1 incident (eg. person not breathing) reached 48 hours last month. The target is 90% of patients reached in 15 minutes. Yet the reality is the average wait was 48 hours. I can't see any way that kind of thing isn't contributing to a shorter life expectancy.
How does something like that even happen...? All I can consider is the relatively small size of the UK, and how one can drive from one side of the other in the UK in just 15 or so hours...
[deleted]
Re: Why did 250k Britons die sooner than expected?
#135It is well-known that the austerity ushered in by Cameron's new Conservative goverment heavily contributed to excess deaths. After a decade of continued underfunding of public services, leading to a collapsed social and health service, you realise the question really isn't that deep
Austerity like NHS spending increasing by 6.5% yearly since 2010? Absolutely absurd argument made from political propaganda, not fact. Not only has it increased in raw numbers, it's increased per capita, making this argument false by any measurement.
There is a difference between defunding and underfunding. It doesn't take much to realise ~6% (average) increase is quickly eroded by inflation and population changes.
NHS funding has been effectivley stagnant [1]
There are also more complex issues beyond a single percentage metric.
But I am sure you know that
[1] https://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/news-item/the-past-present-...
Re: Why did 250k Britons die sooner than expected?
#136It's interesting that you can see the one area where the UK welfare state still exists (the 70+ bracket, e.g. pensions), the UK mortality rate has kept a pretty close track to the EU average.
Re: Why did 250k Britons die sooner than expected?
#137The UK's doctors and nurses are essentially slaves compared to their US counterparts. They make a quarter of the pay or less for equivalent work. When your healthcare strategy is "just employ slaves so we can have free healthcare" of course people will die.
To be fair, medical degrees in the UK are subsidized by the NHS, so they aren't paying extravagant student loans
Medical students pay the exact same way as all other university students. They pay via student finance loans for the first four years.
The NHS pays for the fifth and final year, as Student Fianance (England) will not cover the cost.
Medical students have the same student loans of £60k+ as any other student doing a four year degree
Re: Why did 250k Britons die sooner than expected?
#138Re: Why did 250k Britons die sooner than expected?
#139Earlier quoted context omitted.
To be fair, medical degrees in the UK are subsidized by the NHS, so they aren't paying extravagant student loans
Medical students pay the exact same way as all other university students. They pay via student finance loans for the first four years. The NHS pays for the fifth and final year, as Student Fianance (England) will not cover the cost. Medical students have the same student loans of £60k+ as any other student doing a four year degree
And the average US doctor has student loans of around £207,340, so the point stands. UK doctors do pay towards their education, but it’s heavily subsidised.
Re: Why did 250k Britons die sooner than expected?
#140Earlier quoted context omitted.
Austerity like NHS spending increasing by 6.5% yearly since 2010? Absolutely absurd argument made from political propaganda, not fact. Not only has it increased in raw numbers, it's increased per capita, making this argument false by any measurement.
There is a difference between defunding and underfunding. It doesn't take much to realise ~6% (average) increase is quickly eroded by inflation and population changes. NHS funding has been effectivley stagnant [1] There are also more complex issues beyond a single percentage metric. But I am sure you know that [1] https://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/news-item/the-past-present-...
Your original post said NHS budgets were undergoing austerity -- meaning spending cuts. Now that that's been shown to be utterly false, your terminology has evolved to "stagnant".
NHS funding increases are over 2,000% higher than France, a comparable first-world country, since 2010 -- according to World Bank data.
If the UK has "stagnant" spending increases, what's happening in comparable countries with way less spending increases? France has 0.3%/year healthcare spending increases in that period.
6.5% is not stagnant. It's not austerity. In fact, it's OVER DOUBLE the rate of inflation, contrary to your claims of "erosion by inflation". NHS funding is skyrocketing in real terms and in per capita amounts, over and above inflation.
To claim spending increases are eroded by either inflation or population changes is a lie. It's rising per capita at over 2x inflation. Zero erosion, except perhaps in the fever dreams of The Guardian journalists.