Donate SIGN UP

NHS Prescriptions

Avatar Image
AB Editor | 09:59 Tue 28th Mar 2017 | Body & Soul
50 Answers
 

This poll is closed.

What Should The NHS Be Able to Prescribe? (poll following on from this question)

  • Products available in shops shouldn't ever be available on the nhs - 77 votes
  • 57%
  • Cheap products available in shops (such as sunscreen and paracetomol) shouldn't be available on the nhs but expensive ones should - 49 votes
  • 36%
  • Any health products (including items such as gluten-free foods) should be available on the nhs - 10 votes
  • 7%

See final stats

Stats until: 18:07 Sat 13th Apr 2024 (Refreshed every 5 minutes)
Gravatar

Answers

21 to 40 of 50rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by AB Editor. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
If they are soluble you can buy 100, otherwise you are restricted to 32.
If you buy branded painkillers at any chemist such as Nurofen or Anadin you are only allowed 2 packets at a time. The thing that stunned me was suncream – why should that be on prescription?
might be for people with sensitive skin who need to wear it all the time?
It doesn't matter whether they are branded or not. 32 non-soluble tablets is the most you can get in one go.
Here is the RPS guidance :

http://www.rpharms.com/legal-classification-of-medicines-db/paracetamol-legal-status-table.asp

Only 32 per pack - but up to 100 per transaction in a pharmacy.



I remember traipsing around chemists shops, on our yearly visit from France, to buy paracetamol and hydrocortisone cream because they are so much cheaper here. You are only allowed a minimum amount.

We are approaching the practical parameters of 'means-testing' or 2 different systems. Some people may find gluten-free foods too expensive for them, others can bite the bullet and afford it.

Going back to the French system - it is by no means perfect, believe me, but the 'Amelie' system exists whereby people who are genuinely very hard-up (they have to prove it to the nth degree) can be accepted and have all their health care paid for. Everyone else pays a percentage (30 - 40% depending) unless they take out a 'Complementaire' Insurance policy to cover the difference. We have to start rcognising different abilities to pay i.m.o..
I'd oppose that very vehemently, jourdain - it would yet again be a tax on the prudent middle-class who have provided for themselves and their families, whilst letting the indigent continue to exercise there 'rights' without a thought for their responsibilities. Either we all pay, or no-one does.
Is it not so very much different to the situation which prevailed before the NHS? You would pay 2/6 for a doctor's visit whilst those 'on the panel' would be covered by the welfare system.
Sunny-Dave In my heart I agree with you completely, but I am trying to be practical. I don't want the NHS to collapse and it is one of the ways I think it can continue. The problem lies in identifying the feckless 'care-nothings' with the genuine 'on their uppers'. I don't have an answer to that, but at the moment the prudent are suffering by being deprived of services they have paid for, so I thought that this system might minimise that? Politically it is a keg of dynamite to say to one group -'You are a drag, you pay nothing and you claim all at others' expense'. How can that be got over?
£10 to see the GP, £1 per item on prescription.

No exemptions, none at all, everyone over 18 and under 100 pays?
It might be a start if we restricted help to those who have genuine medical need instead of gleefully funding anyone who comes along who fancies a sex change. (Sits back and waits for the flak).
I don't think there is a one simple solution to all this.

I certainly know of a few people who ignore a lump, change in bowel movements and many other potential signals to possible worrying problems because £10 to visit the GP would mean no electric that week.
^ who would ignore
It's not easy mamya - or someone would have done it by now.

But so many of the NHS's problems are caused by 'frequent flyers' and 'inappropriate attenders' both at the GP and A&E - perhaps there needs to be a yearly quota after which you pay?
No flak from me JD - that is what I am suggesting. Rigorous checks would be needed. There should also be 'La Liste' of conditions which are covered 100% regardless - in France these include cancer, heart disease and the like, very serious, life-threatening conditions.
Non-essential plastic surgery etc., should be paid for - any profit to go towards funding the essential, such as hare-lip repair in babies. All sex-change ops. are a matter for the individual concerned, they are not life-threatening or crippling. Etc., etc.. There is a longish list. I know these things are important to the individuals concerned, but we can't afford it.

S-Dave...........as you get older you need more prescriptions, and you are on a limited pension....and have paid in all your life to cover your health-care. I would go along with everyone paying, say £5 per doctor's appointment, but of equal importance is the need for a system which fines people for missing an appointment (another thing we got used to in France). 15 Euros if you missed 1 appointment and if you missed 2 you were 'off the books' and had to find another doctor. I hasten to add that genuine reasons for missing an appointment (car broke down etc.)were accepted (provided you had the garage bill).
It's fine providing a link to what pharamacies should be providing in terms of paracetamol, but I've never come across a pharmacy in the UK that will provide you with more than 32 at a time. In the last few years, I've travelled the length and breadth of the UK and ask in pharmacies deliberately. I'm always refused. And no, I don't look like a dodgy git!
Prudie, sunscreen is used for a number of dermatological conditions including Tuberous Sclerosis. The latter is a dreadful disease and I have a friend who has contracted a brain tumour which is typical under the circumstances. He is only in his late twenties and the prognosis is grim.
The rules about paracetomol etc are ludicrous. In my small town you can go into the Co-op and buy 32, then next door into Boots for another 32, then next door but one into Sainsbury's for 32 then back to Co-op etc etc and get as many as you like in the end with a bit of patience and minimal walking. So what's the point of the "rule"?
a yearly quota? So the sickest pay most? I don't see that idea working well, though it would no doubt be popular among the healthy.
if patients are going to be fined for missed appointments, then services should be fined for late appointments, undue waiting times for an appointment/procedure and appointment/procedure cancellations and the patient should receive the fine.

21 to 40 of 50rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

NHS Prescriptions

Answer Question >>