Yes, let's teach our patients that physical exercise isn't something that you "do", it's something that you're "entitled to get off the doctor". Given the dismal statistics on adherence to exercise referral schemes, I think this idea makes as much sense as the NHS getting into bed with commercial slimming groups. And *that* is never going to hap ... oh. Yes. I forgot.
This has been a consistent finding in similar surveys for decades. GPs top the list, with other public service workers who play a role in individual people's lives up there beside them and politicians and journalists at the bottom of the pile.
Maybe that's why politicians and journalists get such a kick out of slagging off GPs (and hospital doctors, and teachers, and front line police workers). Looks like it isn't achieving the aim of alienating people's trust in us. People are judging by their personal experience instead.
I'd be surprised if the indemnity cover of a GP who doesn't also have a formal role as a sports medicine practitioner took into account the risk involved in making such an assessment. The same applies to boxing and other combat sports.
This just sounds like more moving of the goalposts in a game in which performance can't be measured by counting goals.
I don't like these signs either. Not because they're stopping us from making diagnoses (if we're even half-decent clinicians we'll elicit the relevant information) but because they actually encourage the behaviour that they're intended to discourage. What patients see is, "These signs mean that LOTS OF OTHER PEOPLE have been going into the doctor with a list of problems, therefore this is NORMAL BEHAVIOUR, so I can do it too."
And I've had a patient come in and tell me that they've seen the sign but realise it's not meant for "people like them". I'm still scratching my head about that one.
Unfortunately, we sometimes don't know which patients are genuinely consulting about their dandruff and which are going to say, after spending eleven minutes of a ten-minute slot perseverating about their dandruff, "Oh, by the way, doctor, is it normal to have blood in your poo?" or burst into tears and disclose domestic abuse.
I'm inclined to agree a little bit with Mr Hunt a about this. Over the last 20 years I've seen many of the clinical skills I took pride in polishing up becoming obsolete as technology has improved. AND I don't think this is a bad thing in the overall scheme of healthcare.
But a huge amount of our workload involves deciding when and what technology is appropriate (for blunderbuss tests are probably worse than no tests), making diagnoses that don't need any technology, assuring people that self-limiting conditions will get better by itself, supporting people with conditions that won't be amenable to being cured by any amount of technology, and managing mental illness (yes, Mr Cameron, we DO manage lots and lots of mental illness and we're very good at it) in which the technology base is miniscule. If you think you can get all those jobs done more cheaply by someone else, go for it. You won't be the first to have tried.
PENANCE?! Is Mr Hunt trying to tell us that he's the Second Coming of Christ? That would explain the Apocalypse that's going on in the NHS.
Count me in. Anyone else?
I didn't join the toothless, let's-not-actually-inconvenience-anyone "strike" over pensions and haven't been a BMA member for many years, but I'll do whatever I can to make sure that today's junior doctors don't have to experience the brutal hours and low pay that those of us who trained in the 1980s and 1990s suffered.
This comment has been deleted
Eh? Is it April 1st, or is it Nineteen Eighty Four, or is Mr Cameron following the precedent set by Mrs Thatcher and Mr Blair and losing his already limited grip on reality?
CBT isn't going to do much for the poor sods who are depressed because they've had their benefits cut by the current government and don't know where their next meal is coming from. It's of no benefit in many mental health conditions. And I want my patients to be able to decline psychological therapies without me or them being penalised for that decision.
Feel for 'em. But maybe this will inspire more of us to say no when asked to take on pointless tickitty-boxitty tasks in future.
Interesting! Something else to keep my eyes open for. I never cease to be surprised at the ingenuity of our drug misusing population.
I have no interest in anyone being allowed to hold a firearm in civilian life and shall decline any such requests.
GPs do not "need to" anything. We are a scarce resource and WE should be calling the shots on access.
Give the fella time to pull his thoughts together, eh?
Out of all the Labour leadership candidates, Jeremy Corbyn was the most likely to seek to ensure that everyone remains able to access a reasonable standard of health care. He can't save the NHS because he's in opposition with limited support from his parliamentary party (as opposed to the actual grassroots Labour Party members) and Jeremy Hunt has a mandate to collapse the NHS during the current parliamentary term. But every other candidate would have smiled and nodded while the NHS was sold off to the profit-skimming chancers inside and outside our profession, whereas there's a chance that Jeremy Corbyn will ensure that awkward questions are asked. That's the best we can hope for.
Why is she coming over all "humbled"? I would like to see the post of shadow health secretary occupied by someone who professes to be chuffed to bits at getting a big promotion and full of enthusiasm for the challenge of the job, not using language that suggests they've been made to eat dust. Even if that's the reality.
Thank you for telling your story. I wish you well for the future :o)
I shall be interested to see whether this campaign leads to a genuine increase in diagnoses of coeliac disease in people who would not otherwise have presented for testing, or to a massive increase in our workload for little measurable benefit, rather like the Koff Koff Koff Kampaign which, in my practice, generated a lot of consultations and chest x-rays and precisely no new lung cancer diagnoses.
This is a piece of nonsense. I've been routinely testing every patient who has any symptoms of any sort for coeliac disease since before NICE issued guidance to that effect, and I haven't picked up a single case of coeliac disease in someone who didn't present with a family history. I am sure the "1 in 100" figure is plucked from thin air and is a huge exaggeration of the actual prevalence of the condition.
"Being expected to make myself directly available to patients by e-mail or Skype," is something I decided years ago would be a trigger for retiring from the job. In those days, I was free to decline to do telephone consultations, which have subsequently turned into a monstrous, uncontainable ADDITIONAL workload. What part of our workload is going to be taken away to make time for even more remote consultations?