Brexit!

[Jon the Hat]

Just now, Alf Bentley said:

 

Not their specialist focus, but they can presumably perceive the outcomes of systems set up by the logistics specialists - particularly when they see "a dry run of emergency deliveries"?

 

I'm guessing they wouldn't have asked for "urgent clarification of plans" due to "problems revealed in the system" .......unless, er, they had noticed some problems?

Don’t worry! Amber Rudd says 70-80% of Government  time is being spent on no deal planning!

[Jon the Hat]

3 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Do you mean that all senior doctors are part of the scheming Remoaner liberal elite? 

You’re getting it now!! 😇

Edited 19 September 2019 by Jon the Hat

[Footballwipe]

2 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Do you mean that all senior doctors are part of the scheming Remoaner liberal elite? 

And of course, if they'd said the exact opposite, they wouldn't be accused of having an agenda or being fervent Brexiteers. Instead they'd be hailed for their expertise and honesty in the face of disgusting remain smears.

 

[Alf Bentley]

1 minute ago, Jon the Hat said:

Don’t worry! Amber Rudd says 70-80% of Government  time is being spent on no deal planning!

 

She didn't say anything about the No Deal plans being flawless.... 

 

1 minute ago, Jon the Hat said:

You’re getting it now!!

 

I thought you said doctors would be focused on being good doctors.....

 

Now you say they're making groundless allegations that there are flaws in a perfect No Deal logistics system that will ensure the smooth delivery of medical supplies.....just because they're all Europhile Commie Remoaners? 

[leicsmac]

5 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

They can say what they like, but you and everyone else should then question whether they as medical professionals actually know anything about moving the medications they rely on.

True enough, you can draw attention to the level of knowledge that they have on the matter all day.

 

However, I'm also of the opinion that most doctors (in the UK anyway) get into the business to help patients, so there are precious few ulterior motives here...again to draw parallels, I hear similar criticisms directed at the scientific community when they try to highlight matters that various powerful interests don't like, when, again, their primary intent is not power and influence for themselves, but actually to help people.

 

The trouble with being a powermonger (as those interests are) is that you're inclined to think everyone else is too.

[StanSP]

7 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

It suggests they might have other motives. And we should ask actual experts if they are right to be concerned.

Fair enough. 

 

This is interesting and ironic you mention 'actual experts' though as whenever they have commented on something that might happen in the event of Brexit, it's been knocked down as 'Project Fear' (not by you, but one particular member on here and elsewhere on social media). 

 

 

[Alf Bentley]

2 minutes ago, Footballwipe said:

And of course, if they'd said the exact opposite, they wouldn't be accused of having an agenda or being fervent Brexiteers. Instead they'd be hailed for their expertise and honesty in the face of disgusting remain smears.

 

 

Whatever they said, I'd assume what Jon said first time: that the focus of doctors will be on ensuring a good medical service is provided.

 

I assume that some doctors are Remainers and others are Leavers, but that their main focus will be on anything affecting the critically important work that they do.

 

Maybe I'm naive and all doctors have forgotten all about the Hippocratic Oath and are running about frothing at the mouth about Brexit, like the absolutists at the far ends of the Brexit spectrum (both ends).....

[The Guvnor]

1 hour ago, Wortho said:

I honestly hope that you and your wife are well. I know of the worry of looking after someone with cancer it's horrendous for both of you.

Thankyou for your kind words, fortunately the treatment for my wife has been extremely positive but as we know too well that is not always the case.

 

 

[Leicester_Loyal]

I've already stated earlier in the thread, in comparison to what someone else has mentioned in here, someone I know works in the NHS and they have been advised that leaving with or without a deal would not effect the supply of medicines anymore than usual. Every year there are shortages of some of them, due to the supply & demand and issues due to production, logistics etc.

[HappyHamza]

3 hours ago, Wortho said:

So you are saying that should there be a no deal Brexit people in the UK will be unable to receive life saving drugs? My son also needs vital drugs so that he function. 

Is this the fault of the EU or companies within the EU? If so who would want to be part of an empire that refuses to supply these vital drugs. I think it says more about the EU than anything. 

 

2 hours ago, The Guvnor said:

Do you mind me asking what life saving medication you are referring to? 

I am taking regular medication you could argue is life preserving and my wife is taking medication post cancer treatment, we haven't been told of any supply problems, I've just had my Annual review and she has recently visited her Oncologist.

I am genuinely interested. 

 

2 hours ago, WigstonWanderer said:

I think you’re missing the point. Whether the insulin is in short supply post Brexit or not, this guy is prepared to die for the cause. If that’s not a cult, I don’t know what is.

 

2 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Nobody, neither the EU nor companies nor anyone else will "refuse to supply these vital drugs".

 

With No Deal, the risk is that orders of vital drugs will not arrive because they get stuck in massive queues of lorries outside Dover/Calais. Or delayed due to extra Customs/product checks. Or, in some cases, will be unusable due to delays if they have to be used within a very limited period.

 

By opting for No Deal, the UK would be choosing to take the risk of that happening - a very real risk according to the UK Govt's own assessments.

 

Advance stockpiling would alleviate some of that. But not infinitely, only for a few weeks/months for non-perishable items - and some medicines simply cannot be stockpiled as they have to be used within 1-2 days or whatever.

 

2 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

Just one example, @Wortho....

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-49153073

 

"Senior doctors have called for ''urgent clarification" of plans to supply cancer treatments in the event of a no-deal Brexit, BBC Newsnight has learned. In a letter to the prime minister, seen by Newsnight, they say a "dry run" of emergency deliveries earlier this year revealed problems in the system.

 

About one million patients in the UK receive medical radioisotopes for diagnosis or therapy each year. The Department of Health said "action is being taken to safeguard supplies". 

 

Radioisotopes are radioactive atoms that can be used against cancer and are a key component of some types of scan. Their supply chains operate on tight schedules, as the nuclear materials quickly decay and become unusable. And stockpiling supplies in advance of a potential no deal, as planned for some other medicines, is impossible".

 

 

2 hours ago, Kopfkino said:

 

 

 

Two years on and you have managed to strawman me.

 

For the avoidance of doubt though, centrally-planned health systems require strict rationing for which NICE has to make tough decisions based on strict mathematics, the QALY measure. The choice NICE has to make is essentially the one you brought up and that's the problem. "Wrt withdrawing treatment from heart attack patients, I am not countering that it is a bad thing. I said I am not making those choices, I am not discussing what specifics deserve treating and what doesn't, I am again asking what you continue to treat". That's exactly my problem, NICE have to make these decisions because of the system we operate. Elsewhere, where healthcare is treated more as a transaction between consumer and provider, those decisions are made differently, although obviously always with a nod to money.

 

Alas your point about not having to make that choice would be nice and probably come to some degree long after we depart.

 

1 hour ago, BKLFox said:

I'd imagine its possible for life saving drugs and those with short shelf lives could/would be flown in with immediate checks made on loading / unloading & met by medical transport & taken directly to supply depots, no?

 

1 hour ago, Jon the Hat said:

Ask yourself what doctors know about logistics.  

 

1 hour ago, Jon the Hat said:

It suggests they might have other motives. And we should ask actual experts if they are right to be concerned.

So, I happen to know somebody involved with pharmacy on a national level and who has been in direct contact with the government relating to brexit.  

 

He is of the opinion that the government is nowhere near where they claim to be in terms of contingency planning. The government also expects that pharmaceuticals are likely to cost around 40% more overall (exact costs for individual medicines have been calculated). I respect his voice on this more than anybody elses.

Edited 19 September 2019 by HappyHamza

[Jon the Hat]

4 minutes ago, HappyHamza said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So, I happen to know somebody involved with pharmacy on a national level and who has been in direct contact with the government relating to brexit.  

 

He is of the opinion that the government is nowhere near where they claim to be in terms of contingency planning. The government also expects that pharmaceuticals are likely to cost around 40% more overall (exact costs for individual medicines have been calculated). I respect his voice on this more than anybody elses.

On what assumptions?  Zero duty imports from the US anyone?

[Jon the Hat]

Sooo juncker says the backstop can go! And a deal is possible.  Who would have thought?

[Smudge]

3 minutes ago, HappyHamza said:

So, I happen to know somebody that has been right at the top of british pharmacy for a number of years and who has been in direct contact with the government relating to brexit.  

 

He is of the opinion that the government is nowhere near where they claim to be in terms of contingency planning. The government also expects that pharmaceuticals are likely to cost around 40% more overall (exact costs for individual medicines have been calculated). I respect his voice on this more than anybody elses.

I'm not sure i'd be taking the pharmacy lobby as gospel.

[Jon the Hat]

Just now, Smudge said:

I'm not sure i'd be taking the pharmacy lobby as gospel.

They’d love increases if 40% I’m sure!

[Alf Bentley]

11 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

Sooo juncker says the backstop can go! And a deal is possible.  Who would have thought?

 

I'm not sure what your point is here, Jon.

 

The EU has always made clear that it wants a deal - indeed it approved one (May's Deal).

It has also made clear that the backstop can go......provided it is replaced by some equivalent means of preventing a hard border if the UK & the Irish Republic end up diverging with different customs & regulatory regimes.

 

Juncker has not not said anything different to that now, has he?

 

Edited 19 September 2019 by Alf Bentley

[HappyHamza]

14 minutes ago, Smudge said:

I'm not sure i'd be taking the pharmacy lobby as gospel.

 

14 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

They’d love increases if 40% I’m sure!

I'm not taking the pharmacy lobby as gospel. 

 

I'm taking somebody that works at such a high level within our health system that he's in direct contact with number 10 as gospel. 

 

And Jon, the vast majority of medication prescribed in the UK is paid for by the NHS at drug tariff prices. Pharmacies don't set the price paid. It's the baseline cost that would rise.

 

Edited 19 September 2019 by HappyHamza

[Jon the Hat]

5 minutes ago, HappyHamza said:

 

I'm not taking the pharmacy lobby as gospel. 

 

I'm taking somebody that works at such a high level within our health system that he's in direct contact with number 10 as gospel. 

 

And Jon, the vast majority of medication prescribed in the UK is paid for by the NHS at drug tariff prices. Pharmacies don't set the price paid. It's the baseline cost that would rise.

 

He’s only human, we can all be wrong

 

what Would drive a 40% increase exactly?

[HappyHamza]

1 minute ago, Jon the Hat said:

He’s only human, we can all be wrong

 

what Would drive a 40% increase exactly?

I have no idea.  I'm not a phamacy expert. But i find it incredible that ordinary people can deny or question experts in the way that brexiteers do (as if everybody has an agenda and is out to crush their dream) when they have no knowledge of the sector whatsoever. 

 

In fairness though you have ended up asking the question you should have asked from the beginning, even if I'm not somebody that can answer it.

 

I'm much prefer that people asked questions to aid their own understanding rather than dismissed all information that doesn't help their cause.  It's the same with climate change denial. 

[Jon the Hat]

Just now, HappyHamza said:

I have no idea.  I'm not a phamacy expert. But i find it incredible that ordinary people can deny or question experts in the way that brexiteers do (as if everybody has an agenda and is out to crush their dream) when they have no knowledge of the sector whatsoever. 

 

In fairness though you have ended up asking the question you should have asked from the beginning, even if I'm not somebody that can answer it.

 

I'm much prefer that people asked questions to aid their own understanding rather than dismissed all information that doesn't help their cause.  It's the same with climate change denial. 

Climate change has scientific evidence.  Speculation on the effects of Brexit has literally none whatsoever.  Poor comparison.

[HappyHamza]

1 hour ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

I've already stated earlier in the thread, in comparison to what someone else has mentioned in here, someone I know works in the NHS and they have been advised that leaving with or without a deal would not effect the supply of medicines anymore than usual. Every year there are shortages of some of them, due to the supply & demand and issues due to production, logistics etc.

This is interesting as it the opposite of the information I have.  What sort of level do they work at and where did they hear this?

[HappyHamza]

1 minute ago, Jon the Hat said:

Climate change has scientific evidence.  Speculation on the effects of Brexit has literally none whatsoever.  Poor comparison.

It has none whatsoever if all you do is believed the express and dismiss every expert.

 

If you are an actual expert then you have the weight of your industry's expertise and knowledge and assessments. So quite scientific. It's not speculation when it's an assessment by experts based on a thorough understanding of their subject.

 

I'm not sure why this is so hard to understand.

 

 

[Guest Fktf]

With all the no deal preparations that the govt are apparently undertaking, I find it hard to believe doctors would not have been briefed on any expected shortages - particularly for the meds that are essential for life. 

[Jon the Hat]

14 minutes ago, HappyHamza said:

It has none whatsoever if all you do is believed the express and dismiss every expert.

 

If you are an actual expert then you have the weight of your industry's expertise and knowledge and assessments. So quite scientific. It's not speculation when it's an assessment by experts based on a thorough understanding of their subject.

 

I'm not sure why this is so hard to understand.

 

 

The problem is you are only seeing half the argument.  The press isn’t reporting the other side.

For example today the vote leave and BeLeave won the appeal and proved they did not break election law despite the claims of the election commission.  I don’t see this anywhere on Sky news app, or BBC app.

so those of us pro Brexit are fed up with it.

[The Guvnor]

1 hour ago, Jon the Hat said:

Sooo juncker says the backstop can go! And a deal is possible.  Who would have thought?

They have always been desperate for us to stay, one reason so the EU trawlers can hoover up from our prime fishing grounds.

We should tell tem to fcuk off now just for the Halibut.

[yorkie1999]

22 minutes ago, Fktf said:

With all the no deal preparations that the govt are apparently undertaking, I find it hard to believe doctors would not have been briefed on any expected shortages - particularly for the meds that are essential for life. 

Have there really been any no deal preparations or is it all just guesswork and maybe's. Taking half a dozen lorries to an old airfield as an experiment in to see how to handle 30 miles of queuing trucks is hardly an exact simulation and if the rest of the preparations are carried out in such a bodged up fashion, i suspect that most of the spiel the government comes out with should be taken with a pinch of salt. Talkers they may be, but doers they definitely are not. Unless it's fiddling their expenses they're not really that good at anything worth shouting about.

 From the institute for government

 

How much progress has the government made on preparing for no deal?

The government has provided no comprehensive update on how far it has got on preparing for no deal. A government paper published in February 2019 said it was “on track for just over two-thirds of the most critical projects.” However, the report did not explain what those critical projects are, which ones are not on track, or what the government is doing to get them back on track.

In February 2019, the National Audit Office (NAO) published an updated assessment of the government’s preparations for the UK border in the case of a no-deal exit. The assessment found that the successful delivery of certain new IT systems needed for no deal is “in doubt”. It also found that Border Force has made significant progress on recruiting new staff needed to manage the border in the case of no deal.

Since a long extension to Article 50 was agreed with the EU in April, the government has not published any further assessment of the state of no-deal preparations.

Although since March preparedness has improved in some areas, where the government has been able to complete necessary projects or agreements, in other ways the UK is now less ready for no deal than it was before the original Brexit date: for example, key officials have left or changed jobs, while many businesses are reluctant to spend money replicating the short-term preparations they made previously