DENYING cancer patients NHS treatment if they have paid for an additional drug should be fought every step of the way. Nearly 90 per cent of the public believe it is unfair and the Government is going to have to back down sooner or later.
If NHS drugs are five times less effective than those obtained privately, what are the patients expected to do? There is no logic to it. As a consultant rheumatologist says, a patient with rheumatoid arthritis may decide to pay for a hip operation pr
ivately.
This is exactly the same principle as buying an additional drug for cancer. Does the private hip operation mean the patient must now pay for all future care of his arthritis?
The Health Secretary, Alan Johnson – the man who tells nurses to smile more – says he wants to avoid a two-tier system. What does he think we have now? Outside agencies provide temporary staff (at exorbitant cost). Private contractors provide services at a profit. What does Johnson call that?
Some of the case histories are heartbreaking. A former fireman
who developed liver cancer after 25 years' service had been told that
if he pays for the only drug that can best treat his disease, his NHS care will be withdrawn. The doctors have no choice.
The drug, Nexavar, is the only effective treatment for advanced liver cancer is routinely prescribed in most continental countries. Another drug, Erbitux, is recognised as the most effective in treatment of bowel cancer. Patients in France are 13 times, in Spain 10 times, and in Germany nine times more likely to receive the drug than in Britain.
How can Johnson justify spending billions on treating minor
conditions and then deny cancer patients NHS support when they want to help with the costs themselves? Another consultant asks what happens when a patient has a massive heart attack after a private hernia operation and is sent to the NHS coronary care unit? Does the NHS wash its hands of the patient just because the operation was done privately? It is an inhuman policy and it must change.
HOW typical of this craven Government to blame the judges
for letting the advocate of terror, Abu Qatada, out of jail, despite describing him as a "truly dangerous individual".
The judges are bound by the Human Rights Act, introduced by Labour in 2000, despite warnings. Even a human rights lawyer admitted: "This will result in a field day for crackpots, a pain in the neck for judges, and a gold mine for lawyers." So it has been proved.
Qatada should never have been allowed into Britain in the first
place: a man wanted on terrorism charges in Jordan, travelling on a forged passport. But he had only to utter the magic words "I claim asylum" in order to be welcomed, and given a guide to welfare
benefits. Since 1993, Qatada and his family have already cost the taxpayers over £1m. It will now cost £500,000 a year to keep him in an MI5 "safe house".
Internationally, "human rights" are a grisly farce. Of the 50-odd countries represented on the UN commission of Human Rights, most are not democracies. Entrusting your human rights to the likes of China, Cuba, Saudi Arabia and Sudan has to be a sick joke.
The European Court of Human Rights includes judges from such beacons of judicial perfection as Albania, Latvia and the Ukraine. The court has now made it impossible to expel foreigners who pose a threat to this country's security. Another triumph for New Labour.
THE truly tragic thing about the four soldiers killed in Afghanistan last week is that they were all reservists. The way reservists are used to plug gaps in under-strength regular forces is a scandal. At the same time as cutting their funding, the Ministry of Defence has shamelessly exploited the Territorial Army and other reserve forces. Some senior officers regard them as a "quarry" to be mined in order to make up shortfalls.
Some 15,000 reservists – almost half the TA establishment – have served in Iraq or Afghanistan since 2003, and military chiefs admit that otherwise they could not meet the commitments piled on by politicians. Many reservists are on their second, or even third, tour of duty. Since the Second World War, 350 have been killed. The are given virtually no support on their return from combat and many have suffered severe mental health problems.
Every death in combat is a tragedy but there is something particularly poignant when you see five daughters mourning their father – a 51-year-old businessman and RAF regiment reservist killed recently by a roadside bomb in Afghanistan.
They are all volunteers and they serve willingly, but no one can
believe this is any thing other than plain wrong. Even worse is
the sight of sanctimonious politicians like Gordon Brown
paying their sickly tributes to brave men and women who have had to sacrifice their lives partly as a result of his policies.
The full article contains 842 words and appears in n/a newspaper.