Hospital waiting lists.
Harvey Wilson
being denied adequate medical care by over stretched and underfunded
health services.
The latest to come to light according to todays Herald are patients
needing treatment for heart/artery operations at Aucklands Hospital are
being turned away because of lack of staff and facilities.
When will the Labour Government finaly admit that it has allowed the
health system in New Zealand to become an underfunded shambles and a
service that is so run down and mismanaged that it is costing patients
lives.
Why does Labour continue to lie to the NZ public over its inept and
callous handling and gross underfunding of one of this countrys
essential services.
We are assured as a nation that the tens of thousands of immigrants
being foisted upon us are vital for our survival, while the real truth
is that the influx is causing overstretched social services to collapse
around our ears, and as a country the situation is becoming worse by
the day.
Why will Government not stop immigration or drastically reduce numbers,
in the words of the late Labour PM, pause for a cuppa, until such time
as services like health can be rebuilt to the standards where all sick
Kiwis can receive medical care.
Spend some of those billions Labour so proudly boasts, by putting them
to the best use possible, and just for once stop telling us such
blatant lies.
E. Scrooge
"Harvey Wilson" <wilson...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1145221119.9...@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
E. Scrooge
"Harvey Wilson" <wilson...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1145221119.9...@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
It's been getting worse and worse for years. The population is expanding
all the time as well. It's a bit strange when the current government is
made up of old farts who are 5 years past their use by date - Hodgson,
Benson-Dope and Cullen, plus a few others.
The health system would eventually save a bit if their was a complete ban on
smoking. The government is more worried about going down the PC track of
what people eat. What people eat shpould be up to the people, some
promotion of moderation wouldn't hurt though.
By helping people early would save the hositals a lot of money instead of
trying to eventually help those people when it's damn near too late.
The waiting list is more about those who will die than actually treating
people on the lists. When it gets a bit too embarrassing the old lists are
dumped with fresh new ones starting all over again.
E. Scrooge
Stan
"Harvey Wilson" <wilson...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1145221119.9...@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> being denied adequate medical care by over stretched and underfunded
> health services.
>
What has overtaken the Health Services in all western countries is the
exponential growth of technolgy in health care. New electronic means for
diagnosis require huge sums of money to buy. Not just for one hospital.
Just do a quick count of how many hospitals you have in the whole country
and multiply the cost of just providing one Catscan machine to each. Plus
the costs of the technicians to operate them...plus the admin costs.
Everytime you hear of a new breakthrough to save life, think of the cost
also. Then think of what you would cut down on to pay for it. Then think
of how many jobs will be lost in the cutting down...and the tax loss from
those jobs as well...and the welfare costs to the losers.
dickydoo
"Stan" <ecr...@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
news:z3B0g.8197$vy1....@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
and pliers.
thingy
> "Harvey Wilson" <wilson...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1145221119.9...@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
>>Every day more shocking statistics are coming to light over patients
>>being denied adequate medical care by over stretched and underfunded
>>health services.
>>
>>The latest to come to light according to todays Herald are patients
>>needing treatment for heart/artery operations at Aucklands Hospital are
>>being turned away because of lack of staff and facilities.
So Labour put sin dollars where the nasty Nats would not have....who did
you vote for? Nats offering a tax break? or Labour spending more than
the Nats ever did on Health care?
>>When will the Labour Government finaly admit that it has allowed the
>>health system in New Zealand to become an underfunded
Yes, underfunded, becaus ethat is the level of funding we as voters wanted.
shambles
No evidence of a shambles.
and a
>>service that is so run down
Yes OK.
and mismanaged
No, definately not, having worked in Hospitals for ten+ years IMHO they
are well run by dedicated managers and health professionals who do
miracles with little funding.
that it is costing patients
>>lives.
Patients who would have died anyway.
>>Why does Labour continue to lie to the NZ public over its inept and
>>callous handling and gross underfunding of one of this countrys
>>essential services.
Because voters wont vote for the funding levels voted, when will you
peopel get to the fact that if you vote for tax cuts and not social
spending this is what you get.
You made that choice by voting as you voted, want greater health care?
stand up and vote for parties that put this forward as a pledge, or
stand up as a canditate with these.
>>We are assured as a nation that the tens of thousands of immigrants
>>being foisted upon us are vital for our survival, while the real truth
>>is that the influx is causing overstretched social services to collapse
>>around our ears, and as a country the situation is becoming worse by
>>the day.
>>
>>Why will Government not stop immigration or drastically reduce numbers,
>>in the words of the late Labour PM, pause for a cuppa, until such time
>>as services like health can be rebuilt to the standards where all sick
>>Kiwis can receive medical care.
Because Immigration should bring in workers who will contribute more to
the system in terms of tax than they take out.
>>Spend some of those billions Labour so proudly boasts, by putting them
>>to the best use possible, and just for once stop telling us such
>>blatant lies.
>
>
> It's been getting worse and worse for years. The population is expanding
> all the time as well. It's a bit strange when the current government is
> made up of old farts who are 5 years past their use by date - Hodgson,
> Benson-Dope and Cullen, plus a few others.
and Brash is a pensioner? and you voted for who? get real....
> The health system would eventually save a bit if their was a complete ban on
> smoking. The government is more worried about going down the PC track of
> what people eat. What people eat shpould be up to the people, some
> promotion of moderation wouldn't hurt though.
>
> By helping people early would save the hositals a lot of money instead of
> trying to eventually help those people when it's damn near too late.
and Labour wants to spend money by reducing Doctors fees to encourage
people to go see a quack early....and National's stance?
> The waiting list is more about those who will die than actually treating
> people on the lists. When it gets a bit too embarrassing the old lists are
> dumped with fresh new ones starting all over again.
Those people had a choice of getting private health insurance or not,
voting for more money spent on health care or not, they chose not so
wait in line for the basic care.
> E. Scrooge
regards
Thing
thingy
No we choose whether to fund ever greater levels of care giving ever
less useful outcomes for us as a Nation.
ie basic health care and hygeine standards give the best return on money
spent in terms of quality of life and Net improved national GDP. From
then on the increased spend gives less and less positive outcomes.
We dont have to revert to hack saws and pliers, but we can choose not to
spend any more and set certian limits ie no heart transplants, no hip
ops....
As long as we keep screaming at the Government of the day for increased
care we cannot afford and wont pay for in tax or private provision the
Health system will be stretched as it is.
Choose what you want by voting for what you want.
regards
Thing
Harvey Wilson
I dont know of any New Zealander who would have voted for the
substandard health system that the present Government has now hoisted
upon us.
A Government that openly boasts of a massive tax surplus in excess of
eight billion dollars, but a government who at the same time wants to
sit on its hands and ignore the suffering of thousands of New
Zealanders while it bleats that there is no money available.
In a nutshell Labour is not the slightest bit interested in the
welfare of its voters, and adopts a, who cares, let the bastards suffer
and die attitude.
Labour clearly forgets that the first duty of any Government is the
well-being of its people.
Tihare Eruera
> A Government that openly boasts of a massive tax surplus in excess of
> eight billion dollars, but a government who at the same time wants to
> sit on its hands and ignore the suffering of thousands of New
> Zealanders while it bleats that there is no money available.
> In a nutshell Labour is not the slightest bit interested in the
> welfare of its voters, and adopts a, who cares, let the bastards suffer
> and die attitude.
>
> Labour clearly forgets that the first duty of any Government is the
> well-being of its people.
>
beneficiaries are not counted as unemployed
TE
-Newsman-
<wilson...@hotmail.com> wrote:
The first duty of any government is to *protect* its people.
But not from their own stupidity and lack of commonsense where the
appalling consequences of gluttony and sloth are concerned.
mikeg...@xtra.co.nz
-Newsman- wrote:
> The first duty of any government is to *protect* its people.
Yes, but ONLY from each other eg from socialist masochist twits like
ewe Spewsman.
> But not from their own stupidity and lack of commonsense...
So if you are not a masochist, then how come you want to be threatened
with jail unless you conform to what others say is good for you? eg
taxation?
Michael Gordge
-Newsman-
It's not a matter of 'want'; it's a matter of what I can treat as
tolerable.
I choose to live in a certain kind of society. This society comes with
its benefits and its less attractive aspects - such as useless
clappermouth dumbfucks like you - which is the case in any society.
And I am pefectly content for it to be this way.
You, plainly, are not, which is why:
1. You are such a hoplessly unhappy individual.
2. You have lost your reason and are manifestly beyond all help.
but not beyond the law....
mikeg...@xtra.co.nz
-Newsman- wrote:
> I choose to live in a certain kind of society.
Well good for you, now lets see if thats true, have a crack at
explaining why you need to be forced to conform to your own fucking
enjoyment and then have a crack at explaining the sadistical enjoyment
you get out of forcing others to conform to your values.
Michael Gordge
-Newsman-
>
>-Newsman- wrote:
>> I choose to live in a certain kind of society.
>
>Well good for you, now lets see if thats true, have a crack at
>explaining why you need to be forced to conform to your own fucking
>enjoyment
Gaaawd - what are you smoking these days?
You post little but absurd, unhinged nonsense.
Tell me - who is forcing me to conform to my own enjoyment?
ROTFL!
>and then have a crack at explaining the sadistical enjoyment
>you get out of forcing others to conform to your values.
>
Not a soul in this world has ever been forced by me to conform to my
values. They may have used, copied or emulated my values or maybe they
haven't.
Which is their freedom to choose, and which is exactly as it should
be.
Kerry
"Harvey Wilson" <wilson...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Every day more shocking statistics are coming to light over patients
> being denied adequate medical care by over stretched and underfunded
> health services.
>
> The latest to come to light according to todays Herald are patients
> needing treatment for heart/artery operations at Aucklands Hospital are
> being turned away because of lack of staff and facilities.
>
> When will the Labour Government finaly admit that it has allowed the
> health system in New Zealand to become an underfunded shambles and a
> service that is so run down and mismanaged that it is costing patients
> lives.
>
> Why does Labour continue to lie to the NZ public over its inept and
> callous handling and gross underfunding of one of this countrys
> essential services.
The health system is funded at a higher level than it ever has been
before
Most people's cost of doctors visits have or are about to halve, there
is more money in tertiary care than there has ever been
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job,
wait until you hire an amateur.
Harvey Wilson
Kerry wrote:
> In article <1145221119.9...@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
> "Harvey Wilson" <wilson...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Every day more shocking statistics are coming to light over patients
> > being denied adequate medical care by over stretched and underfunded
> > health services.
> >
> > The latest to come to light according to todays Herald are patients
> > needing treatment for heart/artery operations at Aucklands Hospital are
> > being turned away because of lack of staff and facilities.
> >
> > When will the Labour Government finaly admit that it has allowed the
> > health system in New Zealand to become an underfunded shambles and a
> > service that is so run down and mismanaged that it is costing patients
> > lives.
> >
> > Why does Labour continue to lie to the NZ public over its inept and
> > callous handling and gross underfunding of one of this countrys
> > essential services.
>
> The health system is funded at a higher level than it ever has been
> before
>
> Most people's cost of doctors visits have or are about to halve, there
> is more money in tertiary care than there has ever been
>
> --
While it may be cheaper now to go to your GP, the waiting lists for
surgery are at an all time high and steadily increasing.
Yes in most cases if it is a medical emergency then specialist care is
available, but for the rest of those unfortunate patients, many in
extreme pain and in steadily worsening medical condition the situation
is bleak.
Surely in light of the latest revelations regarding hospital waiting
lists no one could find the rapidly worsening situation as either ideal
or acceptable.
Kerry
"Harvey Wilson" <wilson...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Kerry wrote:
> > In article <1145221119.9...@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
> > "Harvey Wilson" <wilson...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Every day more shocking statistics are coming to light over patients
> > > being denied adequate medical care by over stretched and underfunded
> > > health services.
> > >
> > > The latest to come to light according to todays Herald are patients
> > > needing treatment for heart/artery operations at Aucklands Hospital are
> > > being turned away because of lack of staff and facilities.
> > >
> > > When will the Labour Government finaly admit that it has allowed the
> > > health system in New Zealand to become an underfunded shambles and a
> > > service that is so run down and mismanaged that it is costing patients
> > > lives.
> > >
> > > Why does Labour continue to lie to the NZ public over its inept and
> > > callous handling and gross underfunding of one of this countrys
> > > essential services.
> >
> > The health system is funded at a higher level than it ever has been
> > before
> >
> > Most people's cost of doctors visits have or are about to halve, there
> > is more money in tertiary care than there has ever been
> >
> > --
>
> While it may be cheaper now to go to your GP, the waiting lists for
> surgery are at an all time high and steadily increasing.
Are they? Or is the demand higher?
Show us your statistics . We have an aging population and more
operations to offer the aging. It stands to reason then that waiting
list number still increase.
We are also performing more surgeries than in history
> Yes in most cases if it is a medical emergency then specialist care is
> available, but for the rest of those unfortunate patients, many in
> extreme pain and in steadily worsening medical condition the situation
> is bleak.
It's not bleak. There are operations done, just not at the rate you
would like
For people whose conditions do not reach the required levels for surgery
it is a waiting game, and it certainly can be bleak. We can only do so
many operations a day at the level of funding available today
Was your party of choice offering increased health funding in the last
election?
> Surely in light of the latest revelations regarding hospital waiting
> lists no one could find the rapidly worsening situation as either ideal
> or acceptable.
A) it's not rapidly worsening. Operations are being performed at
greater rates than ever before. The need is increasing with our aging
population, as is the number of conditions that surgical treatment are
available for.
B) you need to support such claims with something other than anecdote
C) Sick people receive excellent health care at little or no cost in
this country every day
William Walker
with non-genuine needs who continue to take health and hospital systems for
a ride, and it is not just a problem in Australia and NZ it is a world wide
problem which all governments must address. I am calling for Medicare and
free health care to be scrapped, and making everybody even the poor seek
health insurance.
William Walker
"Harvey Wilson" <wilson...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1145221119.9...@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Sue Bilstein
wrote:
>
>C) Sick people receive excellent health care at little or no cost in
>this country every day
Do they? which health care workers work for free?
Harvey Wilson
I would be happy to do so, a few months ago a close family member was
being operated on in one of our major hospitals, the placement of two
stents for severe aneurisms, one in the femoral artery, the other in
the illiac, forgive my spelling.
An incision is made in the right and left groin in this patients case
to allow the surgeon to place the stents, with the incisions made and
one stent in place a further emergency required that the theatre be
vacated, so my elderly relative had the incisions closed and was
returned to the ward.
It was a further two days before theatre space and a surgeon became
available to complete the stent procedure, with the resulting trauma of
the patient having to have the incisions reopened to complete the
procedure.
Now he is a tough old bird and survived, but this is just one example
of the many shortages of both theatre space and medical expertise.
A desirable situation, surely not.!!
Mike Parsons
> In article <1145221119.9...@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
> "Harvey Wilson" <wilson...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Every day more shocking statistics are coming to light over patients
>>being denied adequate medical care by over stretched and underfunded
>>health services.
>>
>>The latest to come to light according to todays Herald are patients
>>needing treatment for heart/artery operations at Aucklands Hospital are
>>being turned away because of lack of staff and facilities.
>>
>>When will the Labour Government finaly admit that it has allowed the
>>health system in New Zealand to become an underfunded shambles and a
>>service that is so run down and mismanaged that it is costing patients
>>lives.
>>
>>Why does Labour continue to lie to the NZ public over its inept and
>>callous handling and gross underfunding of one of this countrys
>>essential services.
>
>
> The health system is funded at a higher level than it ever has been
> before
>
> Most people's cost of doctors visits have or are about to halve, there
> is more money in tertiary care than there has ever been
Sid should specify how much he thinks the health budget should be, and
therefore how much more tax he wants to pay.
Mike Parsons
> "Harvey Wilson" <wilson...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>The health system is funded at a higher level than it ever has been
>>>before
>>>
>>>Most people's cost of doctors visits have or are about to halve, there
>>>is more money in tertiary care than there has ever been
>>
>>surgery are at an all time high and steadily increasing.
>
> Are they? Or is the demand higher?
He doesn't know what he's talking about. He just likes to complain; for
him, it's a hobby.
> Show us your statistics. We have an aging population and more
> operations to offer the aging. It stands to reason then that waiting
> list number still increase.
> We are also performing more surgeries than in history
He'll just bluster in response.
Sue Bilstein
wrote:
>
>The health system is funded at a higher level than it ever has been
>before
>
>Most people's cost of doctors visits have or are about to halve,
Now that's bullshit. Most people's cost of doctor's visits have
increased somewhat recently with the shift to PHOs. Most doctors are
already sick of the increased admin work with PHOs.
mikeg...@xtra.co.nz
-Newsman- wrote:
> >Well good for you, now lets see if thats true, have a crack at
> >explaining why you need to be forced to conform to your own fucking
> >enjoyment
>
> Gaaawd - what are you smoking these days?
Oh so no answer, you were telling porkies obviously.
> Which is their freedom to choose, and which is exactly as it should
> be.
Oh so *their* freedom is a good idea is it? So how come you're a
socialist? gawd what a fucking liar you are.
Michael Gordge
John Cawston
Sid should keep up his private health insurance.
JC
-Newsman-
>
>-Newsman- wrote:
>> >Well good for you, now lets see if thats true, have a crack at
>> >explaining why you need to be forced to conform to your own fucking
>> >enjoyment
>>
>> Gaaawd - what are you smoking these days?
>
>Oh so no answer, you were telling porkies obviously.
You received an answer but in your shameful dishonesty you excluded it
from your post.
>
>> Which is their freedom to choose, and which is exactly as it should
>> be.
>
>Oh so *their* freedom is a good idea is it?
Why not?
>So how come you're a socialist?
A fanatasy of your latest brainfart. As always you speak from a
position of the profoundest ignorance.
>gawd what a fucking liar you are.
>
Only the certifiable would draw such a conclusion.
This ends our correspondence. Peddle your cretinous ranting claptrap
elsewhere.
E. Scrooge
"William Walker" <ww1...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:dIH0g.8442$vy1....@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> It's not the pollies who are causing long waiting lists, it is the people
> with non-genuine needs who continue to take health and hospital systems
> for a ride, and it is not just a problem in Australia and NZ it is a world
> wide problem which all governments must address. I am calling for
> Medicare and free health care to be scrapped, and making everybody even
> the poor seek health insurance.
>
> William Walker
Given the demand for treatment by the entire country on Private Health Care
the cost of Medical Insurance would go right up. Those than can afford are
in pretty good health and nice cushy jobs. They don't sit round at the pubs
boozing and smoking half their lives either.
Probably only cost you about 10 grand a year for everyone to be on Private
Health Care, Texas Ranger.
E. Scrooge
E. Scrooge
"Mike Parsons" <mike.pa...@hot.mail.comma> wrote in message
news:4443...@clear.net.nz...
How about making sure how the money is being used by the Hospitals?
Are they paying for fucking bullshit horoscope readings like the NZ Army?
E. Scrooge
a_l_p
But the crazy part is that meantime the people who are in pain and/or disabled
are using up funds anyway. E.g. criteria for hip op include not being able to
do a whole range of things unaided, so the sufferer gets, as well as medication
for the pain, support with housework and personal care. And in the meantime
s/he is losing social contacts and recreational habits, unable to work at career
or voluntary work, i.e. is in a position of consuming more and contributing less
to society, while at the same time through being too unfit to move much is
becoming less healthy for when surgery *does* actually occur.
It seems to me that a massive catch-up targeting the "otherwise would be
productive" patients would make a hell of a lot of sense, using staff and
facilities to the maximum safe level until the list and the non-list are cut
right down, then keep funding at a level such that people don't become
unhealthier waiting for treatment. These are not conditions that will get
better by themselves. I've heard of spontaneous remissions in cancers but never
in hip degeneration.
A L P
Geopelia
Harvey Wilson
You do realize that most major surgery is not carried out in private
hospitals and regardles of health insurance or otherwise, the patient
is dependant on the availability of both surgeon, medical staff and
theatre.
Or are you under the illusion that say major heart surgery etc, is
performed down the road at your local private hospital.
Harvey Wilson
Parsons presents the unofficial attitude of all Labour politicians,
that despite the overtaxing of the NZ wage earner and the enormous tax
surplus in Government coffers, that to provide a satisfactory health
service for all New Zealanders would require a further massive lift in
personal taxation.
Same old leftist whining and nonsense that effective levels of health
care are unaffordable.
Harvey Wilson
No, no, Mr Parsons, bluster, bullshit, and mistruth, are the
prerogative of the Labour Politician and the party machine.
You work so close to the Labour coal face that you can no longer
differentiate between what is party propaganda, and what is reality.
mikeg...@xtra.co.nz
-Newsman- wrote:
> You received an answer but in your shameful dishonesty you excluded it
> from your post.
**Gaaawd - what are you smoking these days?** is not an answer.
The question again
why you need to be forced, threatened with jail, to conform to your own
fucking enjoyment?
If you claim you are not being forced or threatened with jail to
conform to your own enjoyment, then why do YOU need an invented law, ie
why do YOU need to be threatened with jail demanding YOU pay eg tax?
Note, In reality YOU can ONLY speak for YOU.
> >So how come you're a socialist?
>
> A fanatasy of your latest brainfart. As always you speak from a
> position of the profoundest ignorance.
Oh so you believe tax is theft? Thats funny I have never read a post of
your claiming tax is theft.
Michael Gordge
Kerry
wrote:
I agree with you.
The hip waiting lists are not very long, because mobility impairment
has more weight in the formula assessment. It's your varicose veins and
haemorrhoids you have to worry about. You cannot get Vv surgery under
the public health system anymore, not 'important' enough, but for many
people quite debilitating. (actually you can get them, but you have to
be extremely bad to meet the criteria)
Kerry
Sue Bilstein <sue_bi...@yahoop.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 19:03:24 +1200, Kerry <ker...@iiiihug.co.invalid>
> wrote:
> >
> >The health system is funded at a higher level than it ever has been
> >before
> >
> >Most people's cost of doctors visits have or are about to halve,
>
> Now that's bullshit. Most people's cost of doctor's visits have
> increased somewhat recently with the shift to PHOs. Most doctors are
> already sick of the increased admin work with PHOs.
Whose doctors fees have gone up? Some people's doctors visits have gone
up because the costs of providing the service have gone up. But if the
consultation fees of an individual in the heavily subsidised groups have
gone up since the price before the rolling out of the increased funding
give us your reference.
The only group that has not had $25 or so extra a consultation given to
the IPa is the 25-64s and that happens this July. Everyone else has had
huge amounts of money put in, and fees have gone down by $15-25 for
consultations.
'Most doctors' aren't sick of the ability to provide more service for
better payment. 'Most doctors' say the primary healthcare initiative
has a hope of saving general practice as a speciality, and has enabled
them to stay in the speciality they love. But maybe I know more doctors
than you.
Kerry
"Harvey Wilson" <wilson...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Mike Parsons wrote:
> > Kerry wrote:
> > > "Harvey Wilson" <wilson...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>The health system is funded at a higher level than it ever has been
> > >>>before
> > >>>
> > >>>Most people's cost of doctors visits have or are about to halve, there
> > >>>is more money in tertiary care than there has ever been
> > >>
> > >>While it may be cheaper now to go to your GP, the waiting lists for
> > >>surgery are at an all time high and steadily increasing.
> > >
> > > Are they? Or is the demand higher?
> >
> > He doesn't know what he's talking about. He just likes to complain; for
> > him, it's a hobby.
> >
> > > Show us your statistics. We have an aging population and more
> > > operations to offer the aging. It stands to reason then that waiting
> > > list number still increase.
> > > We are also performing more surgeries than in history
> >
> > He'll just bluster in response.
>
> No, no, Mr Parsons, bluster, bullshit, and mistruth, are the
> prerogative of the Labour Politician and the party machine.
Then give us your statistics.
>
> You work so close to the Labour coal face that you can no longer
> differentiate between what is party propaganda, and what is reality.
You seem out of touch with reality to my eyes. So give us the real
numbers here.
Kerry
"Harvey Wilson" <wilson...@hotmail.com> wrote:
You seem confused Sid. Waiting lists are for elective surgery. You
are bemoaning waiting lists for elective surgery. That is the surgery
that is absolutely appropriate for your private hospital, where
availability is rarely a problem.
> Or are you under the illusion that say major heart surgery etc, is
> performed down the road at your local private hospital.
It most certainly is.
Or are you complaining about waiting lists for acute surgery? There are
no waiting lists for acute cardiac surgery.
You seem confused.
Kerry
"Harvey Wilson" <wilson...@hotmail.com> wrote:
But an emergency one, as you said. No doubt the emergency was seen as
trivial in your eyes,
So he got the surgery he needed under the public system.
But this is a very small country, we do not have multiple teams of
doctors working on acute and elective surgeries in certain specialities
in some parts of the country. Sometimes emergencies happen.
But some people do not think emergencies should ever affect them, unless
they are the person needing the emergency service.
Now if the emergency had been, for example, YOUR relative who was rushed
to hospital with a dissecting aortic aneurysm you would have been the
first screaming that the vascular surgeons should have stopped their
elective surgery to treat your relative in the emergency department
before he died. Which is probably what happened. 2 live people instead
of one
NB your anecdote is not proof that waiting lists are 'worse than ever' ,
nor that we are doing less surgeries than ever before. How long did the
old bird wait?
Kerry
Sue Bilstein <sue_bi...@yahoop.com> wrote:
How much does it cost you for surgery in the public hospital?
And yes, we all pay tax. Me more than most.
Harvey Wilson
Kerry wrote:
> In article <1145301827.4...@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
> "Harvey Wilson" <wilson...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > John Cawston wrote:
> > > Mike Parsons wrote:
>
>
> > > Sid should keep up his private health insurance.
> > >
> > > JC
> >
> > You do realize that most major surgery is not carried out in private
> > hospitals and regardles of health insurance or otherwise, the patient
> > is dependant on the availability of both surgeon, medical staff and
> > theatre.
> >
>
> You seem confused Sid. Waiting lists are for elective surgery. You
> are bemoaning waiting lists for elective surgery. That is the surgery
> that is absolutely appropriate for your private hospital, where
> availability is rarely a problem.
>
> > Or are you under the illusion that say major heart surgery etc, is
> > performed down the road at your local private hospital.
>
> It most certainly is.
>
> Or are you complaining about waiting lists for acute surgery? There are
> no waiting lists for acute cardiac surgery.
>
> You seem confused.
>
I wonder why it is then that my elderly relative was told that even if
he should go private, the the operation for his stents would still
entail the procedure to be carried out at the public hospital, and he
would then be returned to the private facility after the successful
conclusion.
Or do you suggest that either the old man and his family are liars, or
the private hospital concerned deliberately misled them.
I note with interest how you conveniently ignore the old man being sent
back to the ward half way through his surgery then facing a two day
wait for its completion.
Presumably you find this a satisfactory, normal, and desirable
situation.
Kerry
"Harvey Wilson" <wilson...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Kerry wrote:
> > You seem confused.
> >
>
> I wonder why it is then that my elderly relative was told that even if
> he should go private, the the operation for his stents would still
> entail the procedure to be carried out at the public hospital, and he
> would then be returned to the private facility after the successful
> conclusion.
I don't know what city you live in.
I imagine that is because of his age and having a vascular surgery. He
needs an acute arrest team and the availability of an ICU. Something
private hospitals do not supply. High risk public patients do have
surgeries done in public when they need the availability of ICU. Even
private surgeons do not want to put their patients at more risk than
necessary, and know the systems available in the public hospital are
necessary for their high risk patients.
That is not the norm for most elective surgery
>
> Or do you suggest that either the old man and his family are liars, or
> the private hospital concerned deliberately misled them.
No I suggest you are ignorant, and willfully choose not to understand
the reasons why. Because it suits your 'argument'
So he got his surgery done privately in the hospital system, and his
private surgery was curtailed and then redone privately in the hospital
system
Why aren't you angry about the private medical system?
>
> I note with interest how you conveniently ignore the old man being sent
> back to the ward half way through his surgery then facing a two day
> wait for its completion.
>
> Presumably you find this a satisfactory, normal, and desirable
> situation.
No but I understand it exactly
Harvey Wilson
Because the pre -op, operation, and post -op were carried out at the
public hospital when both he and the family discovered that it could
not be done privately.
You are correct in your premise that the theatre was required by
another patient requiring urgent and immediate surgery for a AAA.
Neither the old man nor his family had any objections that this life
saving surgery took priority and were happy to have stood aside.
What they were annoyed about was the further two day delay in
completing his initial operation and the added trauma, stress, and
infection risk posed to the patient.
Im sorry but a delay of that nature where an elderly patient is
concerned must be considered by any responsible person as less than
satisfactory.
Kerry
"Harvey Wilson" <wilson...@hotmail.com> wrote:
But you are not happy. Or at least think you'll use it as an example of
everything that is wrong with the health system.
Maybe this is an example of what is manifestly right about our health
system? People who need get, people who can wait may have to, to let
those who cannot wait a moment longer into the queue.
>
> What they were annoyed about was the further two day delay in
> completing his initial operation and the added trauma, stress, and
> infection risk posed to the patient.
Well 2 days to get elective surgery is not bad. He needed to be
scheduled for several hours in theatres that were already booked. They
rearranged operations to get him several hours in a theatre within 2
days. His surgeons also rearranged their schedules to complete his
surgery in 2 days. There are not lots of, or even 1 free theatre with
anaesthetist, surgeons, nurses, technicians available to do cancelled
surgeries in Nz hospitals. He needed very specific specialist
treatment, with specific vascular surgeons. He needed an arranged ICU
bed. He needed hours of theatre time and the team of people necessary
to run that surgery.
You have no idea what a feat that is. I do
>
> Im sorry but a delay of that nature where an elderly patient is
> concerned must be considered by any responsible person as less than
> satisfactory.
But understandable.
How would you have felt if he was the one with the rupturing AAA that
had to die while they were just opening the skin of a patient having an
elective surgery? Would you have been happy if the vascular team had
refused because they couldn't make a stable patient with a skin incision
wait?
This in New Zealand man. A country of compromise between what we want
and what we can have.
thingy
> thingy wrote:
>
>>dickydoo wrote:
>>
>>>"Stan" <ecr...@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
>>>news:z3B0g.8197$vy1....@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>>
>>>
>>>>"Harvey Wilson" <wilson...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:1145221119.9...@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Every day more shocking statistics are coming to light over patients
>>>>>being denied adequate medical care by over stretched and underfunded
>>>>>health services.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>exponential growth of technolgy in health care. New electronic means for
>>>>diagnosis require huge sums of money to buy. Not just for one hospital.
>>>>Just do a quick count of how many hospitals you have in the whole country
>>>>and multiply the cost of just providing one Catscan machine to each.
>>>>Plus the costs of the technicians to operate them...plus the admin costs.
>>>>Everytime you hear of a new breakthrough to save life, think of the cost
>>>>also. Then think of what you would cut down on to pay for it. Then think
>>>>of how many jobs will be lost in the cutting down...and the tax loss from
>>>>those jobs as well...and the welfare costs to the losers.
>>>
>>>So we revert back to ether or a knock on the head,amputations with hack saws
>>>and pliers.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>No we choose whether to fund ever greater levels of care giving ever
>>less useful outcomes for us as a Nation.
>>
>>ie basic health care and hygeine standards give the best return on money
>>spent in terms of quality of life and Net improved national GDP. From
>>then on the increased spend gives less and less positive outcomes.
>>
>>We dont have to revert to hack saws and pliers, but we can choose not to
>>spend any more and set certian limits ie no heart transplants, no hip
>>ops....
>>
>>As long as we keep screaming at the Government of the day for increased
>>care we cannot afford and wont pay for in tax or private provision the
>>Health system will be stretched as it is.
>>
>>Choose what you want by voting for what you want.
>>
>>regards
>>
>>Thing
>
>
> I dont know of any New Zealander who would have voted for the
> substandard health system that the present Government has now hoisted
> upon us.
>
> A Government that openly boasts of a massive tax surplus in excess of
> eight billion dollars,
and the Nats wanted to give it away. So who is left to vote for?
but a government who at the same time wants to
> sit on its hands and ignore the suffering of thousands of New
> Zealanders while it bleats that there is no money available.
> In a nutshell Labour is not the slightest bit interested in the
> welfare of its voters, and adopts a, who cares, let the bastards suffer
> and die attitude.
No, you have the option of taking out private health care. It is known
as looking after yourself...
Ditto pensions, if you are happy living on the state pension in
retirement fine, for myself I am saving privately.
>
> Labour clearly forgets that the first duty of any Government is the
> well-being of its people.
>
This is one of the reasons I think health should be on the agenda and be
debated during an election, it isnt. Why? because I think any
Government sees it as a bottomless pit with no hope of winning votes
longer term so they ALL avoid it.
I really think ring fencing a % of our taxes so we can see what is spent
on health is a good idea. If we can do it with ACC why not Health? The
percentages could also be different, smokers paying say double the
standard amount, ditto overweight or underweight people.
regards
Thing
thingy
> In article <1145258493....@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com>,>>>In article <1145221119.9...@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
>>> "Harvey Wilson" <wilson...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Every day more shocking statistics are coming to light over patients
>>>>being denied adequate medical care by over stretched and underfunded
>>>>health services.
>>>>
>>>>needing treatment for heart/artery operations at Aucklands Hospital are
>>>>being turned away because of lack of staff and facilities.
>>>>
>>>>When will the Labour Government finaly admit that it has allowed the
>>>>health system in New Zealand to become an underfunded shambles and a
>>>>service that is so run down and mismanaged that it is costing patients
>>>>lives.
>>>>
>>>>Why does Labour continue to lie to the NZ public over its inept and
>>>>callous handling and gross underfunding of one of this countrys
>>>>essential services.
>>>
>>>before
>>>
>>>Most people's cost of doctors visits have or are about to halve, there
>>>is more money in tertiary care than there has ever been
>>>
>>
>>While it may be cheaper now to go to your GP, the waiting lists for
>>surgery are at an all time high and steadily increasing.
>
>
> Are they? Or is the demand higher?
>
> list number still increase.
>
> We are also performing more surgeries than in history
>
>
>>available, but for the rest of those unfortunate patients, many in
>>extreme pain and in steadily worsening medical condition the situation
>>is bleak.
>
>
> It's not bleak. There are operations done, just not at the rate you
> would like
>
> For people whose conditions do not reach the required levels for surgery
> it is a waiting game, and it certainly can be bleak. We can only do so
> many operations a day at the level of funding available today
>
> election?
>
>
>>Surely in light of the latest revelations regarding hospital waiting
>>lists no one could find the rapidly worsening situation as either ideal
>>or acceptable.
>
>
> A) it's not rapidly worsening. Operations are being performed at
> greater rates than ever before. The need is increasing with our aging
> population, as is the number of conditions that surgical treatment are
> available for.
>
> B) you need to support such claims with something other than anecdote
>
>
> this country every day
>
My father was extreamly ill last year and was seen immediately, he had
excellent care and after care monitoring to make sure he recovered well
was also first rate. I have no complaints about the care he received
under the public health system. Last year my mother had a issue as well
but it was a 3 month waiting list, she went privately.
Over their lives they have worked hard and saved and have private
pensions, so now have no worries. Yet from what I can see lots of their
generation around them earned more yet saved less (or nothing) and now
have little in retirement, it was their choice. It would appear to be
happening again with my generation and indeed generation X, spend it now
and who cares about tomorrow....
For me the Pension, Public health DPB, etc should be the practical
minimum, above that then people should be providing for themselves.
regards
Thing
thingy
> On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 19:31:35 +1200, Kerry <ker...@iiiihug.co.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>
>>this country every day
>
>
Not the same argument.
Pharmac keeps the cost of drugs low. Then the agreed stuff is heavily
subsidized...
My family have had operations when needed at no cost....
regards
Thing
Harvey Wilson
You are being unreasonable, no one is criticizing the medical staff
involved, they are doing an almost superhuman job under the most trying
of conditions, having been a patient myself some three years ago in the
vascular ward at Aucklands hospital I have the greatest admiration for
all the surgical and general staff and for the expert care and
consideration I received.
This is not a criticism of this countrys medical staff far from it, but
an accolade that they manage despite the shocking nursing shortage,
lack of adequate funding and political duckshoving and disinterest, to
function as well as they do.
The fault here lies not with those at the coal face but with our
disinterested self seeking politicians.
Worst of all the money is there, ready waiting and available to offer
New Zealanders one of the best health services in the world, just take
a few billion out of the Governments slush fund, that massive tax
surplus they love to boast over, but then it would never do for the
present Government to be seen as pandering to the health needs of its
entire population.
dickydoo
> Labour clearly forgets that the first duty of any Government is the
> well-being of its people.
Who are now mainly refugees and people from the 3rd world. Its a great
service compared to where they came from.
Kerry
"Harvey Wilson" <wilson...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Kerry wrote:
And how would that have changed the experience of your relative?
Would there have been multiple vascular teams and extra theatres and
twice as many nursing staff and anaesthetists and ICU beds to ensure no
one need ever be inconvenienced and all should get what they want
exactly when they want it?
And who is to pay for this?
And what does this have to do with waiting lists?
Harvey Wilson
That is why this present Government gets away with the shambles it has
caused, the immigrants who overwhelm the health service are greatful
for receiving any type of care.
Interestingly when I was in the ward at Auckland, out of the nine
people receiving treatment only two were native born New Zealanders the
rest were recent immigrants, it is very much the same with out-patient
clinics where it is not unusual to find one is the only Kiwi in a
waiting room of twenty or more.
Not the fault of the immigrants of course, but it certainly has a great
bearing on why our over stretched health system is going into a steady
decline.
Just one more example of idiot Government immigration policy, where the
countrys social structures are unable to cope with the ever increasing
demands caused by the immigrant influx.
Far from raising the living standard of the third world refugee and
immigrant to those previously enjoyed by Kiwis, we as a country are
being rapidly dragged down to the life styles experienced by the
poorest examples of the third world.
Harvey Wilson
Surely you do not suggest that by a large increase in available medical
staff, coupled with the most modern of equipment and more adequate
theatre space, would have no bearing on waiting lists or lead to making
patient care far easier for those responsible for their well-being.
Its a very simple premise Kerry, one cannot dramatically increase a
countrys population without taking steps to ensure that the essential
services are increased in accordance, that is not being done.
But I would have thought, and Im surprised by your attitude where
health is concerned, that you are prepared to contemplate settling for
second best.
New Zealanders are entitled to expect the best health care that money
can buy, we are not getting it.
Kerry
"Harvey Wilson" <wilson...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> dickydoo wrote:
> > >snip<
> > > Labour clearly forgets that the first duty of any Government is the
> > > well-being of its people.
> >
> > Who are now mainly refugees and people from the 3rd world. Its a great
> > service compared to where they came from.
>
> That is why this present Government gets away with the shambles it has
> caused, the immigrants who overwhelm the health service are greatful
> for receiving any type of care.
>
> Interestingly when I was in the ward at Auckland, out of the nine
> people receiving treatment only two were native born New Zealanders the
> rest were recent immigrants, it is very much the same with out-patient
> clinics where it is not unusual to find one is the only Kiwi in a
> waiting room of twenty or more.
What a load of crap
Harvey Wilson
Kerry wrote:
> In article <1145314741.1...@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> "Harvey Wilson" <wilson...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > dickydoo wrote:
> > > >snip<
> > > > Labour clearly forgets that the first duty of any Government is the
> > > > well-being of its people.
> > >
> > > Who are now mainly refugees and people from the 3rd world. Its a great
> > > service compared to where they came from.
> >
> > That is why this present Government gets away with the shambles it has
> > caused, the immigrants who overwhelm the health service are greatful
> > for receiving any type of care.
> >
> > Interestingly when I was in the ward at Auckland, out of the nine
> > people receiving treatment only two were native born New Zealanders the
> > rest were recent immigrants, it is very much the same with out-patient
> > clinics where it is not unusual to find one is the only Kiwi in a
> > waiting room of twenty or more.
>
> What a load of crap
>
Now you are being emotive and silly, Auckland being New Zealands
biggest based immigrant city has an exceptionaly large number of of
recent arrivals turning up for medical care compared to other New
Zealand centers, as would be expected.
To suggest as you appear to believe, that there are but a very few
recent arrivals using Aucklands medical services just makes you look
foolish and wildly out of touch.
Mutlley
>
>
>I wonder why it is then that my elderly relative was told that even if
>he should go private, the the operation for his stents would still
>entail the procedure to be carried out at the public hospital, and he
>would then be returned to the private facility after the successful
>conclusion.
>
>Or do you suggest that either the old man and his family are liars, or
>the private hospital concerned deliberately misled them.
>
>I note with interest how you conveniently ignore the old man being sent
>back to the ward half way through his surgery then facing a two day
>wait for its completion.
>
>Presumably you find this a satisfactory, normal, and desirable
>situation.
Sounds like a friend of ours in their 70s. Tax payers all their
lives told that they would have to wait several years for an heart
op. Eventually he go so bad that they had to take out a 37K "we'll
take your house when you die" loan to get the op done. It was done
within a week.
No doubt that Helen and co if they go real sick they would go to the
top of the list or use the very generous tax payer funded private
health insurance..
dickydoo
"Mutlley" <mutle...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:7me842dm2iajk4dfb...@4ax.com...
Sarns
"dickydoo" <dick...@xtra.co.nz> wrote in message
news:vfX0g.13722$JZ1.5...@news.xtra.co.nz...
Well i have to say..... i was most impressed..i only waited 5 months for the
operation i've just had. I also got an appt thru for another department
within 3 weeks.
Sarns
Sue Bilstein
wrote:
>In article <uji64296pk7pes44e...@4ax.com>,
> Sue Bilstein <sue_bi...@yahoop.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 19:31:35 +1200, Kerry <ker...@iiiihug.co.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >C) Sick people receive excellent health care at little or no cost in
>> >this country every day
>>
>> Do they? which health care workers work for free?
>
>How much does it cost you for surgery in the public hospital?
So you don't understand the difference between the cost of a service,
and the price of it?
It always costs to provide medical care - wages, equipment, buildings,
etc are not free. The more efficient the provider, the lower the cost
per procedure. Given that the health budget has increased markedly
and the number of procedures has not increased noticeably, one
suspects that providers are not as efficient as they should be.
Sue Bilstein
wrote:
>In article <71o642hqag4vcq50i...@4ax.com>,
> Sue Bilstein <sue_bi...@yahoop.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 19:03:24 +1200, Kerry <ker...@iiiihug.co.invalid>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >The health system is funded at a higher level than it ever has been
>> >before
>> >
>> >Most people's cost of doctors visits have or are about to halve,
>>
>> Now that's bullshit. Most people's cost of doctor's visits have
>> increased somewhat recently with the shift to PHOs. Most doctors are
>> already sick of the increased admin work with PHOs.
>
>Whose doctors fees have gone up?
>Some people's doctors visits have gone
>up because the costs of providing the service have gone up. But if the
>consultation fees of an individual in the heavily subsidised groups have
>gone up since the price before the rolling out of the increased funding
>give us your reference.
Probably it's the people who are not in "heavily subsidised groups"
who have had price increases. I must only know unsubsidised people,
because everybody I talk to has experienced this.
>
>The only group that has not had $25 or so extra a consultation given to
>the IPa is the 25-64s and that happens this July. Everyone else has had
>huge amounts of money put in, and fees have gone down by $15-25 for
>consultations.
>
>'Most doctors' aren't sick of the ability to provide more service for
>better payment. 'Most doctors' say the primary healthcare initiative
>has a hope of saving general practice as a speciality, and has enabled
>them to stay in the speciality they love. But maybe I know more doctors
>than you.
You want to tell NatRad then: they had a feature recently on GPs
leaving the profession or the country, and this was a common theme -
the great increase in workload associated with capitation. The GPs
and nurses in the practice we go to are complaining of it.
Mike Parsons
> In article <1145304019.5...@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
> "Harvey Wilson" <wilson...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Mike Parsons wrote:
>>
>>>Kerry wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Harvey Wilson" <wilson...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>The health system is funded at a higher level than it ever has been
>>>>>>before
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Most people's cost of doctors visits have or are about to halve, there
>>>>>>is more money in tertiary care than there has ever been
>>>>>
>>>>>While it may be cheaper now to go to your GP, the waiting lists for
>>>>>surgery are at an all time high and steadily increasing.
>>>>
>>>>Are they? Or is the demand higher?
>>>
>>>He doesn't know what he's talking about. He just likes to complain; for
>>>him, it's a hobby.
>>>
>>>
>>>>Show us your statistics. We have an aging population and more
>>>>operations to offer the aging. It stands to reason then that waiting
>>>>list number still increase.
>>>>We are also performing more surgeries than in history
>>>
>>>He'll just bluster in response.
>>
>>No, no, Mr Parsons, bluster, bullshit, and mistruth, are the
>>prerogative of the Labour Politician and the party machine.
Heh ... he doesn't understand I've killfiled him. he probably think the
lack of replies from me to his post indicates some sort of capitulation
to the power of his ranting. LOL! What a plonker.
> Then give us your statistics.
He won't. He never has any.
Brian Dooley
<ker...@iiiihug.co.invalid> wrote:
>In article <1145301827.4...@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
> "Harvey Wilson" <wilson...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> John Cawston wrote:
>> > Mike Parsons wrote:
>
>
>> > Sid should keep up his private health insurance.
>> >
>> > JC
>>
>> You do realize that most major surgery is not carried out in private
>> hospitals and regardles of health insurance or otherwise, the patient
>> is dependant on the availability of both surgeon, medical staff and
>> theatre.
>>
>
>You seem confused Sid. Waiting lists are for elective surgery. You
>are bemoaning waiting lists for elective surgery. That is the surgery
>that is absolutely appropriate for your private hospital, where
>availability is rarely a problem.
>
>> Or are you under the illusion that say major heart surgery etc, is
>> performed down the road at your local private hospital.
>
>It most certainly is.
>
>Or are you complaining about waiting lists for acute surgery? There are
>no waiting lists for acute cardiac surgery.
>
>You seem confused.
Ignorance is more usual term for his complaint.
--
Brian Dooley
Wellington New Zealand
Sue Bilstein
Right, patients who are actually having a heart attack don't have to
wait.
But you wait 6 months for an angioplasty when you have two major
cardiac arteries 75% blocked.
John B
"Mike Parsons" <mike.pa...@hot.mail.comma> wrote in message
news:4444a4cc$1...@clear.net.nz...
> Heh ... he doesn't understand I've killfiled him. he probably
> think the lack of replies from me to his post indicates some
> sort of capitulation to the power of his ranting. LOL! What a
> plonker.
It's easy to understand you. You are a spin-doctyor for the
Labour Party. You are a propaganda machine. A good little
bullshitter and fraud.
You are also a coward to attack a man from behind the safety of a
kill-file.
>> Then give us your statistics.
>
> He won't. He never has any.
Truth is truth.
Kerry
Sue Bilstein <sue_bi...@yahoop.com> wrote:
Some people like to moan. It's not an easy job, there are large
compliance costs that have not been funded. However General practice
for the people doing it is less financially precarious than it has been
for a long time. Which does not mean to say that changing to capitation
based funding doesn't have its issues. But once they are worked out the
living is better these days than it was 5 years ago they tell me. Back
then people were seriously walking away from practices with nothing.
Next what needs addressing is the quality of life issues. Getting a
holiday occasionally while running a practice, that sort of thing.
That's the reason people are leaving, burnout. They'd be hard pressed
to be paid more giving up the profession. There are only so many middle
managers required....aren't there?
Kerry
Sue Bilstein <sue_bi...@yahoop.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 08:44:43 +1200, Kerry <ker...@iiiihug.co.invalid>
> wrote:
> >In article <uji64296pk7pes44e...@4ax.com>,
> > Sue Bilstein <sue_bi...@yahoop.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 19:31:35 +1200, Kerry <ker...@iiiihug.co.invalid>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >C) Sick people receive excellent health care at little or no cost in
> >> >this country every day
> >>
> >> Do they? which health care workers work for free?
> >
> >How much does it cost you for surgery in the public hospital?
>
> So you don't understand the difference between the cost of a service,
> and the price of it?
Yes I do understand those things.
So how much does it cost you for an operation in the public hospital?
>
> It always costs to provide medical care - wages, equipment, buildings,
> etc are not free.
O rly?
E. Scrooge
"Kerry" <ker...@iiiihug.co.invalid> wrote in message
news:kerryd-83C3AA....@news.xtra.co.nz...
> In article <tf894259l0le4kb0o...@4ax.com>,
> Sue Bilstein <sue_bi...@yahoop.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 08:44:43 +1200, Kerry <ker...@iiiihug.co.invalid>
>> wrote:
>> >In article <uji64296pk7pes44e...@4ax.com>,
>> > Sue Bilstein <sue_bi...@yahoop.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 19:31:35 +1200, Kerry <ker...@iiiihug.co.invalid>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >C) Sick people receive excellent health care at little or no cost in
>> >> >this country every day
>> >>
>> >> Do they? which health care workers work for free?
>> >
>> >How much does it cost you for surgery in the public hospital?
>>
>> So you don't understand the difference between the cost of a service,
>> and the price of it?
>
> Yes I do understand those things.
>
> So how much does it cost you for an operation in the public hospital?
>
>>
>> It always costs to provide medical care - wages, equipment, buildings,
>> etc are not free.
>
> O rly?
Of course not. She's only joking.
Everyone knows costs are rising all the time along with grow population
needs, while Hospitals are being cut back. The Auckland outfit even has
less beds than before.
The government can splash round medical aid overseas while the people in NZ
who need operations are being removed from the growing lists.
The 11 million on prison landscaping would pay for a few hip operations.
All the millions wasted on government services could be put into Health with
no extra tax funding needed.
E. Scrooge
Harvey Wilson
The figures quoted are not "My" statistics, but those presented by this
country's senior Health spokespersons and now belatedly acknowledged by
the Minister of Health.
Small points that both Parsons and Kerry are happy to pretend do not
exist.
It is a shame that these two individuals continue to embarrass
themseves with their pathetic pretence that the system is as good as it
gets and is beyond further improvement.
Parsons of course can be excused, to him any debate is an excuse for
personal abuse rather than a broad discussion, coupled of course with a
complete lack of any humanity towards there being any reduction of the
suffering of the 8000 plus unable to get medical assistance by way of
operations.
As for Kerry, the surprise is that she continues to contradict the
position taken by her senior spokes -people who freely admit that there
is indeed a huge problem, and one that is steadily getting worse, but
as many here appreciate her attitude is driven by her sense of
political loyalty.
Harvey Wilson
Says Dooley, pretending his understanding of the situation is so much
more extensive than that of the departmental heads of our Health
services.
george
While it may not fit your agenda
It isn't Auckland where they returned the surgical list to their GP's
care !
Harvey Wilson
Thats wonderful news George, you are suggesting there are no waiting
lists for surgery at hospitals in the greater Auckland region.
I understand these figures are to be released shortly, I think the size
of the lists will surprise you.
Sue Bilstein
> In article <tf894259l0le4kb0o...@4ax.com>,
> Sue Bilstein <sue_bi...@yahoop.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 08:44:43 +1200, Kerry <ker...@iiiihug.co.invalid>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >How much does it cost you for surgery in the public hospital?
> >
> > So you don't understand the difference between the cost of a service,
> > and the price of it?
>
> Yes I do understand those things.
>
> So how much does it cost you for an operation in the public hospital?
Evidently you don't - thanks for the demonstration.
>
> >
> > It always costs to provide medical care - wages, equipment, buildings,
> > etc are not free.
>
> O rly?
My argument judged distasteful by the Kerry-bot, and automatically
deleted.
Kerry
"Harvey Wilson" <wilson...@hotmail.com> wrote:
What figures? I haven't seen any roll off your fingers.
Numbers man, give us them
Harvey Wilson
Figures supplied by Pete Hodgson in todays Herald, the numbers
requiring surgery but who have been removed from waiting lists total
8108.
Let me point out this relates only to those being denied surgery, it
does not include those facing horrific delays while on the lists and
awaiting surgery.
Please answer me one thing, why are you so violently opposed to those
seeking an improved health service, you present as a MD, and as such
it's a very surprisng attitude for any doctor to take.
insider
How much did those bananas (or other item of your choice) that you
bought today price you Sue?
Kerry
"Harvey Wilson" <wilson...@hotmail.com> wrote:
You have not said anything substantive about waiting lists, just raged
about your personal experiences as if they reflect absolutely the
situation for most NZers. You rage against the government, but what if
it isn't their fault? The government spend 'our' money on everything
'we' want. I don't support your 'it's all the governments fault, gross
underfunding, etc etc " ideology. You are wrong.
The fact of the matter is health funding has increased by 60 percent
over the last few years, more people ARE getting operations than ever
before. Lists still exist though because demand has increased.
So how much more than 60 percent increased health funding do you want?
And how will we pay for it?
Should hospitals take the money and become more efficient? What if the
increased funding given to Hawke Bay hospital has been misused?
There will always be waiting lists. The reasons for them are complex.
We are a small country, no bigger than many international cities. We
have to spend wisely. Some people have to wait. How many people? You
obviously think too many. I see far more than ever before getting
operations as an improvement. I doubt its about more funding as much as
it is about efficient management in hospitals. And of course the public
recognising they also have a role in delays every time they don't turn
up for an appointment or operation. Something never said, but well
recognised as an important factor in the system.
Harvey Wilson
One wonders in these instances which cap you are wearing when you
reply, is the above your professional opinion, or is it your political
idealism speaking.
You mention our small population as a reason or excuse for the less
than adequate health care, well when I think back to when my parents
and other family and friends were alive in the 1950s, and couple that
with the much smaller population at that time, they faced no delays in
getting operations for the various conditions brought on by the onset
of old age.
So that rather destroys your argument that because of the countrys
small population that adequate medical care for all is not a viable
option.
So many other in your profession are speaking out against the health
systems shortcomings, and I applaud their dedication and honesty.
You know you will not be cast out of the political fold for telling it
like it is, and Im sure your colleague's will applaud you.
Kerry
"Harvey Wilson" <wilson...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Kerry wrote:
> >
> > There will always be waiting lists. The reasons for them are complex.
> > We are a small country, no bigger than many international cities. We
> > have to spend wisely. Some people have to wait. How many people? You
> > obviously think too many. I see far more than ever before getting
> > operations as an improvement. I doubt its about more funding as much as
> > it is about efficient management in hospitals. And of course the public
> > recognising they also have a role in delays every time they don't turn
> > up for an appointment or operation. Something never said, but well
> > recognised as an important factor in the system.
> >
>
> One wonders in these instances which cap you are wearing when you
> reply, is the above your professional opinion, or is it your political
> idealism speaking.
I don't have any political idealism, but feel free to keep wondering.
>
> You mention our small population as a reason or excuse for the less
> than adequate health care, well when I think back to when my parents
> and other family and friends were alive in the 1950s, and couple that
> with the much smaller population at that time, they faced no delays in
> getting operations for the various conditions brought on by the onset
> of old age.
>
Ahh the good old days. When the population was at least half that of
today, when there were more hospitals open, more doctors per head of
population, fewer things you could do to help people, and 60% of people
who broke their hip died.
Lets go back there, who will you kick out, and who won't you treat?
Harvey Wilson
I dont believe you can blame the medical profession of the day for not
having the technology we presently enjoy, one always has to accept
there will be an improvement in medicine and medical techniques over a
fifty year period.
But you do contradict yourself with the admission that fifty years ago
with half the population we enjoyed the best that the medical services
of the day could offer and twice the doctors per head of population
that we have today.
Even allowing for modern medicine and medical techniques our present
health system lags far behind what is acceptable, and yes of course
funding is higher than ever before, but it is still inadequate to meet
the need of the dramatically increased population, and that is the crux
of this entire argument.
Mike Parsons
> The 11 million on prison landscaping would pay for a few hip operations.
Yes it would. Do you want all money spent everywhere else to be diverted
into the Health budget? And why do you want the government to break the
law in constructing the four new prisons?
E. Scrooge
"Mike Parsons" <mike.pa...@hot.mail.comma> wrote in message
What the fuck has putting some grass seed and tarseal down instead of 11
million for garden show quality landscaping got to do with breaking the law?
H E A L T H could get millions more with no extra loss to the tax surplus
by gathering up all the millions which are being wasted elsewhere.
Maori TV and TVNZ should be cut free. Let them survive in the commercial
world from their own profits. Any outfit that can pay a damn newsreader
$800,000 a year for a couple of hours a day work is doing damn well.
A couple more top films and Sir Peter Jackson will be able to afford to buy
the entire country.
E. Scrooge
Mike Parsons
> "Mike Parsons" <mike.pa...@hot.mail.comma> wrote in message
> news:44459dfd$1...@clear.net.nz...
>
>>E. Scrooge wrote:
>>
>>>The 11 million on prison landscaping would pay for a few hip operations.
>>
>>Yes it would. Do you want all money spent everywhere else to be diverted
>>into the Health budget? And why do you want the government to break the
>>law in constructing the four new prisons?
>
>
> What the fuck has putting some grass seed and tarseal down instead of 11
> million for garden show quality landscaping got to do with breaking the law?
They're NOT doing 'garden show quality landscaping'; wherever did you
get that idea? But having said that, it isn't just 'tarseal and grass
seed'. You really don't know what you're talking about, do you?
As regards the law, Wouldn't you agree the Dept of Corrections would be
in serious trouble if they broke their resource consent conditions when
building four new prisons?
-Newsman-
But why would he want to own it?
Tilly
> dickydoo wrote:
> > > snip<
> > > Labour clearly forgets that the first duty of any Government is
> > > the well-being of its people.
> >
> > Who are now mainly refugees and people from the 3rd world. Its a
> > great service compared to where they came from.
>
> That is why this present Government gets away with the shambles it has
> caused, the immigrants who overwhelm the health service are greatful
> for receiving any type of care.
>
> Interestingly when I was in the ward at Auckland, out of the nine
> people receiving treatment only two were native born New Zealanders
> the rest were recent immigrants, it is very much the same with
> out-patient clinics where it is not unusual to find one is the only
> Kiwi in a waiting room of twenty or more.
LIAR.
Kerry
"Harvey Wilson" <wilson...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Even allowing for modern medicine and medical techniques our present
> health system lags far behind what is acceptable,
No it doesn't
Harvey Wilson
Clearly your knowledge of the ethnic diversity of many outpatient
clinics at Auckland hospital is even greater than your lack of
intellect.