2008 August 28 – YOUR Government’s Shamefull Behaviour!

2008 August 28 03:30:37 BST
Posted By: Greg_L-W.
Discussion
Greg_L-W.’s Blog
 

Hi,

I do find the behaviour of the British Government shamefull.

It is clearly revolting that on the very day the Government’s shelter organisation the QUANGO N.I.C.E. is befouling the image of what was the envy of the world, the British NHS, by hiding in their luxury Head Quarters behind their £30,000,000 annual budget.

Hiding from some 60 Kidney Cancer patients and their carers peacefully demonstrating against the new Government policy, as announced by N.I.C.E., to selectively EUthenase an entire category of patients those Challenged by Kidney Cancer who are now to be deliberately denied the drugs they clinically require both to continue to live and to have a quality in the life that is left to the,

Whilst these brave people, some of whom were dying as a result of this deliberate action, were demonstrating I, as a Kidney Cancer patient was unable to attend due to the damage I have received physically as a result of my Kidney Cancer, but whilst my friends were there to protest at their impending death, against the very people who can save them N.I.C.E. – I was aware the disingenuous claim of N.I.C.E. was that they could not afford the drugs and rather than admit it was directly due to the incompetence of the Government in the management of the Health Service – the devolved irresponsibility of regionalisation that has led to the “post code lottery”.

N.I.C.E. has even tried to shelter their incompetence to manage or negotiate, behind the specious claim that the people who researched and funded the developement of these drugs charge too much – yet it is clear that America who fund the drug for prisoners on death row and the Argentine that prescribes it more than Britain, Malasia and the EU and a total of some 70 Countries around the world would seem to disagree!

Consider – on the very day whilst my friends were demonstarting and their servants the Government funded N.I.C.E. lacked even the manners to meet with these very ill people and N.I.C.E. security was turned on these sick people to intimidate them by photographing them in the street despite the presence of Police Officers invited BY the demonstrators!

Whilst they were peacefully demonstrating and N.I.C.E. hid in shame – I read on my computer that MY Government had pledged to squander from the NHS budget £170,000,000 to train therapists to councel those with ‘Cognative Behaviour Disorder’ – to buy votes by providing this fashion and lifestyle service rather than fund the drugs that are available world wide for Kidney Cancer that may, if nothing else, provide experience for the Oncologists and researchers towards an actual cure whilst giving hope to us The Kidney Cancer Patients that N.I.C.E. have selected to deliberately permit to die for economic expediency – whilst still funding breast enhancement, In Vitro Fertilisation, tattoo removal and many other treatments that can ONLY be seen as frivolous when compared with the deliberate death of Kidney Cancer patients!

Do warn us at what stage we are to be moved into The Harold Shipman Ward in our Regionalised NHS Hospital.

First they came for Kidney Cancer patients and took away their lives

but as you were no a Kidney Cancer Patient I guess you did nothing!

Then they came for those with Crohns Disease (?) and withdrew their treatment

but as you didn't have Crohns Disease I guess you did nothing!

When they come for YOU in your hour of need and weakness -

there was no one left to help you they had been swept away, I guess 'cos you did nothing!

Where will YOU draw the line – Must it be YOUR child, YOUR Mother, YOUR wife?

Or would it have to be YOU?

That is YOUR Shame to share with N.I.C.E. and the Government that hides behind them!

Regards and Warm Hands for YOUR Hour of Need,

Greg L-W.

www.KidneyCancerResource.com

Available to help YOU 01291 – 62 65 62 Please feel free to visit and join The Forum to discuss topics with others. Click on the

Users Forum link or click on the link in the Main Menu on the left hand side at any time.

Since medical information on line is notoriously prone to ‘Snake Oil’ sales Questions may be asked or answered in the full light of member scrutiny on The Forum. It is felt that this may give ‘some’ protection from those seeking to exploit medical fears or confusion.

It is for this reason, amongst others, that we would ask you to use The Forum in preference to The Discussion Tags. Clearly if you feel there are inaccuracies within the article then feel free to fix those directly.

Thank you in anticipation of ANY help you can give in the building of The Web Site or in discussion on The Forum.

To Post on This Web Site it is required that you join as a User/Member, as also on The Forum where you may become a Member separately.

Welcome to our Community.

Blog Entry: User:Greg L-W./BlogEntry: 2008 August 28 03:30:37 BST

Posted under Avastin, Greg Lance-Watkins, Nexavar, Sutent, Torisel

This post was written by Greg Lance-Watkins on October 11, 2008

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

2008 August 25 – Suggestions on N.I.C.E. – How to fund drugs

2008 August 25 22:23:16 BST
Posted By: Greg_L-W.
Discussion
Greg_L-W.’s Blog
 

Andrew Dillon, chief executive of Nice, said: “The provisional conclusions on the use of drugs for treating renal cancer are those of an independent appraisal committee whose membership is largely drawn from NHS clinicians in active practice. They understand the issues at stake.”

He said that if the 26 oncologists are to “maintain the credibility of their argument” they must explain which patients “should forgo cost-effective care in order to meet the needs of those with renal cancer”.

May I usurp their authority and propose that savings could be made as follows:

1. £30,000,000 could be saved by closing N.I.C.E. which is merely a QUANGO behind which corrupt politicians shelter their mismanagement of the NHS.

2. £190,000,000 PER ANNUM could be saved by making organ donorship an opt out scheme rather than an opt in scheme. This being the sum spent on those who are on waiting lists for organs spent annually keeping them alive.

3. Upto £300,000,000 which the Health Service spends per annum on tattoo removal QUOTE Baroness Gardiner House of Lords see Hansard.

4. Cease providing any Government employees with ANY aspect of Private Health Care this would not only make massive multi £Million savings but would also ensure the inducement that they ensure the Heath Service is repaired.

5. Cease providing funding for inflation linked pensions for Government employees – since they are indemnified from their incompetence as inflicted on the balance of the public.

6. Place a ceiling on incomes in Government QUANGOs as few if any of these people are employable in the commercial world which is why they flourish in the unaccountable world of sheltered employment in QUANGOs.

  • Be minded of the fact that in the real world high salaries are determined by the ability to generate high profits leading to greater levels of employment and more tax profit for Government – high salaries in QUANGOs and Government merely produce a need for higher taxation and contribute nothing additional to the Country.

7. Cease giving early retirement and compensation for stress related claims – individuals should be free to select whether they do a given job it being their choice to accept the additional incomes of a given job. Stress in employment is a choice: if you are out of your depth and suffering stress hand back the salary you clearly are failing to earn and quit!

8. Cease providing life style care as a given whereby life style care should ONLY be provided once primary Health Care is provided thus saving on:

  • In Vitro Fertilisation.
  • Breast augmentation.
  • Rectal repair when self inflicted for sexual pleasure.
  • VIAGRA & other erectile defficiency drugs.
  • All forms of fertility enhancement.
  • Treatment of any long term condition for aliens & health tourism.
  • Close all councilling services on the Health Service that are not directly medical.
  • Charge for failure to attend appointments.
  • Cease all concepts of gender reassignment.

9. Withdraw from membership of the EUropean Union as clearly we have joined a club we can afford as we are unable to take care of our own people and are paying £1,800,000 per HOUR of British tax payers money (QUOTE Institute of Directors) and are having to kill British Kidney Cancer patients to find the money to fund the Warsaw Underground, Incompetent French farmers, Corrupt Fishing quotas for great maritime nations like Austria and whilst funding Spain to build their roads we permit them to enrich themselves by stealing fish from British fisheries.

10. Surrender the utterly specious Olympic Games which we clearly can not afford as already the budget of £2.8 Billion has already run to £9.3 Billion with an expectation of a final spend wasted on these irrelevant games of £18 Billion where less than 1% of the population will participate meaningfully in the related sports unlike 100% who will have need of the Health Service where the new policy is to Kill Patients who are too costsly.

I do appreciate that Andrew Dillon on his massive salary may well be able to turn a brief phrase in defence of his job and his QUANGO but clearly he is not competent to the job he is paid to do or he would not have made such a staggeringly stupid and ill considered statement regarding the murders he is planning to preside over.

Regards,

Greg L-W. 01291 – 62 65 62

Blog Entry: User:Greg L-W./BlogEntry: 2008 August 25 22:23:16 BST

Posted under Avastin, Greg Lance-Watkins, Nexavar, Sutent, Torisel

This post was written by Greg Lance-Watkins on October 11, 2008

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

2008 August 17 – PCT Policy – lengthy tortalogous definition

2008 August 17 18:44:32 BST
Posted By: Greg_L-W.
Discussion
Greg_L-W.’s Blog
 

Hi,

I note with some interest the lengthy tortalogous definition of PCT Policy which Rose Woodward has tracked down which follows:

[QUOTE]

This is a typical attempt of a PCT to explain why they are refusing to fund cancer treatments. This is from their policy document.

Guidance for considering exceptionality¡¦ in individual cases

Oxfordshire Commissioning Board decision – Policy Statement 80a
The Oxfordshire Case Review Committees consider requests to fund individuals for treatments which currently fall outside commissioning policies and agreements. A patient will not normally be funded, unless exceptional circumstances apply. The purpose of the Case Review Committees is to carefully consider, within the Ethical Framework, whether such circumstances exist. The key question is: On what grounds can this patient be funded when others will not be?¨ The Oxfordshire Priorities Forum gives guidance for decision making about ¡§exceptional cases¡¨. It is not appropriate to give specific examples of exceptionality. Definition of exception: A particular case which falls within the application of a rule, but to which the rule is not applicable. Definition of exceptional¨: of the nature of or forming an exception; unusual or special.

General guidelines: 1. It is stated on the Priorities Forum low priority¡¨ policies Potentially exceptionalcircumstances may be considered by the patient¡¦s PCT where there is evidence of significant health status impairment (e.g. inability to perform activities of daily living)¡¨. 2. By definition, ‘exceptional’ may not necessarily be predicted or spelt out in advance. 3. The fact that a patient¡¦s clinical picture matches ¡¥accepted indications¡¦ for a treatment which is not normally provided is not, in itself, exceptional. 4. The fact that the treatment is (or is likely to be) efficacious for a particular patient is not, in itself, exceptional. 5. Consideration will be given to evidence that shows that the benefit from the treatment for the patient would be significantly greater than would be expected for an average patient. 6. It is for the requesting clinician (or the patient) to demonstrate why they should be considered as an exception.

===========================

Individual Patient Requests

Exceptional Status (what makes the individual sufficiently different from the usual in policy terms)
Central to consideration of individual requests for funding is the concept of the case being exceptional.

In order for funding to be agreed there must be some unusual or unique clinical factor about the patient that suggests that they are:

„« Significantly different to the general population of patients with the condition in question

And

„« likely to gain significantly more benefit from the intervention than might be expected from the average patient with the condition.

However:

„« The fact that a treatment is likely to be efficacious for a patient is not, in itself, a basis for an exception.

„« If a patient‘s clinical condition matches the ‘accepted indications’ for a treatment that is not funded, their circumstances are not, by definition, exceptional.

„« Social value judgements (the ‘worth¡¦ of patients) are not relevant to the consideration of exceptional status but there may rarely be exceptional circumstances where benefits may go beyond the patient (e.g. as a carer) in respect of social or health related benefits for others.
This guide is in addition to the Oxfordshire Priorities Forum Lavender policy on ¡§Guidance for considering exceptionality in individual cases¡¨, policy number 80a.

Oxfordshire Treatment Request Panel and Case Review Committee June 2007

[/QUOTE]

Why we go to such lengths to track this sort of stuff down one has to wonder when we could so much more readily have obtained the original training manual for PCT Diktat Obfuscation when required to hide dishonesty and corruption in regulation documents.

Here is the relevant passage in the Drafting Officer’s Manual:

[QUOTE] “The fact that the Patient needed to know was not known at the time that the now known need to know was known, and therefore those of us who needed to advise and inform felt that the information that we needed as to whether or not to inform the highest authority of the known information was not yet known, and therefore there was no authority for the authority to be informed because the need to know was not yet known, or needed.” [/QUOTE]

I must admit that I have cheated a little as I substituted the word patient for prime minister in this section of speech by Sir Humphry in ‘Yes Minister’.

For EU Regulations it may interest you to know that the Official drafting of ALL EU drivel is drawn up by French ENARCHS, who are, whilst at L’ Ecole National, it seems trained in the black arts of perfidy to write any sentence in a manner where that which is the diametric opposite of that which it would seem to indicate!

No one has yet managed to answer the simple question under Law – by which Act of Parliament are The State authorised to practice EUthenasia on selected groups? The fact that the Government shelter behind their appointed cronies in N.I.C.E., P.C.Ts. etc. makes it no less a State decision to EUthenase selected Kidney Cancer patients.

In a civilised society it is possible to judge its standards by the way it treats its weakest citizens. To administer a poison in order to kill someone is an act of MURDER – perhaps someone wiser than I in authority can explain how it is Morally any different witholding a needed and proven drug.

Be aware that – the self same Government which is advocating the deliberate Muder of certain selected Kidney Cancer patients on the grounds of cost efficacy of certain drugs has I understand sent over 600 people, besides athletes & trainers, to Beijing to watch people running around in circles or whatever – I understand the cost of an MP in terms of expenses runs to about £24K. This is the same Government that authorises the John Lewis List scam and the funding of London second homes for MPs.

More specifically this is the Government which Baroness Gardiner assured us in The House of Lords ‘spends upto £300,000,000 on tattoo removal’.

Just how can the deliberate Murder of Kidney Cancer Patients be justified?

Any ideas?

Regards, Greg L-W.

Blog Entry: User:Greg L-W./BlogEntry: 2008 August 17 18:44:32 BST

Posted under Greg Lance-Watkins

This post was written by Greg Lance-Watkins on October 11, 2008

Tags: , , , , ,