Stay At Home And Protect The Nhs

[nicebloke1]

Many did so, but it all seems to have been a bit of a joke now. No doubt when the 4 day strike is done and dusted we will be hearing that no one died due to the strike, that wouldn't have died anyway.
What we won't know or be able to prove is how many will die in the coming weeks and months ahead, due to no treatment this week. The latter will be covered up by NHS and government.
Just thought I would get that off my chest. :0(

[Zacs-Master]

'it all seems to have been a bit of a joke now'

Does it.....why?

'when the 4 day strike is done and dusted we will be hearing that no one died due to the strike, that wouldn't have died anyway.'

Will we?

[Old_Geezer]

It's just a change of emphasis. It's now, "stay at home, there's no one to see you at the NHS".

[jno]

the NHS is still the fifth biggest employer in the world, a bit behind McDonalds, and they haven't all gone on strike.

[nicebloke1]

Cancer don't wait 4 days.

[New Judge]

//….the NHS is still the fifth biggest employer in the world,//

With a considerable number of those employed performing no useful functions whatsoever and lots more simply duplicating tasks. Politicians measure “success” by the volume of money they shovel into the bottomless pit that is the NHS (a fair amount of it being paid to people described above) rather than successful outcomes for the patients it serves. The advantage they have which allows them to continue doing this is that the NHS is treated more as a religion by some and not as a service which should be there to treat patients as and when required, rather than being constantly in crisis.

This will never change. No government of any persuasion will take the necessary steps to move the service away from its current financial and logistical model (which no other country has seen fit to replicate). The howls of anguish would be the same as if an attempt was made to ban Christianity or Islam. Until a sufficient number of people come to realise that the NHS in its current form is simply unsustainable they will have to put up with a “service” which doesn’t serve them properly at all. The lucky ones will be able to pay for treatment that puts them out of pain and discomfort. The unlucky ones? They will have to get on with it.

[nicebloke1]

The larger any organisation gets the less efficient it becomes in my view. The amount of money being paid to agency staff who are willing to cover at the moment must run into millions.
Agencies in London are offering up to £86 per hour for night shifts doctors, take it at £80 for a 12 hour shift, £960.

If you are unlucky enough to be in hospital at the moment, then you are being seen by someone who's there for the money, the next shift you may well see a different doctor with different ideas to your problems.
Its a bit like taking your car into a garage and having 2 or 3 different mechanics working on your car, its sure to go tits up. :0)

[youngmafbog]

//we will be hearing that no one died due to the strike, that wouldn't have died anyway.//

I might disagree with the strike but I also disagree with what you are saying. I doubt anyone will die.

[nicebloke1]

Like I said above, long term implications for people that needed their treatment this week. Again, cancer don't just stop growing this week.

[youngmafbog]

And as jno has pointed out above, the NHS is not just junior doctors.

And neither are all junior doctors on strike, also big ops are done by consultants (although they may use juniors for the less important bits like stitching you back up).

[dave50]

Well said NJ, absolutely spot in.

[youngmafbog]

//If you are unlucky enough to be in hospital at the moment, then you are being seen by someone who's there for the money//

That is completely untrue.

BTW, you may have my daughter working on you!

[nicebloke1]

That's completely untrue? don't know why doctors and nurses are leaving to work in other countries then?

[Kardashev]

I think they were just worried about the NHS being swamped and I think the lockdowns largely achieved that. Of course we don't know how they would have coped had we not locked down. Though they did have the nightingale facilities ready that went largely unused so perhaps they could have managed without locking down.

[youngmafbog]

//don't know why doctors and nurses are leaving to work in other countries then?//

There is a recruitment drive down under, but most are not interested. And waht has that got to do with the money, what if they fancy a change?

My daughter worked in a Sydney A&E, didnt stay though.

[New Judge]

//I think they were just worried about the NHS being swamped and I think the lockdowns largely achieved that.//

All the lockdowns did was delayed it being swamped - until now, with 7m people waiting for treatment. Covid is not the reason for the current crisis. The NHS has been stumbling from one crisis to the next for as long as I can recall, each one being worse than the last. And so it will continue, for the reasons I have outlined above.

[Zacs-Master]

'All the lockdowns did was delayed it being swamped'

The hospital which Mrs Z works at had 15 wards given over to Covid patients. Had lockdown not happened there was a severe risk that ta great deal more, maybe the entire hospital, would have ben taken over with Covid patients. This would have delayed far more treatments and operations so I don't follow your logic, NJ.

[New Judge]

I can't speak for hospitals in your area, Zacs, but my local hospital and the adjacent large one closed its doors to everybody except Covid patients (with which neither were overwhelmed). Routine "elective" surgery (you know, where people choose to have a major operation instead of taking the easy option of enduring debilitating pain) was all but cancelled for around twelve months or more. Critical surgery was severely curtailed (one of my neighbours died as a result of her life-saving heart surgery being postponed four times). Meanwhile wards in the two hospitals remained dark. Anyway, all history now. Fresh problems abound for the NHS to tackle - as they always will.

[Zacs-Master]

Indeed. There's no doubt that there's a long term effect but the effect would have been much much more severe without lockdown. I don't think the general public appreciate just how close we came to a complete shutdown of the health system in terms of both saturation by COVID and staff exhaustion. I do as I witnessed the effects on NHS staff first hand and learned of the effects second hand.

[davebro]

I think a lot of NHS staff who weren't dealing with covid cases had a couple of years holiday with full pay.

[237SJ]

^ I tend to agree. I still can't figure out why our local health centre has a completely empty waiting room. There are about 20 chairs and they are all empty. The one or two people in there are seeing the practice nurse.