is that it now game over no chance of POTUS

 

Rayguns out

6 hours ago, Dimron said:

When do I start?

I'll do it for expenses

You'd have my vote pal.

1 hour ago, boltonboris said:

Not a joke... Far more dollars to be had treating it, than curing and preventing it

That's an economic reality, but it doesn't mean there is deliberate suppression of cancer cures. 

6 hours ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

I'm presuming you mean within rather than the whole thing being a waste! 😁

It certainly does need increased efficiency, and hopefully the clear out some of the staff within NHS England is just the start.

Yes.

5 hours ago, kent_white said:

I hate it play devil's advocate here. But I work closely with NHS England. Which staff do you think need clearing out? 

For a fucking start, all of the so called 'middle management' on fat salaries; all of the 'diversity and inclusion' thieves and all of the daft (or bent) cunts paying overs for supplies (which is rife). For the latter, I reckon there's a fair chance backhanders are playing a part.

6 hours ago, bolty58 said:

For a fucking start, all of the so called 'middle management' on fat salaries; all of the 'diversity and inclusion' thieves and all of the daft (or bent) cunts paying overs for supplies (which is rife). For the latter, I reckon there's a fair chance backhanders are playing a part.

If someone who hasn't lived in this country for nearly 40 years, can see the huge waste in the NHS, how come all the senior bods can't? Probably needs some erm middle manager type to go in and sort it out.

7 hours ago, bolty58 said:

For a fucking start, all of the so called 'middle management' on fat salaries; all of the 'diversity and inclusion' thieves and all of the daft (or bent) cunts paying overs for supplies (which is rife). For the latter, I reckon there's a fair chance backhanders are playing a part.

@LH white will be on the dole queue by monday

7 hours ago, kent_white said:

That's an economic reality, but it doesn't mean there is deliberate suppression of cancer cures. 

That's what Big Pharma want you to believe.

(Someone on Joe Rogan told me )

8 hours ago, bolty58 said:

For a fucking start, all of the so called 'middle management' on fat salaries; all of the 'diversity and inclusion' thieves and all of the daft (or bent) cunts paying overs for supplies (which is rife). For the latter, I reckon there's a fair chance backhanders are playing a part.

As it usual, a lot of bluster and little in the way of actual facts.

The UK scores very well on administrative efficiency compared with other OECD countries.

If anyone is genuinely interested they can look it up, Google is very easy to use, or read the link below.

https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/insight-and-analysis/reports/nhs-compare-health-care-systems-other-countries

 

9 hours ago, bolty58 said:

For a fucking start, all of the so called 'middle management' on fat salaries; all of the 'diversity and inclusion' thieves and all of the daft (or bent) cunts paying overs for supplies (which is rife). For the latter, I reckon there's a fair chance backhanders are playing a part.

Didn’t you spend a large chunk of your career in middle management?

9 hours ago, kent_white said:

That's an economic reality, but it doesn't mean there is deliberate suppression of cancer cures. 

I don't think any advancements are being halted, but I do think there is a lack of appetite to properly invest in it.

As bad as it sounds, I believe Cancer is the bodies time bomb. I used to go to school with a girl who went onto study cancer cells at a University hospital in San Diego and she wrote a couple of medical journals on it. The general consensus from her and her peers was that the human body is designed to die from cancer. Just that other things, like accidents, or heart defects etc can kill us before that happens

Is the world really sustainable for us to not have this kill us all eventually? Does there need to be a maximum age limit for a potential cancer cure to be administered?

An awful question to ask, I know..

16 minutes ago, boltonboris said:

I don't think any advancements are being halted, but I do think there is a lack of appetite to properly invest in it.

As bad as it sounds, I believe Cancer is the bodies time bomb. I used to go to school with a girl who went onto study cancer cells at a University hospital in San Diego and she wrote a couple of medical journals on it. The general consensus from her and her peers was that the human body is designed to die from cancer. Just that other things, like accidents, or heart defects etc can kill us before that happens

Is the world really sustainable for us to not have this kill us all eventually? Does there need to be a maximum age limit for a potential cancer cure to be administered?

An awful question to ask, I know..

Why would you limit to cancer then ?

Just let Dementia run its course and stop treating. 
 

 

21 minutes ago, boltonboris said:

 

As bad as it sounds, I believe Cancer is the bodies time bomb. I used to go to school with a girl who went onto study cancer cells at a University hospital in San Diego and she wrote a couple of medical journals on it. The general consensus from her and her peers was that the human body is designed to die from cancer. Just that other things, like accidents, or heart defects etc can kill us before that happens

 

I used to be pals with a bloke who was a scientist and something to do with Cancer Research UK - he used to say that he had a job for life, as there would and could never be a cure for cancer, as there are just so many different variants and they differ from person to person - as you've said above, he said it was/is a built in time bomb.

Even though it was a "job for life" he's no longer there, as he was offered much better pay to move to Germany to do a similar job

 

10 hours ago, bolty58 said:

Well said sir. The long game. Just watch where this all ends up. Tyldesley will be wanting to head to Vegas every weekend.

He's not got long, he's only got 4 years. He's already pulled back on the tariffs, as it was having an immediate detrimental effect on the US economy. He'll have them in a full on recession within 18 months, which sadly would mean we'd probably end up in one as well...........

1 hour ago, boltonboris said:

I don't think any advancements are being halted, but I do think there is a lack of appetite to properly invest in it.

As bad as it sounds, I believe Cancer is the bodies time bomb. I used to go to school with a girl who went onto study cancer cells at a University hospital in San Diego and she wrote a couple of medical journals on it. The general consensus from her and her peers was that the human body is designed to die from cancer. Just that other things, like accidents, or heart defects etc can kill us before that happens

Is the world really sustainable for us to not have this kill us all eventually? Does there need to be a maximum age limit for a potential cancer cure to be administered?

An awful question to ask, I know..

There's a lot of truth in that. Most of us blokes will have prostate cancer by the time we die - it's just a matter of whether or not it becomes symptomatic. If you get to your 80's there's about a 70 or 80 percent chance you'll have prostate cancer. Like Sweep says. There's just so many different cancers with varying causes that it will be incredibly difficult to find a cure to all of them. 

2 hours ago, boltonboris said:

I don't think any advancements are being halted, but I do think there is a lack of appetite to properly invest in it.

As bad as it sounds, I believe Cancer is the bodies time bomb. I used to go to school with a girl who went onto study cancer cells at a University hospital in San Diego and she wrote a couple of medical journals on it. The general consensus from her and her peers was that the human body is designed to die from cancer. Just that other things, like accidents, or heart defects etc can kill us before that happens

Is the world really sustainable for us to not have this kill us all eventually? Does there need to be a maximum age limit for a potential cancer cure to be administered?

An awful question to ask, I know..

On the one hand a ‘ cure’is nearly impossible on the other if it is found do not give to old people. So not something we need to moralise about.

What we can do is look at how we treat cancer and that is improving every year. Like I bet nearly everyone on here have lost relatives to cancer. My mum died nearly 50 years ago from breast cancer, would probably survive now. All our female relatives are screened annually and a couple have had issues identified early and treated.

The point is Trump has pulled research money for a range of medical treatments whilst at the same time celebrating with a young kid that has survived cancer. Even his his more ardent supporters must find that uncomfortable. 

4 hours ago, gonzo said:

That's what Big Pharma want you to believe.

(Someone on Joe Rogan told me )

Pharma companies take the piss... bloke I know used to be a Hilti Rep now he's set up as a "project manager" for Mrs Sunak's lot... built himself a home office and does next to bugger all and  gets a big draw... spends his day and salary buying and doing up houses, very little PM work... he can't believe his luck... I keep trying to get involved but the selfish bugger won't let me in on it 🤨

PS He wouldn't know the difference between a disprin and an aspirin if you asked him!

12 hours ago, bolty58 said:

For a fucking start, all of the so called 'middle management' on fat salaries; all of the 'diversity and inclusion' thieves and all of the daft (or bent) cunts paying overs for supplies (which is rife). For the latter, I reckon there's a fair chance backhanders are playing a part.

Well as an NHS middle manager that's me out of a job then. Although I'm not sure about my 'fat salary'. Incidentally - a recent review highlighted the fact that there are too few NHS managers to properly cope with the amount of work as opposed to too many. And that employing more and allowing them to focus on specific topics (as opposed to spinning hundreds of plates) would ultimately be beneficial. 

I don't think you understand how NHS procurement works - but the scrutiny over any type of spend is enormous. For example - at our place - any spend with a value of over £10,000 has to have a business case and then go through a committee who decide whether or not we are allowed to spend it. And any contract over £50,000 has to be listed for public procurement and then go through an extremely onerous selection process. 

And in my time I've never seen, heard or even had an inkling that anybody is paying back handers to suppliers. There are way too many checks and balances for that. 

As for DEI - like I've already explained. They provide a really important function. For example. Say I want to procure a new vaccination team in an effort to bring MMR jab rates up to 95% which typically offers herd immunity. One of the most significant problems in achieving this is cultural beliefs of some people from other backgrounds, which I have some understanding of - but not in enough detail to really persuade people to change. This is where DEI might come in and offer advice and support to me about how to overcome these barriers. And their salary will be hugely offset by just one hospital stay by someone who they prevent from catching measles (and require hospital treatment). 

I can understand how simple it all seems as an outsider looking in. But we're largely intelligent people who do our best to keep everybody fit and well. If we thought that role wasn't worthwhile or somebody wasn't pulling their weight - they would be out. NHS management is ruthless - because we have to be. 

And if you want some idea of how many cuts have already been made. We had 11 in our team 3 years ago. We've now got 4. With additional work. We aren't allowed to spend any money on things like room hire to conduct large meetings and everything has been cut back. Even tea and coffee. 

I don't agree with this idea that there's some sort of DOGE like chainsaw swinging that could be done to save a load of cash. Certainly not in any of the places I've ever worked anyway. 

Art of the Deal = Pissing your pants when Canada tell you to fuck off.

He's a fucking bulb

34 minutes ago, Ani said:

On the one hand a ‘ cure’is nearly impossible on the other if it is found do not give to old people. So not something we need to moralise about.

What we can do is look at how we treat cancer and that is improving every year. Like I bet nearly everyone on here have lost relatives to cancer. My mum died nearly 50 years ago from breast cancer, would probably survive now. All our female relatives are screened annually and a couple have had issues identified early and treated.

The point is Trump has pulled research money for a range of medical treatments whilst at the same time celebrating with a young kid that has survived cancer. Even his his more ardent supporters must find that uncomfortable. 

And he's employed a vaccine sceptic to oversee vaccines (which often prevent cancer). 

1 minute ago, Spider said:

Art of the Deal = Pissing your pants when Canada tell you to fuck off.

He's a fucking bulb

All part of the strategy! 😁

To be honest - I've been pleasantly surprised how many world leaders have decided to take him on instead of rolling over and having their bellies tickle. 

1 hour ago, Spider said:

Art of the Deal = Pissing your pants when Canada tell you to fuck off.

He's a fucking bulb

He 100% was not expecting Mexico and Canada to tell him to get fucked, and respond how they did - it'll be interesting to see what he does next, as a result of not getting his own way, as readily as he thought he would

Edited March 7, 20251 yr by Sweep

3 hours ago, Ani said:

Why would you limit to cancer then ?

Just let Dementia run its course and stop treating. 
 

 

I don't know mate, which is why I posed it as a question.. From a moral standpoint, give everyone the best chance at a long, healthy life.. But at what cost?

1 hour ago, kent_white said:

And he's employed a vaccine sceptic to oversee vaccines (which often prevent cancer). 

Who is now rolling out vaccines to Children for Measles and getting pelters from all the nutters who thought he was the next coming of medichrist