1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

If the electoral promises being made about extra funding for the NHS ever come to fruition...

Discussion in 'Personal' started by Duke of York, Nov 22, 2019.

  1. Duke of York

    Duke of York Star commenter

    Which NHS do you think could do with this funding the most?

    I listened to yesterday's episode of Beyond Today this afternoon, which asked whether mental health is breaking the NHS. It contained stories from people in desperate need of treatment and comments from specialists in mental health care about why it frequently takes many, many months to access any support at all, apart from being dosed up with antidepressants from their GP that do little to help. Apparently, one in four of us suffers from a mental health disorder.

    But I also read in today's news that you're more likely to be diagnosed with cancer in the overstretched resouces of the A&E dept of a hospital than anywhere else.

    On the other hand, there's been a massive increase in the number of people suffering lung disease and diabetes, draining NHS resources and are most likely linked to the modern lifestye.

    I suspect that mental health issues and cancer also have links to the modern way of life. Is the answer to pour more money into the NHS so they can help us cope the problems we have, or is it wiser for the money to be spent erradicaing the causes?

    How would you begin to go about that, if the state of our nation's health was in fact related to our modern lifestyle and maybe only a cure would ever be found by strict regulation of corporations?
     
  2. LondonCanary

    LondonCanary Star commenter

    I would probably leave it to the experts I charge of the nhs.
    How would you regulate corporations in order to make you change your lifestyle?
     
  3. mathsmutt

    mathsmutt Star commenter

    NHS Scotland :)
     
  4. Duke of York

    Duke of York Star commenter

    It's been well known all my life and yours, that smoking is hazardous to health and barely a day passes now that we don't learn of another disease associated with smoking.

    Evidence of the adverse effects of excess sugar in our diets was identified in 1959, but never taken seriously because the food industry was able to better lobby politicians and fund their political campaigns than anyone interested in our health was ever able to.

    It has taken from 1959 to 2015 for our governments to address the over-consumption of sugar in the nation's diet, whilst pretending the cause was too much fat in food.

    As a consequence of the power of political lobbying and sponsorship from the food industry, we now have an obesity crisis and rapidly increasing incidence of diabetes and other dietary-related illnesses.

    To answer your question, Madge, do you not thing it would be within the ability of a government to have addressed these crisises earlier, so we didn't have the problems in dealing with the consequences that corporations are profiting from?

    A government surely has the ability to ban the sale of products known to be hazardous to health. Why isn't it being done?
     
  5. LondonCanary

    LondonCanary Star commenter

    A ban on smoking and confectionery might be impractical.
     

Share This Page