Socialized healthcare care in action.

chcr said:
My lovely wife has a small problem with me shagging random attractive young women (whoda thunk it), otherwise I'd be there in a heartbeat.
Click to expand...

this sucks. i been tryin' hard to catch her eye, and then the old guy blows off the chance i never even got....

jerks... *piss2*
 
spike said:
You link to publications but you couldn't find a single thing to support your words? :laugh:
Click to expand...

I posted some HERE with links to the full story. Did you also miss the thread header and that mouthful of rotten teeth glaring at you? My God, man, are you blind?

spike said:
NO facts to the contrary?
Click to expand...

Why should I. I went HERE and it seems, at first blush, to bear out the infant mortality rate. I could analyze the thing based on such comparative factors as the number of children per woman, etc., but I am not in the mood. So I concede to your study. Now let's move on to the thread subject -- socialized medicine and its failures.

You wanted more examples? I hope you are ready; not that I believe you will read them any more than the ones I posted HERE.
 
chcr said:
"Failing" is also not the same thing as "failed." It's okay though, I fully understand this need to overstate virtually everything in self-righteous breast-beating. It's been escalating for years. It actually became ludicrous about ten or twelve years ago. I just point it out from time to time for my own personal amusement. It's not really wrong if you believe it strongly enough, is it?
Click to expand...

I seeeeeeee. So if it has not COMPLETELY failed it has not failed. Got it.

But why listen to me? How about the guy who runs the store?

http://www.canada.com/topics/news/f...=ff9187b5-c412-4028-b3af-de60437c50db&k=57493

Health act on life support, needs a revamp: CMA boss

'Things have changed a lot' since law written 45 years ago

Sarah Mcginnis , The Calgary Herald, With files from CanWest News Service
Published: 9/15/2007

CALGARY - Canada's health law is outdated and failing, and if universal health care is to survive, the Canada Health Act needs an overhaul, says the new Canadian Medical Association president, Dr. Brian Day.

Though Dr. Day is best known for co-founding the private Cambie Surgery Centre in Vancouver, he said he isn't out to convert medicare into a U.S.-style private system.

"The (Canada Health Act) is based on principles that are nearly 45 years old -- at a time when there were no MRIs, no CT scans and scarcely any hip replacements. Things have changed a lot and it's about time we looked at changing it," Dr. Day said yesterday.

One of the biggest problems in the current system is the lengthy wait times -- causing patients' conditions to deteriorate and costing the system more in the long run, said Dr. Day.

Some patients are no longer willing to wait indefinitely for treatment and have started taking provincial governments to court for the right to purchase medical insurance to cover private medical treatments.

In Quebec's 2005 Chaoulli decision, the Supreme Court of Canada called the country's publicly-funded health system a monopoly that "results in delays in treatment" that are unfair and unjust. It ruled governments that can't guarantee timely treatment also can't deny patients private-sector treatment.

Several other countries, including Britain and Japan, have all but eliminated surgical wait times, said Dr. Day.

Dramatically changing the way hospitals are funded should help address the situation, he said.

Instead of providing hospitals with annual budgets -- which encourages rationing of treatments to keep the books balanced -- they should receive cash for each patient they serve, he said. (Just like we do here in the U.S. -- j)

Having hospitals paid by the province on a per-patient basis would promote efficiency and accountability, said Dr. Day.

"People who criticize me (say) that I just want to privatize the system. It couldn't possibly happen. You couldn't build a private hospital in the next few years. (Eliminating wait times) has to happen in the public system," Dr. Day said.

Dr. Day said he'd also like Canadians to seriously debate the issue of patient co-payments for health services, a concept that has generated considerable controversy from advocates of universal health care. (ie: It ain't gonna be totally free any more -- j)

Most people have private health insurance to cover incidental medical costs such as ambulance transport and medical supplies. But about 30 per cent of Canadians -- mainly the working poor -- don't have private coverage and are suffering financially for basic health care, Dr. Day said.

© The Ottawa Citizen 2007
Click to expand...
 
*sigh* Never mind. There was actually a point in there somewhere but I've forgotten what it was now. Isn't it just awjul how terrible everything everywhere has become?
 
Okay, Spike, these are for you.

The London Daily Telegraph

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/global/m...FGGAVCBQUIV0?xml=/global/2007/04/24/nhs24.xml

Revealed: Lottery of death rates in hospitals
By Nicole Martin
Last Updated: 12:01am BST 24/04/2007

The large disparity in mortality rates in NHS hospitals is exposed today in research carried out for The Daily Telegraph.

Patients are twice as likely to die in hospitals with the highest mortality rates than in those with the lowest, according to a report from Dr Foster Research, the independent health information company.

It found that despite the Government pouring billions of pounds into the NHS, a postcode lottery exists with standards of care varying widely across the country.

While death rates have been falling in hospitals overall, researchers found that the cost of poor performing hospitals in terms of patient lives was staggering.

They looked at 152 NHS trusts in England and estimated that the lives of 7,400 people could have been saved in 2005/6 if all trusts with higher than expected mortality rates had reduced them in line with the expected rate.

Patients at the Royal Free Hospital NHS Trust in north London were identified as the most likely to survive, with a mortality rate 26 per cent below the expected rate.

By contrast, George Eliot Hospital NHS Trust in Nuneaton, Warks, had the highest mortality rate - 43 per cent above the expected rate.

The research did not investigate cause of death at individual hospitals but Dr Foster Research said typical factors would be medical error, infection and failure to deliver "quality of care".

The findings will raise further fears about the spread of superbugs at a time when cases of Clostridium difficile are soaring, with a 69 per cent increase in deaths between 2004 and 2005. MRSA reduction targets are also unlikely to be met.

Patient groups described the findings as "extremely worrying" and said NHS trusts had to do more to reduce the differences that exist around the country in NHS care.

Dr Foster Research's mortality rates, the most comprehensive ever compiled, are standardised to take into account a range of risk factors, such as the age of patients, sex, social demographics, the level of deprivation in the area and whether a patient has any other illnesses.

The ratio shows whether the number of patients who died was higher or lower than expected. The expected level is set at 100. A figure of 110 would mean a death rate 10 per cent above expectations.

Of the 152 trusts analysed, 56 were listed as having a high mortality rate, 45 had a low mortality rate and 51 had an average mortality rate.

Almost all - 145 - had reduced mortality rates over the past five years.

The seven showing the least improvement included Barts and London NHS Trust, Bedford Hospital NHS Trust, George Eliot Hospital NHS Trust and Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust.

Roger Taylor, the research director at Dr Foster Research, said: "We have seen some fantastic efforts by many hospitals to reduce mortality rates.

"Patients have a right to expect that all hospitals should do the same. Wide variations are worrying and indicate variable standards in the quality of care in hospitals."

Katherine Murphy, of the Patients' Association, said: "There should be national standards across the NHS. Patients looking at these figures will be alarmed to learn that they are more likely to die in some hospitals than in others.

"It's essential that poor performing trusts learn from the experiences of better ones. The NHS is very bad at doing that."

Andrew Lansley, the shadow health spokesman, welcomed the publication of mortality rates, saying they would allow patients to make informed choices. "But NHS trusts need to start working towards publishing mortality rates for each of their departments," he said. "This would allow patients and GPs to make genuine comparisons across hospitals."

Andrew Way, the chief executive of the Royal Free Hampstead NHS Trust, said: "We're very proud to have one of lowest mortality rates. Hospital mortality rates are regarded as a very good indicator of overall clinical performance, so this is a significant achievement."

George Eliot NHS Trust said its high mortality rate had been caused by "deficiencies in the hospital's recording of information regarding a patient's diagnosis and is not reflective of the quality of patient care".

Dr Peter Handslip, the trust's medical director, said: "We have undertaken a thorough review of the trust's mortality data over the past year. This has resulted in a dramatic improvement in our standardised mortality rate since July 2006."

Overall, the data indicated that the number of poor performing trusts in England has fallen from 44 in 2001/2 to 36 in 2005/6.

Regional data from Scotland and Wales has only become available recently and is not yet robust enough to draw meaningful comparisons.

Nigel Edwards, the director of policy at the NHS Confederation, said: "This report will help NHS trusts to identify where improvements need to be made."

A Department of Health spokesman said: "We would strongly advise against patients using these figures to make decisions about the relative safety of hospitals. It is impossible to condense into one number the entire performance of a hospital in a way comparable with every other hospital in the country."
Click to expand...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/mai...FGGAVCBQUIV0?xml=/news/2002/05/25/ndocs25.xml

US surgeons to operate in Britain
By Celia Hall, Medical Editor
Last Updated: 11:56pm BST 24/05/2002

Teams of doctors from America and Germany, Switzerland, Spain or France could be operating on NHS patients before the end of the year in an attempt to reduce waiting lists and use the extra millions being made available to the health service, managers heard yesterday.

Alan Milburn, the Health Secretary, told the conference of NHS health authorities and trusts: "I expect to see a growing number of these new providers in place, beginning later this year."

The Department of Health said later that Sir Magdi Yacoub, the eminent heart surgeon appointed special envoy to the NHS in February, was already on a recruitment drive to encourage American surgeons to work in England.

A spokesman said Mr Milburn was expected to meet American health care providers Kaiser Permente and United Health Care in the near future.

But the "first priority would be getting teams sent over here". If they were prepared to build hospitals in England that too would be considered.

Department of Health officials also hope to meet representatives from Germedic Gmbh, which runs hospitals in Sweden and Germany, and health care providers from Spain, Switzerland and France, he said.

The spokesman said there was limited capacity within the UK's own private sector, which was why the Government was looking at providers from abroad.

In his speech to the NHS Confederation in Harrogate, North Yorks, Mr Milburn revealed that providers from abroad would be here to stay. "Like the NHS use of existing private sector providers this is not a temporary measure," he said.

"They will provide NHS services to NHS patients according to NHS principles and in the process they will open up more choices for patients and more diversity on provision."

He was meeting prospective providers from America and Germany over the next few months "to encourage them to invest in Britain".

The biggest problem facing the NHS was its lack of capacity, but it was not true that the NHS was a black hole that absorbed public money without return.

"These critics should instead be pointing at dozens more hospitals, hundreds more beds, thousands more doctors and tens of thousands more nurses, and an NHS that is on the up," he said.

Dr Liam Fox, the shadow health secreary, dismissed the speech as mere talk. "We will be more pleased to see action rather than simply hearing the rhetoric," he said. Unison attacked the plan to use providers from outside the NHS as an admission of failure.

"The Government should be building up capacity within the NHS, not creating a dependency culture of the private sector," said Karen Jennings, the union's national secretary for health.

Mr Milburn's speech was well received by members of the NHS Confederation. A mixed economy of provision was good for health services, said Dr Gill Morgan, chief executive.
Click to expand...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/...AVCBQUIV0?xml=/opinion/2004/11/15/let1501.xml

Letter to the Editor

NHS will have to wake up to outsourcing

Sir – I recently presented a paper to a worldwide conference in Vienna on the growth of international health tourism. Yet on returning to Britain, I note that health tourists are considered scroungers from overseas who wish to bankrupt or abuse the NHS.

In both Europe and Asia, hospitals are not only accelerating their own private medical treatment centres, owing to demand from overseas patients who pay in hard currency, but are also planning to recruit medical professionals from other countries – including Britain – to run such centres. (So as the Brits try to lure American surgeons to Britain, the Brit medical professionals are being lured to America, -- j) As NHS nurses look to America for their future and the NHS recruits more from South Africa and the Philippines, we are witnessing an irrevocable movement of tens of thousands of professionals, working and living in other countries.

State-of-the-art hospitals are being built in India, China and Singapore, with the latest technology, run by highly trained and motivated staff. Many Indian professionals already work in our NHS and will consider, no doubt, returning home for their futures.

Yet this huge and growing private market has been ignored by the Government, which is too preoccupied with its centrally controlled NHS taking on free health tourists, who may be coming to Britain.

The NHS is "cash-blind" and cannot see that properly managed private health tourism is essential in the new health economies.

The Government's mantra of "An NHS offering 21st-century healthcare free at the point of need" is already dead in the water. NHS patients have had enough and are voting with their wallets.

It is the British who are increasingly going overseas to seek healthcare who comprise the new market of health tourists, not the few foreigners coming in to use the NHS for free.

Hundreds are now paying to have quality, immediate, best-value-cost treatment choices abroad. That's why my company exists at all, born from government and NHS delivery failure.

J. Leslie Smith, Chairman and Managing Director, Treatment Choices Ltd, Whitley Bay, Tyne and Wear
Click to expand...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/mai...GCFGGAVCBQUIV0?xml=/news/2006/07/06/nhs06.xml

One NHS patient in 10 'is harmed in hospital'
By Celia Hall, Medical Editor
Last Updated: 10:37pm BST 05/07/2006

Nearly a million patient safety incidents or "near misses" in a single year were recorded in NHS trusts, MPs say today in a report which questions the effectiveness of the National Patient Safety Agency.

The agency, which cost £35 million to run last year, has made insufficient progress and experienced cost over-runs and delays, the public accounts committee (PAC) said.

In 2004-05 there were 974,000 patient safety incidents in England and Wales and MPs believe that 22 per cent of mistakes go unreported.

Edward Leigh, the PAC chairman, further criticised the system for being unable to say how many patients had died through errors by NHS staff.

"According to the Department of Health, one in every 10 patients admitted to NHS hospitals is unintentionally harmed. These statistics would be terrifying enough without our learning that there is undoubtedly substantial under-reporting of serious incidents and deaths.

"To top it all, the NHS simply has no idea how many people die each year from patient safety incidents," Mr Leigh said.

The findings pointed to two related and deep-seated failures, he said. "One is the failure of the NHS to secure accurate information on serious incidents and deaths. The other is the failure on a staggering scale to learn from previous experience. Around 50 per cent of all actual incidents might have been avoided if NHS staff had learned lessons from previous ones."

The agency was set up in 2001 to streamline complaints reporting with a aim of letting organisations learn from mistakes made by others.

Mr Leigh said the system was delivered "several years late" and had led to "serious delay" in the development and sharing of effective solutions, both locally and nationally.

"Given this dysfunctional performance, the contribution the agency has made towards improving patient safety and achieving value for money for the taxpayer has been extremely weak," he said.

The MPs' report says that the errors cost the NHS around £2 billion a year in extra bed days and some £400 million in settled clinical negligence claims. Around half of incidents could have been avoided if lessons from previous incidents had been learnt. These findings were similar to those of other developed countries.

It acknowledges "some notable improvements at NHS trust level in developing a more open and fair reporting culture" but says that under-reporting remains a problem and that few trusts have evaluated their safety "culture".

It says: "... there is a question mark over the value for money being achieved by the National Patient Safety Agency, evidenced in the main by the delays and cost over-runs in establishing its National Reporting and Learning System and in the limited feedback of solutions to reduce serious incident that has, so far, been provided to trusts.

The charity, Action against Medical Accidents (AvMA), called for stronger sanctions. "We hope the report will give an injection of urgency into work to improve patient safety. Whilst there has been welcome progress we want to see more teeth given to existing guidelines and safety alerts. It should be compulsory for NHS providers to implement them," said Peter Walsh, the chief executive. "It will come as a shock to many that some safety alerts are more or less ignored by NHS Trusts, and there is patchy compliance with guidance on reporting incidents," he said.

Susan Williams, the joint chief executive of the National Patient Safety Agency said: "The committee acknowledges that progress has been made and we agree that more needs to be achieved to secure even safer health care in the NHS. The majority of patients receive safe, high-quality care and the NHS is seen internationally as being at the forefront of the drive for improving patient safety.

But Andrew Lansley, the shadow health secretary said: "This is the product of a Government obsessed with waiting time targets, and managers across the NHS who cannot see beyond their short-term financial pressures."
Click to expand...
 
I still think that both systems can and should co-exist. Just as there is a state-run police department and private security firms, there should be public hospitals and private hospitals.

You want basic protection? trust in the police, you're paranoid? get private security.

Don't have money? wait a bit in the line for a doctor and probably share a room with other patients. Have money and want to see all your whims pleased? pay for it.
 
chcr said:
*sigh* Never mind. There was actually a point in there somewhere but I've forgotten what it was now. Isn't it just awjul how terrible everything everywhere has become?
Click to expand...


doooooomed! yor all dooooomed!

yeah where would we be without imaginary shit to get upset about?

oh heeer come the commies, the fascists, the liberals, the guys that want to police our weenuses and our mattreses? holy jimmy floppenchrist here's my stubby choad!

*piss2* *handonhip
 
Here's some more, Spike.

The Manchester Guardian

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2190758,00.html

The dirty truth on the wards


An Observer investigation has revealed how elderly patients are often left in squalor by overworked staff, reports Jo Revill.

Comment: Elderly people's basic human rights are frequently violated, writes Jackie Morris

Sunday October 14, 2007
The Observer


The debate over the poor treatment of elderly patients in Britain's hospitals will be reignited this weekend after an Observer investigation revealed that vulnerable people are being forced to use embarrassing portable toilets or wear incontinence pads rather than being taken to the bathroom.
The investigation found that nurses and healthcare assistants no longer routinely accompany elderly patients to the toilet, particularly when wards are busy. The revelation comes days after Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust, where 90 people died of the C. difficile infection, was criticised for allowing patients to go to the toilet in their beds.

A minister today promised that the government would not 'go soft' on nursing staff who fail to treat patients with dignity and respect. In a sign of how worried ministers have become about the quality of care, the minister for the elderly, Ivan Lewis, warned that staff would face negligence charges if found guilty of giving seriously substandard care.

There is growing concern within the NHS over the number of complaints about older patients being stripped of their dignity on the wards. The scandal of the hospitals in Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells, where patients were left in soiled sheets, revealed how the level of dirt and neglect contributed to two outbreaks of the C. difficile superbug.

Doctors are now saying that nurses must ensure that patients are taken to the toilet if they are able to walk there with support, instead of being left to use commodes, bedpans or even, in extreme cases, soil their own sheets.

The British Geriatrics Society, representing doctors specialising in care of the elderly, has launched a campaign, Behind Closed Doors, to highlight the bad practice it wants banned on the wards. Their warnings, seen by The Observer, suggest that for many patients the prospect of having to relieve themselves using a commode on a mixed sex ward with only a thin curtain around the bed is one of the main reasons why they fear going into hospital.

Dr Jackie Morris, chair of the society's policy group, lists practices which she says most people would find it hard to believe hospital chief executives still allow. Patients who need the toilet are being told to wait maybe for an hour or more. Patients can often hear a person who is forced to use a commode.

'It's a fundamental part of dignity, that you should be able to relieve yourself in privacy,' said Morris. 'But you often see this vicious cycle happening, where patients who may be recovering from an operation are not taken to the loo, but instead given a commode or even told to go in their pants.

'That can lead to pressure sores, which are very painful, but it can also do something else - patients begin refusing to eat or drink because they become very scared of needing the toilet, and then they can start to go downhill pretty quickly.'

The British Geriatrics Society lists other petty humiliations. Sometimes older patients are scolded by staff if they soil their beds. On a busy ward, patients can be left on a bedpan for a considerable amount of time. A patient may be using a commode behind the closed curtains when staff walk in, without checking first.

Worst of all the practices, say the society, is that many patients are just asked to go in their own underwear when the staff are busy. 'I've seen it myself so I know it happens,' said Morris. 'Believe me, it's really distressing for everyone. If you have a ward that is run by a very competent, good senior nurse, these things don't happen - but I would say that they do also need the support of management in the hospital. The neglect happens on wards which are badly run, where no one seems to really be in charge.'

Lewis, the minister with responsibility for dignity of care, said he is angered by the abuses. In some of the toughest language used so far by Gordon Brown's new government, he told The Observer: 'The government's commitment to support and value NHS staff should not be mistaken for going soft on practices which shame the nursing profession and brings the NHS into disrepute.

'All NHS staff, including those in management positions, must be in no doubt that a failure to respect an older person's dignity is professional negligence, and must be subject to disciplinary action.'

A report into the deaths at Maidstone hospital said: 'A particularly distressing practice reported to us was of nurses telling patients on some occasions to "go in the bed" presumably because this was less time-consuming than helping a patient to the bathroom. Some patients were left, sometimes for hours, in wet or soiled sheets, putting them at increased risk of pressure sores.'

The indignity suffered by some patients can be shocking. Jackie Brindle watched her father-in-law's health decline rapidly when he was admitted to hospital in Lancaster. The family believe this was directly due to what they say was a humiliating level of neglect.

The Rev John Brindle, 86, a former Church of England vicar, was taken to hospital after suffering a knock to the head. 'He was admitted for tests, but he was still healthy, and in fact, he had never been into hospital in his life,' his daughter-in-law said. 'He was put onto a ward where the care was appalling, and the nurse who dealt with him was actually quite intimidating.

'I came in one day to find him sitting in his room, completely naked apart from the incontinence pads on him. His feet were blue with cold.

'I quickly got him dressed and asked what had happened. One of the nurses told me that it was against health and safety rules to dress him, because he was resisting them. I was so shocked I could barely speak.

'I also asked why he wasn't being taken to the toilet, instead of being left in pads. The nurse looked at me, and said, "Oh no, he's incontinent", as if I was stupid not to realise. But I know he was not so before he went onto that ward.'

The family then made efforts to have him moved to a private hospital, but he died before they could organise it. 'He seemed to have given up completely. This man, who was proud and private, was treated like a child, like a no-hoper.'

The Brindles put in a full complaint to the University Hospitals of Morecambe Bay NHS Trust, where he was treated, in June. Peter Dyer, medical director of the trust, said that they were taking the concerns raised extremely seriously and would respond within a week. 'We are nearing completion of a very thorough and lengthy investigation into the allegations which included interviewing a large number of staff.'

Healthcare regulators are privately worried that some hospitals are blaming the government's waiting list targets for the pressures on the ward when, if they are properly run, all hospitals should be able to offer decent and dignified bedside care. A recent survey carried out by the Healthcare Commission showed hundreds of patients have complained that they were told to 'go in the bed' and not given full privacy when using a bedpan.
Click to expand...
 
dude just give it up. you can gather all the 'evidence' you want and it's not going to make your position any less ideo-pabulum.
 
And some more

The Times of London

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/health/article2616252.ece

Doctor training policy diagnosed a failure
Nigel Hawkes, Health Editor

Changes to medical training introduced since 2002 have been rushed, poorly led and implemented and are unlikely even to produce very good doctors, according to a new report.

Sir John Tooke, who chaired an independent inquiry set up by the Department of Health, said it had been a sorry episode from which nobody emerged with credit.

The new policy, called Modernising Medical Careers (MMC), was introduced without clear definition of what it was meant to achieve. Weak development, implementation and governance had made it worse. “Put simply, ‘good enough’ is not good enough,” Sir John writes. “Rather, in the interest of the health and wealth of the nation, we should aspire to excellence.”

Problems with MMC first became apparent when the computer-based application system used for selecting doctors for higher training failed this year. The Medical Training Application Service (MTAS) had to be abandoned, and the furore about it drew attention to wider defects. The report by Sir John, who is Dean of the Peninsula College of Medicine, will make uncomfortable reading for the department, and for Sir Liam Donaldson, the Chief Medical Officer, who was the main driving force behind MMC.

Sir John refused to name those directly responsible for the debacle. “The medical profession itself was complicit in MMC, and it is hard to target any individual for responsibility,” he said. The policy had failed in its key aim, which was to eliminate the “lost tribe” of senior house officers who did most of the work in NHS hospitals but were regularly denied opportunities to train to become consultants.

When MMC came in, such doctors found that they had to compete with the growing output from British medical schools and doctors from abroad allowed to work in Britain. Despite repeated warnings, the department at first ignored the problem, and its plan to introduce a policy whereby doctors’ jobs only went to overseas candidates if there was not a suitable home applicant was stymied in the courts. This meant that 8,352 foreign doctors were free to apply for posts in 2007, along with 1,500 from the EU and 11,994 British citizens.

While acknowledging the “fantastic contribution” made to the NHS by foreign doctors, Sir John said it was not sensible to have a policy which allowed them to compete with doctors trained in Britain at a cost each of £200,000 to £250,000. The department moved to rectify the situation yesterday by announcing a consultation to look at proposals for managing overseas applicants in the future.

Sir John’s report suggests that all those successful in getting a place in a medical school should be guaranteed a training place for the year after they graduate.

At present, under MMC, this is not guaranteed — which means medical graduates cannot call themselves doctor, or even work as doctors.

He also suggests that the Postgraduate Medical Education and Training Board should be incorporated into the General Medical Council, which is already responsible for the undergraduate curriculum and for registering doctors.

“The management of postgraduate training is currently hampered by unclear principles, a weak contractual base, a lack of cohesion, a fragmented structure and, in England, deficient relationships with academia and service,” the report said.

Andrew Lansley, the Shadow Health Secretary, said that it laid bare “the shameful mismanagement by the Government of junior doctors’ training. Hundreds of junior doctors still need action taken to ensure those who continue to meet the necessary standards will have the training [made] available to them.”

Ben Bradshaw, the Health Minister, said that the Government had learnt important lessons from MMC and would consider the report fully.
Click to expand...
 
2minkey said:
dude just give it up. you can gather all the 'evidence' you want and it's not going to make your position any less ideo-pabulum.
Click to expand...

I didn't offer it up. Spike demanded it HERE.

You link to publications but you couldn't find a single thing to support your words?
Click to expand...

So if you don't want to be inundated with information supporting my claims, simply stop asking for it.

By the way. That's "ideo-pablum" for those who can spell made up words.
 
We could all emulate chcr & minkey...

Another government misdeed? Oh look, butterflies
 
Main Entry: pab·u·lum Pronunciation: \ˈpa-byə-ləm\ Function: noun Etymology: Latin, food, fodder; akin to Latin pascere to feed — more at food Date: 1733 1: food; especially : a suspension or solution of nutrients in a state suitable for absorption2: intellectual sustenance3: something (as writing or speech) that is insipid, simplistic, or bland

http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/pabulum

You should maybe stop trying to correct spelling. Pablum is a brand name. The brand name of a cereal which was funnily enough invented by doctors at the Toronto Hospital for Sick Children.
 
Oh... BURN!!

KELSO_02-thumb.gif
 
Leslie said:
You should maybe stop trying to correct spelling. Pablum is a brand name. The brand name of a cereal which was funnily enough invented by doctors at the Toronto Hospital for Sick Children.
Click to expand...

In the context in which you used it, PABLUM is the CORRECT spelling.

pab·lum (pāb'ləm) Pronunciation Key
n. Trite, insipid, or simplistic writing, speech, or conceptualization: "We have to settle for the pablum that passes for the inside dope" (Julie Salamon).

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2006 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
Click to expand...

pablum

noun
1. a soft form of cereal for infants
2. worthless or oversimplified ideas [syn: pap]

WordNet® 3.0, © 2006 by Princeton University.
Click to expand...

Pablum was the Word of the Day September 6, 2001.

Word of the Day Archive
Thursday September 6, 2001

pablum \PAB-luhm\, noun:
Something (as writing or speech) that is trite, insipid, or simplistic.

I imagined his thoughts had been solely of me, that the letter would be filled with love sonnets, that it would gush with the same romantic pablum I devoured from those movie star magazines.
-- Kate Walbert, The Gardens of Kyoto

. . .the mindless pablum of celebrity journalism, the endless stories about self-promoting actors and movie stars who pretend they dislike the press.
-- Richard Stengel, "It Ain't Necessarily Bad That Nobody's Interested in Politics", Time, March 2, 2001

Pablum comes from Pablum, a trademark used for a bland soft cereal for infants.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top