Have a Good NEWS

Survival rates

cancer in the NHS are excellent. However, without the interference cost may be even better

A new piece of research that rates of cancer survival links with investment levels in the treatment shows that the NHS offers excellent value for money. Indeed, between 1979 and 2006, of the 10 countries studied (which also included Germany, USA, France and Japan), survival rates in England and Wales found that more improved, care service Health more effective in reducing cancer mortality.

So how does the health service was so good, when everything seems you hear bad news about cancer? So when our politicians claim that the NHS is defective, it is the objective evidence suggests otherwise?

In my 35 years working as a doctor, I tried all kinds of cancer patients - many successful and some, unfortunately, no. I was also involved in media campaigns to modernize and improve the treatment - some more successfully, at least -. And just completed a collection of stories of cancer patients and their doctors to help people better understand the disease and its treatment

There are two main reasons why the situation has improved: the first measures, public health, such as campaigns against tobacco, snuff and attempts to find cancer at an early stage and curable by screening "normal" people. A decrease in smoking rates over 40% of the population 25 years and 20% have had a fall in the incidence of cancer of the larynx, lung and bladder. And while the value of the consideration is always the debate no doubt that the cervical screening has reduced mortality by 50%, while mortality from breast cancer was reduced by 30% in 15 years, with about 3,000 lives saved each year.

messages on diet, however, do not pass. We are getting fatter, and fat is bad for health. Increasing obesity rates are particularly bad omens for the cancer rates in the future.

The other reason for the improvement of our cancer survival rates - and that's where politics is more - the better to treatment. In the 1950s, there was a seedy brigade of effective drugs against cancer, and now have a sparkling battalion, reinforced by the surprising new treatment operation at any time. In particular, therapies that target molecular genetic changes in cancer cells, can prolong life in patients with advanced cancer. In cancer of the intestine, where 10 years ago the survival of a patient with metastatic disease was nine months now, we can extend the life expectancy of about two and a half years - and the extension Life is good, too

The reality is that very little spending on drugs against cancer - much, much less than, say, laxatives. Our politicians tell us they can not afford new cancer treatments, however, spending only 9.5% of our GDP on health is low on the list in the context of industrialized countries. This includes 9.5% of private health expenditures, and compares the cost of 17% in the U.S. and 14.5% in France.

The problem is that politics interferes with the treatment of our patients. And the cost of the policy for the NHS is enormous. It is estimated that the annual cost of running the primary care trusts around £ 5 billion - a cost of managing a large scale. And change the funding being introduced as a "GP consortia" is seen, most of us like to be a disaster even greater than the PCT -. A triumph of a political consensus on the creation Smart
Far

Find best price for : --Waxman--