Why can’t doctors admit Tory NHS cuts are a myth?
The annual spend on the NHS has now reached £2,160 per person, and the figure has continued to rise steadily in terms of the percentage of Britain’s total income
When it comes to the NHS, the mantra ‘Tory cuts’ is repeated so many times that it’s just assumed to be true. In medicine, you hear it over and over again, with no one ever seeming to stop and question it.
I find this particularly strange given that doctors are supposed to practise evidence-based medicine and are, therefore, used to questioning data and asking for proof of claims.
All over social media, doctors and nurses are warning that Theresa May will spell the end of the NHS.
Well, I don’t buy it. If anything, Labour messed up when they were in power, rolling out disastrous policies, such as the Private Finance Initiative, which are now causing so many problems.
But go on social media and there is a cacophony of dire warnings about how the Conservatives are destroying the NHS. Many doctors I know who intend to vote Tory daren’t admit this in public for fear of the opprobrium they will face from the liberal Left.
Yet a report this week from the National Institute of Economic and Social Research found that health service spending is at its highest level in history. The report makes it clear that Jeremy Corbyn’s accusations that the Tories have presided over deep ‘cuts’ to the NHS budget are simply wrong.
The annual spend on the NHS has now reached £2,160 per person, and the figure has continued to rise steadily in terms of the percentage of Britain’s total income, increasing from 4.7 per cent in 1997 to 7.4 per cent last year.
What’s more, the Tories have pledged to pump in an extra £8 billion a year by 2022/23 — which is more than the £7.4 billion pledged by Labour
But still, the lie that Tories have presided over NHS cuts endures. Why?
I think it’s because accepting this lie is easier than facing reality. For the cold, hard truth is that, despite record levels of spending, our National Health Service is collapsing.
For make no mistake, it is collapsing. It breaks my heart to say this, but for some time those of us at the coalface have known that things can’t go on much longer. Services are being axed or stripped to the bone. But this is not because the Government is taking money away.
The bitter pill to swallow is that, despite record funds being put in, the demands made on the NHS are outstripping the money.
The problem is that the calls on our health service are growing exponentially. We expect it to give us whatever we want — but advances in medicine, combined with an ageing population, mean that the costs of providing this are rising exponentially, too.
The drugs bill for the NHS in the past five years alone has risen by around 50 per cent.
If the NHS is to survive despite these burdens, then we must also take individual responsibility for the way we use it and the pressure we place on its precious resources. The NHS simply doesn’t have bottomless pockets.
Yet people don’t want to take responsibility for their health because they don’t see the point — since the NHS will be there to pick up the pieces.
People use and abuse the NHS because they see it as ‘free’. They fail to turn up to appointments, needlessly call out ambulances or go to AE because it’s more convenient than seeing a GP. They feel entitled to demand whatever treatment they want.
The problem is that the NHS is from a different, simpler time. It’s an historical artefact, and it’s unrealistic to expect it to be able to keep up with the demands this brave new world places on it.
What we really need is a serious, profound debate about what the NHS is actually for.
We need to decide how it’s going to be funded and what we can expect it to provide. Do we, as a society, want the NHS to pay for obesity surgery, or IVF, for example?
Several generations have now been born and brought up under its care and don’t know anything different. Simply put, they take it for granted.
The real problem is not the fantasy of Tory cuts, but the fact that our expectations of the NHS are more than it can ever deliver.
Sleep-walking into serious trouble
Problems with sleep are incredibly common. In fact, insomnia will affect one in five of us at some point.
So what is the answer? All too often, medics simply reach for the prescription pad. But, more often than not, insomnia is a symptom of an underlying problem, and a sleeping pill is little more than a sticking plaster that never really gets to the root of the issue.
While there are times when sleeping tablets can be helpful, sleep researchers this week warned about the dangers of over-reliance on such pills, linking them with cancer, falls and even heart attacks. One scientist went so far as to brand them ‘extremely hazardous’.
But what’s the alternative? The majority of cases of insomnia can be addressed through careful behaviour change.
There are some excellent sleep clinics in the NHS that offer a wealth of alternatives to medication, including specialist talking therapy, but waiting lists are incredibly long.
Yet we are failing patients in not providing the help they need, and I worry that we are storing up bigger problems for those patients further down the line.
I was fascinated to read a piece of research that looked at how we comfort one another.
It examined video footage of how people responded to the victim of a crime, looking at their body language and interaction with the victim — then compared this with the way primates like chimps demonstrated compassion, which involved different types of physical closeness.
The research seems to suggest that offering hugs to soothe victims of violence is a primal instinct.
But, to me, it also speaks about the biology of love. The processes that determine human behaviour have been the subject of fierce debate for decades.
Yet, in one respect, things are refreshingly simple. Countless studies have shown that love and support are essential factors to normal development in childhood and beyond.
Regardless of how difficult life seems, all we want, deep down, is to feel loved and cared for.
Blimey! Potheads are SO touchy
Occasionally, something really hits a nerve — and, my goodness, I’ve been surprised by the response I had to an article I wrote last week about cannabis.
I pointed out that there appears to be a common thread of cannabis use among jihadis, as well as many others who commit violent crimes.
The link between cannabis and psychosis is well established. Now research is emerging which suggests that, in some people, cannabis use can shrink the orbitofrontal cortex in the brain — which is responsible, among other things, for empathy.
Further studies have shown that this shrinkage can have a devastating effect, stunting people’s ability to engage with others’ emotional responses.
To me, this warrants serious consideration — not because it in some way excuses the terrorists’ behaviour (it doesn’t, of course), but because this flies in the face of the pro-cannabis lobby who would have us believe that the drug is harmless.
Patients claimed that cannabis simply made them sleepy, or hungry, or relaxed
Well, I was quite taken aback by the hundreds of threatening emails and tweets from people furious with me for even daring to suggest that smoking cannabis might negatively affect one’s interaction with others.
Mostly, it was people who smoke cannabis sending me aggressive messages insisting that cannabis doesn’t make people aggressive. The irony of this was clearly lost on them.
Who knew that potheads could be so touchy? One person even contacted a friend of mine and threatened her.
Others claimed that cannabis simply made them sleepy, or hungry, or relaxed — and therefore it was ludicrous to suggest that it might make someone less empathic.
Well, alcohol makes me sleepy and relaxed, but we know that it is a risk factor in all manner of violent crimes. Just because a substance has a certain effect on one person, doesn’t mean that effect is universal.
A study published earlier this year by an eminent professor of psychiatry looked at cannabis use and violence in the U.S., and found that the drug was the single most common variable in violent crimes.
The paper concluded: ‘Greater marijuana accessibility, resulting in more use, will lead to increased health risks in all demographic categories across the U.S.. Violence is a well-publicised, prominent risk from the more potent, current marijuana available.’
It couldn’t be clearer. It might not be what those who use cannabis want to hear, but I’m afraid getting angry about it will do no good.