 |
 |
Ah! Typo - one handed texting... WithOUT the functioning infrastructure as above. Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device -----Original Message----- From: [log in to unmask] Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2011 08:04:37 To: Ted Harding<[log in to unmask]>; <[log in to unmask]> Reply-To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: "FAQ's health cuts" If you are interested in evidence of cuts here are some suggestions: http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/nov/17/nhs-waiting-times-data Public health measure which depend on a functioning infrastructure would be a good place to start. Teenage pregnancy rates are likely to rise as the services like Connextions are cut and school nurses spread even thinner. The 6 week breastfeeding prevalence rate statistical collection published by the DH is useful both as an indicator of local services supporting new mothers in breastfeeding support and in take-up of the 6 week check. The more vulnerable a mother is the more likely this check gets forgotten with the functioning infrastructure as above. Healthy Start recipients and numbers of children requiring free school meals would give different but connected public health information about cuts. I am interested in the impact of paperless communication for new mothers impacts on families without easy access or time to search online. This includes reducing risks of cot death, making up infant formula and Birth to Five. That's probably enough for now. Good to join this list! Phyll MSc student on EBHC course Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device -----Original Message----- From: Ted Harding <[log in to unmask]> Sender: "Evidence based health (EBH)" <[log in to unmask]> Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 22:04:50 To: <[log in to unmask]> Reply-To: Ted Harding <[log in to unmask]> Subject: "FAQ's health cuts" Greetings all! I'm sending a composite of two messages to RadStats (mailing list of the Radical Statistics Group), composed from the original query by: Kate Bloor <[log in to unmask]> and a response from: Jane Galbraith <[log in to unmask]> (to both of whom this message is being copied, so you have their addresses, to reply directly). The originals can be read at: https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/ webadmin?A2=ind1111&L=RADSTATS&F=&S=&P=12704 https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/ webadmin?A2=ind1111&L=RADSTATS&F=&S=&P=13569 I am doing this on behalf of Kate and Jane. I think there is a lot of good knowledge out there on EBH which could be very helpful for this query. QUERY: Can anyone direct me to any good articles or papers, that show that privatisation of the NHS is not (or is) more efficient, or cheaper, than public provided care? Or information about the impact of [UK] coalition [government] policies on actual cuts or reductions in services? Politicians look for evidence only to support their argument, statisticians should assess all evidence. What we need is good quality evidence and discussion. Does that exist in the public/private NHS debate? END OF QUERY. With thanks, Ted. -------------------------------------------------------------------- E-Mail: (Ted Harding) <[log in to unmask]> Fax-to-email: +44 (0)870 094 0861 Date: 16-Nov-11 Time: 22:04:45 ------------------------------ XFMail ------------------------------