UK: Patients forced to live in agony

[WillowTree]

Now she's just trolling lol.

I think she's just trashing the thread since it's pretty obvious that she's wrong about the anesthetic thing.

Or she's extremely confused.

Or both.

Neither

 

[tigerbob]

Isn't the Telegraph a respected newspaper?

The Telegraph is a fairly right wing newspaper, one that will take every opportunity to kick the current Labour government. The implication of the article is that there is a funding crisis in the NHS (there has never NOT been a funding crisis) and that the Government is responsible for this crisis.

Whether the Telegraph is respected or not will depend on what someone thinks of their motives. Every media outlet has political bias of some form or other.

so how do you deal with the funding crisis? Is the article true or not true?

I suspect the article is true. And as to how one deals with the crisis, I have no idea. The Labour administration has increased NHS funding dramatically over the last 7 or 8 years, but because targets keep changing it is almost impossible to determine what improvements have been made. In addition, there are too many 'managers' in the NHS, people concerned solely with the achievement of politically set milestones. Ask any doctor and they will tell you that the amount of red tape it what really ties the NHS in knots.

Finally, NICE. The NICE homepage on the NHS site describes NICE as "an independent organisation responsible for providing national guidance on promoting good health and preventing and treating ill health." This is a half truth. The other an less spoken role of NICE appears to be to shoot down treatments that are too costly. Cost can be determined financially or based on the law of diminishing returns.

In general, socialized medicine is hugely beneficial to the majority of society. However, in many cases it fails people as well. I see a combination of privately and publicly funded healthcare as the solution, but of course the problem is in the application.

For example, private healthcare could take over where NICE believes treatment to be too unproven, or too costly, but there would still be the issue of where the 'tipping point' is, and who determines the location of that tipping point. If the tipping point is determined by any organization that reports to the Government, then it will of course be manipulated for political reasons, much as the NHS is manipulated now.

It's a very complex issue and anyone who says it's easy needs their head examined.

Sorry for the long, rambling reply.

 

[WillowTree]

The Telegraph is a fairly right wing newspaper, one that will take every opportunity to kick the current Labour government. The implication of the article is that there is a funding crisis in the NHS (there has never NOT been a funding crisis) and that the Government is responsible for this crisis.

Whether the Telegraph is respected or not will depend on what someone thinks of their motives. Every media outlet has political bias of some form or other.

so how do you deal with the funding crisis? Is the article true or not true?

I suspect the article is true. And as to how one deals with the crisis, I have no idea. The Labour administration has increased NHS funding dramatically over the last 7 or 8 years, but because targets keep changing it is almost impossible to determine what improvements have been made. In addition, there are too many 'managers' in the NHS, people concerned solely with the achievement of politically set milestones. Ask any doctor and they will tell you that the amount of red tape it what really ties the NHS in knots.

Finally, NICE. The NICE homepage on the NHS site describes NICE as "an independent organisation responsible for providing national guidance on promoting good health and preventing and treating ill health." This is a half truth. The other an less spoken role of NICE appears to be to shoot down treatments that are too costly. Cost can be determined financially or based on the law of diminishing returns.

In general, socialized medicine is hugely beneficial to the majority of society. However, in many cases it fails people as well. I see a combination of privately and publicly funded healthcare as the solution, but of course the problem is in the application.

For example, private healthcare could take over where NICE believes treatment to be too unproven, or too costly, but there would still be the issue of where the 'tipping point' is, and who determines the location of that tipping point. If the tipping point is determined by any organization that reports to the Government, then it will of course be manipulated for political reasons, much as the NHS is manipulated now.

It's a very complex issue and anyone who says it's easy needs their head examined.

Sorry for the long, rambling reply.

Thank you for the reply. I learned a lot.

 

[Coyote]

bullshit,, they do it all the time the proper term is "empirical" honey

How is injecting someone's back with steroids "empiric therapy"?

nothing else seems to work, so you give it a try.. see if it works and provides relief,, that "empirical" honey

Kind of sounds like "quackery" in my dictionary....

 

[WillowTree]

How is injecting someone's back with steroids "empiric therapy"?

nothing else seems to work, so you give it a try.. see if it works and provides relief,, that "empirical" honey

Kind of sounds like "quackery" in my dictionary....

It's not though,, it's called empirical.

 

[Coyote]

did you goggle using steriods empirically in the treatment of back pain?????

Interestingly enough:

The use of intradiscal steroid therapy for lumbar ...[Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2004] - PubMed Result

CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that intradiscal steroid injections do not improve the clinical outcome in patients with discogenic back pain compared with placebo.

It appears that a study in 1976 demonstrated that steroid injections in the back offer no better results than saline. Which is probably why the practice of doing so is not familiar to people here.

The term "empiric" is used in the abstract, but it is from a British study (as is this article), so perhaps it has a different meaning over there.

I will concede that the term exists outside the realm of antibiotics, though.

there are lots of studies, about the use of steroids used empirically, and of course you realize that for every doctor who says it has no value there are those who say it does, and also in the treatment of low back pain steroids are not injected alone always,,often accompanied with an anesthetic agent and so you can see how a patient might obtain some relief. so if you have ever suffered chronic back pain you would not be happy if the treatment were denied you. would you?

The problem with that is you can also use it to justify paying for outright quackery.

 

[WillowTree]

Interestingly enough:

The use of intradiscal steroid therapy for lumbar ...[Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2004] - PubMed Result



It appears that a study in 1976 demonstrated that steroid injections in the back offer no better results than saline. Which is probably why the practice of doing so is not familiar to people here.

The term "empiric" is used in the abstract, but it is from a British study (as is this article), so perhaps it has a different meaning over there.

I will concede that the term exists outside the realm of antibiotics, though.

there are lots of studies, about the use of steroids used empirically, and of course you realize that for every doctor who says it has no value there are those who say it does, and also in the treatment of low back pain steroids are not injected alone always,,often accompanied with an anesthetic agent and so you can see how a patient might obtain some relief. so if you have ever suffered chronic back pain you would not be happy if the treatment were denied you. would you?

The problem with that is you can also use it to justify paying for outright quackery.

well then, given your attitude I can only suggest to you that when you hear your physician use the term empirical you should run away and hide, as quickly as you can.. cover your head, your ears, and your eyes, and put you ass up in the air! everybody say amen!

 

[Coyote]

no i didn't,, i clearly said they combine anesthetics with the steroids when they inject them

Right, the local anesthetic is to relieve the pain of the injection.

Emma cited the relevant text for you in the previous post.

Note:

This is due to the mechanical process of needle insertion as well as initial irritation form the steroid itself.

I didn't say a word about local aneththetic,, I talked about the anesthetic agents they mix with the steroids and inject into the facets to relieve back pain.. so now both of you are talking out of your asses.

It appears that it's you who might be flatulating here since your own source states: Injection of steroids and anesthetic into the facet joints of the lumbar spine is useful to diagnose or treat patients with facet syndrome (back pain caused by abnormalities of the facet joints)

It appears that this is a treatment for a specifically diagnosed condition causing back pain - not what the OP claimed, as Emma pointed out - restricting injections only for those who had been in pain for less than a year, where the cause was not known.

 

[WillowTree]

Right, the local anesthetic is to relieve the pain of the injection.

Emma cited the relevant text for you in the previous post.

Note:

It appears that it's you who might be flatulating here since your own source states: Injection of steroids and anesthetic into the facet joints of the lumbar spine is useful to diagnose or treat patients with facet syndrome (back pain caused by abnormalities of the facet joints)

It appears that this is a treatment for a specifically diagnosed condition causing back pain - not what the OP claimed, as Emma pointed out - restricting injections only for those who had been in pain for less than a year, where the cause was not known.

and what part of "sometimes they never find the cause" passed over yer feebleness?

 

[Coyote]

nothing else seems to work, so you give it a try.. see if it works and provides relief,, that "empirical" honey

Kind of sounds like "quackery" in my dictionary....

It's not though,, it's called empirical.

"Empirical" evidence (in science) is information gained by observation or experiment - in other words it is dependent on evidence that is observable by the senses (as opposed to theoretical)...

According to NICE - there was insufficient scientific evidence to support the practice of those injections for that particular category of back pain.

That's empirical.

 

[Coyote]

It appears that it's you who might be flatulating here since your own source states: Injection of steroids and anesthetic into the facet joints of the lumbar spine is useful to diagnose or treat patients with facet syndrome (back pain caused by abnormalities of the facet joints)

It appears that this is a treatment for a specifically diagnosed condition causing back pain - not what the OP claimed, as Emma pointed out - restricting injections only for those who had been in pain for less than a year, where the cause was not known.

and what part of "sometimes they never find the cause" passed over yer feebleness?

....and dontcha figure that after a year they will have exhausted all tests to determine a cause and, if none is found...then hey, they'll do an injection. At least by that point the injection won't hopefully be masking something more serious underlying the pain ... Yer Feebleness m'am....

 

[WillowTree]

Kind of sounds like "quackery" in my dictionary....

It's not though,, it's called empirical.

"Empirical" evidence (in science) is information gained by observation or experiment - in other words it is dependent on evidence that is observable by the senses (as opposed to theoretical)...

According to NICE - there was insufficient scientific evidence to support the practice of those injections for that particular category of back pain.

That's empirical.

just according to NICE? like I said,, don't worry yer little pointed head about it,, run and hide and never let a doctor pracitice empirical medicine on you,, you should be fine,, sic.

 

[Coyote]

well then, given your attitude I can only suggest to you that when you hear your physician use the term empirical you should run away and hide, as quickly as you can.. cover your head, your ears, and your eyes, and put you ass up in the air! everybody say amen!

I have a feeling your physician may not know the meaning of "empirical" or, more likely....what he said never made it past your arse. Just a friendly suggestion but if you remove your head from that orifice it might improve your hearing

 

[WillowTree]

well then, given your attitude I can only suggest to you that when you hear your physician use the term empirical you should run away and hide, as quickly as you can.. cover your head, your ears, and your eyes, and put you ass up in the air! everybody say amen!

I have a feeling your physician may not know the meaning of "empirical" or, more likely....what he said never made it past your arse. Just a friendly suggestion but if you remove your head from that orifice it might improve your hearing

and you should put yours back up there,, makes you look smarter! should we all bray in unison?? asswipe!

 

[Coyote]

just according to NICE? like I said,, don't worry yer little pointed head about it,, run and hide and never let a doctor pracitice empirical medicine on you,, you should be fine,, sic.

No....but, don't let pesky facts get in the way of your prattle

 

[Coyote]

well then, given your attitude I can only suggest to you that when you hear your physician use the term empirical you should run away and hide, as quickly as you can.. cover your head, your ears, and your eyes, and put you ass up in the air! everybody say amen!

I have a feeling your physician may not know the meaning of "empirical" or, more likely....what he said never made it past your arse. Just a friendly suggestion but if you remove your head from that orifice it might improve your hearing

and you should put yours back up there,, makes you look smarter! should we all bray in unison?? asswipe!

If you wipe your ass...will that remove all your make up then?

Tell me some more about this "empirical" business you've been blathering on about....I'm starting to get the impression you ain't talking science here sweetheart.

 

[WillowTree]

It appears that it's you who might be flatulating here since your own source states: Injection of steroids and anesthetic into the facet joints of the lumbar spine is useful to diagnose or treat patients with facet syndrome (back pain caused by abnormalities of the facet joints)

It appears that this is a treatment for a specifically diagnosed condition causing back pain - not what the OP claimed, as Emma pointed out - restricting injections only for those who had been in pain for less than a year, where the cause was not known.

and what part of "sometimes they never find the cause" passed over yer feebleness?

....and dontcha figure that after a year they will have exhausted all tests to determine a cause and, if none is found...then hey, they'll do an injection. At least by that point the injection won't hopefully be masking something more serious underlying the pain ... Yer Feebleness m'am....

so you support the patient suffering in agony for a full year and then he gets a little relief.. how compassionate of you.

 

[WillowTree]

I have a feeling your physician may not know the meaning of "empirical" or, more likely....what he said never made it past your arse. Just a friendly suggestion but if you remove your head from that orifice it might improve your hearing

and you should put yours back up there,, makes you look smarter! should we all bray in unison?? asswipe!

If you wipe your ass...will that remove all your make up then?

Tell me some more about this "empirical" business you've been blathering on about....I'm starting to get the impression you ain't talking science here sweetheart.

talk to emma,, she has all the answers you like.. now kindly put yer head back up yer azz..and don't ever let a doctor treat you empirically you will be fine.

 

[Coyote]

and what part of "sometimes they never find the cause" passed over yer feebleness?

....and dontcha figure that after a year they will have exhausted all tests to determine a cause and, if none is found...then hey, they'll do an injection. At least by that point the injection won't hopefully be masking something more serious underlying the pain ... Yer Feebleness m'am....

so you support the patient suffering in agony for a full year and then he gets a little relief.. how compassionate of you.

Maybe I missed something but that's nothing new when debating you since your "logic" frequently misses the target but....can you show me where these injections are the only treatment available for "agonizing" pain and nothing else provides "a little relief"?

 

[Coyote]

and you should put yours back up there,, makes you look smarter! should we all bray in unison?? asswipe!

If you wipe your ass...will that remove all your make up then?

Tell me some more about this "empirical" business you've been blathering on about....I'm starting to get the impression you ain't talking science here sweetheart.

talk to emma,, she has all the answers you like.. now kindly put yer head back up yer azz..and don't ever let a doctor treat you empirically you will be fine.

Emma's not the one who brought up this "empirical" business we're trying to get to the bottom of...speaking of which if you would kindly remove your head...

on second thought....never mind, that might not help matters much.