[log in to unmask] and
Andrew Herd <[log in to unmask]> wrote in favour of explicit rationing
>>> Subject: Re[2]: Lies, damn lies and Government lies
>>> Is this not an ideal opportunity to start the ball rolling with a
>>> national debate about whether certain conditions will be funded on
>the
>>> NHS and certain ones won't?
which is reasonable, but...
if we are talkig about certain conditions then rather than Viagra
being banned, and the rather expensive injections and moderately
expensive MUSE being continued, we should have seen an explicit
decision resulting in an increase in the number of appointments for
Urologists for conditions other than potency, and a ban on NHS
prescription of the existing treatments.
This would be logical, sensible to a degree, and save money for the
NHS - unless Katie can put some figures on the cost of absent
erections and flesh out her account into a business case for the NHS
saving money on Prozac by providing Sildenafil.
Of course, if we could accurately link an incident of depression to
impotence, and having decided not to treat impotence on the NHS,
presumably the patient would be invited to pay for his and his
wife's Prozac. Logically.
What we see at present is the worst sort of fudge [1] which
demonstrates that somewhere in the layers of alleged management in
the NHS nobody could get up the gumption to step aside from the
onrushing problem and actually do something sensible.
---------------------------
[1] the best sort of course contains rum, raisins, and bits of
chocolate
--- OffRoad 1.9r registered to Adrian Midgley
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|