[Dick Godfrey]

Sad story in The Times about Doddie saying the NHS has done nothing for him since he was diagnised with MND. If this is true for Doddie the situation will be the same for other sufferers of this terminal affliction. Sorry for being political, but what on earth is being allowed to happen to the NHS?
I don't expect a response to this posting, just thought people should know about what is happening to one of the finest ever Falcons. I am welling up as I write this. Keep strong big fella.

[Aidanb]

He has been clear all along that the NHS have let him down

He described the way the consultant broke the news to him as a disgrace

He described the fact the MND had no investment in medications in the last 20 years as part of that.

His action plan was to use his situation to bring it to the front and change the inertia.

He is doing that.

He also recognised that he may not benefit from the work being done.

He is a genuine inspiration and it is a disgrace what is happening.

[Monkey1]

I am not too sure what the NHS is supposed to do. Doddie's condition is not treatable. That isn't something the NHS can be held responsible for. If he needs any sort of help as his condition worsens I am sure it will be available, but at present I honestly cannot see what can be done. The NHS is an amazing operation staffed by people who do their best, but perhaps we expect too much from it. The main function of the NHS these days seems to be to keep old people alive forever and look after them because nobody else wants to. The hospitals are crammed full of old people who look lost & sad, and that seems to be what we want from it, to keep our old relatives alive for as long as possible without inconveniencing us too much. They do this very well, so to criticise because they can't work miracles for somebody with an untreatable condition is perhaps unfair, and must be demoralising for people who are trying their best.

[Aidanb]

I am not too sure what the NHS is supposed to do. Doddie's condition is not treatable. That isn't something the NHS can be held responsible for. If he needs any sort of help as his condition worsens I am sure it will be available, but at present I honestly cannot see what can be done. The NHS is an amazing operation staffed by people who do their best, but perhaps we expect too much from it. The main function of the NHS these days seems to be to keep old people alive forever and look after them because nobody else wants to. The hospitals are crammed full of old people who look lost & sad, and that seems to be what we want from it, to keep our old relatives alive for as long as possible without inconveniencing us too much. They do this very well, so to criticise because they can't work miracles for somebody with an untreatable condition is perhaps unfair, and must be demoralising for people who are trying their best.

I think you may have the wrong end of that stick.

Doddie's complaint about the NHS was that they were brutally short of compassion in breaking the news and unable to help him because there had been no investment [from the government and research teams] into new meds for MND

The NHS does far more than keep old people alive who no one else wants to anymore.

And MND may well be a treatable condition if research and development was spent on it

[Monkey1]

It isn't the function of the NHS to do medical research. If there is a treatment that is proved to be effective then I am sure they will add it to their armoury as they do for everything that they can, until then I struggle to see what it is that people think the NHS can do that they are not doing. Medical research is the key starting point for any treatment that will alleviate symptoms of a condition, maybe slow down the development, or in an ideal world discover a cure, and that is largely what Doddie is raising money & awareness for. If that gets anywhere it is then over to the big drug companies to develop it further & take it through testing. Only after that is there any chance of it being prescribed by doctors. That is the same everywhere, not just in Britain, and not a failing of the NHS.

I agree that the way the doctor gave Doddie the news was brutal, but that is down to one person being a bit poor at his job & does not reflect on the NHS as a whole.

[Aidanb]

It isn't the function of the NHS to do medical research. If there is a treatment that is proved to be effective then I am sure they will add it to their armoury as they do for everything that they can, until then I struggle to see what it is that people think the NHS can do that they are not doing. Medical research is the key starting point for any treatment that will alleviate symptoms of a condition, maybe slow down the development, or in an ideal world discover a cure, and that is largely what Doddie is raising money & awareness for. If that gets anywhere it is then over to the big drug companies to develop it further & take it through testing. Only after that is there any chance of it being prescribed by doctors. That is the same everywhere, not just in Britain, and not a failing of the NHS.

I agree that the way the doctor gave Doddie the news was brutal, but that is down to one person being a bit poor at his job & does not reflect on the NHS as a whole.

So we are in agreement then

Research into illness and medications is not the job of the nhs in terms of patient treatment, however the nhs does a lot to take part in case studies and testing of the impact of new treatments and methods once they have been declared safe for human participation

No one above was saying so

[CharlieDog]

I haven't yet read Doddie's book (though I have it waiting) so I don't know the detail of how direct / blunt / brutal the doctor was in delivering the diagnosis but my experience is that they are factual, clear and concise and non-flowery in their delivery.

I have recently been diagnosed with (low grade and entirely treatable) prostate cancer - having had biopsies taken, on my return visit to the consultant, following basic initial pleasantries, immediately explained that out of 14 samples I had cancer in 6 of them. He then went on to explain the level and likely outcome etc but the initial statement was I had cancer. On the scale of "clear / direct / blunt / brutal" I would say that was clear and direct

Not everyone can be good at everything. Doctors are trained to deal with patients but if I had the choice of a doctor being a good doctor or a good communicator, I would pick a good doctor!

I'm lucky, I (probably) don't have a life shortening disease but I would prefer clear and unambiguous facts.

It's about time I read the book!