Should I be flattered? In a rare communication since his former boss tried to have me sacked, a BBC Reporting Scotland reporter has had a go at responding to my recent piece on how a BMA study undermines their agenda on NHS targets. Here’s the TuS report:
Here’s one of Stewart’s three tweets in response:
Taking this as evidence of a principled position by our state broadcaster, why did they, then, miss one of the targets which NHS Scotland had met 100% and for the fifth year in succession? Could that be suppression of information?
Here is the one they conveniently missed:
The target is for 90% of patients to be screened within 365 days of receipt oi referral. Demand for the screening had gone up 5.36% since the last quarter yet 100% were screened within 365 days. The target has been met since in was first measured in 2015.
This is a quite significant and newsworthy target given that its failure to be met in England has had wider and shocking consequences for corruption in the NHS, benefiting the private sector and politicians and for related mental health conditions. See:
IVF failures create knock-on effects in women’s mental health
Failing to treat infertility can result in problems and further costs for the NHS in other areas. A Danish study of 98 737 women, between 1973 and 2003, showed that women who were unable to have children were 47% more likely to be hospitalised for schizophrenia and had a significantly higher risk of subsequent drug and alcohol abuse. See this:
https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn22020-infertility-may-increase-risk-of-mental-disorders/
IVF in England has become a licence to print money.
As we tumble toward a hard Brexit and trade deals with the USA allowing the private sector into the heart of the NHS, we can see how things will work out in the already privatised IVF service in England and contrast it with the state-controlled and regulated version, in Scotland. See this from the Guardian today:
‘Private fertility clinics routinely try to sell desperate patients add-ons that almost certainly don’t help – why isn’t more done to monitor the industry? Around three-quarters of all IVF cycles fail. And results vary with age. Figures from the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) published in March state the average live birth-rate for each fresh embryo transferred for women of all ages is 21%; for those aged under 35, it is 29% – the highest it has ever been. For older women, the picture is bleaker: 10% for women aged 40-42, for example. IVF is expensive. And what makes it worse, says Hugh Risebrow, the report’s author, is the lack of pricing transparency. “The headline prices quoted may be, say, £3,500, but you end up with a bill of £7,000,” he says. “This is because there are things not included that you need – and then things that are offered but are not evidence-based.”’
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2018/jun/18/how-ivf-became-a-licence-to-print-money
IVF in England has created opportunities for the private sector
In Tory-run NHS England, only 12% of boards offer three full cycles in line with official guidance. 61% offer only one cycle of treatment and 4% offer none at all. Private treatment costs between £1 343 and £5 788 per cycle.
Why some UK politicians would like more privatisation in the NHS
There are 64 Tory and Labour (New) MPs with ‘links’ to private health care. Why would we trust them to protect the NHS? See this:
Perhaps Stewart could pass this to the BBC Scotland Disclosure Team to investigate?
For more, see:
Talking-up Scotland 
I often wonder if these MSM people ever realise how foolish they look to anyone who takes a moment’s thought and sees them at best as pedlars of half truths and ommisions.
LikeLiked by 2 people
They rarely mix with ‘ordinary’ people. There is a cliquishness amongst the ‘meeja-volk’ and others in the ‘entertainment’ business so, they rarely come across people like you or I.
LikeLiked by 2 people
‘Many people can be like me, obviousleee, but not too many can be like him, fortunateleee?’
LikeLiked by 1 person
Maybe too deluded to realise?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Just spotted this from the twitter account of Lord (Andrew) Adonis today:
“In case I haven’t made myself clear to BBC executives & journalists who keep attacking me for standing up for public service broadcasting – I support the ideal of the BBC, I believe the BBC is betraying it, & the rot is now so deep we may need a new public service broadcaster.”
LikeLiked by 4 people
Yes BBC Bias more widely recognized.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The nomedia have taken the old adage that “No news is good news” and turned it into “Good news is no news”. Bias by omission.
We now have another Broontervension on the SNHS in the shape of an unchallenged party political statement. Do you think it’s written into the BBC Charter that whatever he says has to be accepted uncritically as the gospel truth, or does he just get wheeled out when they think there is an election/referendum in the offing.
There must be a name for folk that hate their own country so much – the nearest I could come up with is oikophobes, although the collective noun could be TWATS. (The Wankers Always Traducing Scotland)
LikeLike