Got a text from my dentist saying aerosol work under the NHS is banned
but if you go private they can do it....would this be correct ? .....

On Tue, 18 Aug 2020 17:24:07 +0100, "Jim GM4DHJ ..."
wrote:

Got a text from my dentist saying aerosol work under the NHS is banned
but if you go private they can do it....would this be correct ? .....

Not sure about the aerosol, it's the other end of the alimentary canal
that I'm having problems with.
--

Mike

On 18 Aug 2020 17:20:52 GMT, Tim Streater
wrote:

On 18 Aug 2020 at 17:24:07 BST, "Jim GM4DHJ ..."
wrote:

Got a text from my dentist saying aerosol work under the NHS is banned
but if you go private they can do it....would this be correct ? .....

Sure. I had a crown and an implant (started just before lockdown) completed
last month. I've always paid for dentistry in all the countries I've lived
in.

Same here. And when you have to pay for *all* your medical treatment,
not just dentistry, it teaches you to look after yourself properly.

On 18/08/2020 18:20, Tim Streater wrote:
On 18 Aug 2020 at 17:24:07 BST, "Jim GM4DHJ ..."
wrote:

Got a text from my dentist saying aerosol work under the NHS is banned
but if you go private they can do it....would this be correct ? .....

Sure. I had a crown and an implant (started just before lockdown) completed
last month. I've always paid for dentistry in all the countries I've lived
in.

I turned down their £3,500 offer of a implant just before lockdown glad
I did ....

On 18/08/2020 17:24, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:
Got a text from my dentist saying aerosol work under the NHS is banned
but if you go private they can do it....would this be correct ? .....

Dentists should be banned from doing NHS and private. They have been
known to slag of NHS just to make you go private.

Since dentists (as opposed to GPs) are only paid for what they do, why
aren't they asking people to come back for treatment?

--
Max Demian

On Tue, 18 Aug 2020 17:24:07 +0100, "Jim GM4DHJ ..."
wrote:

Got a text from my dentist saying aerosol work under the NHS is banned
but if you go private they can do it....would this be correct ? .....


According to Google "aerosol work" requires negative pressure rooms
or similar. Presumably the NHS is unwilling to cover the cost of
installing such rooms and so their use is confined to private
patients whose treatment will.


michael adams

....

michael adams wrote:

On Tue, 18 Aug 2020 17:24:07 +0100, "Jim GM4DHJ ..."
wrote:

Got a text from my dentist saying aerosol work under the NHS is banned
but if you go private they can do it....would this be correct ? .....


According to Google "aerosol work" requires negative pressure rooms
or similar. Presumably the NHS is unwilling to cover the cost of
installing such rooms and so their use is confined to private
patients whose treatment will.

Or more likely, private dentists can just do what they like as theyre not
restricted by NHS rules.

Tim

--
Please don't feed the trolls

"Tim+" wrote in message
...
michael adams wrote:

On Tue, 18 Aug 2020 17:24:07 +0100, "Jim GM4DHJ ..."
wrote:

Got a text from my dentist saying aerosol work under the NHS is banned
but if you go private they can do it....would this be correct ? .....


According to Google "aerosol work" requires negative pressure rooms
or similar. Presumably the NHS is unwilling to cover the cost of
installing such rooms and so their use is confined to private
patients whose treatment will.

Or more likely, private dentists can just do what they like as they're not
restricted by NHS rules.

If they're not worried about the possibility of catching Covid9 themselves
and infecting all of their private patients into the bargain, and getting
sued as a result, then you're perfectly correct.

Which does of course depend on how you view the current pandemic. The greatest
ever threat to civilisation and the word economy as we know it, or the greatest
ever hoax and/or load of bulll****.


michael adams

.....

Tim Streater Wrote in message:
On 18 Aug 2020 at 17:24:07 BST, "Jim GM4DHJ ..."
wrote:

Got a text from my dentist saying aerosol work under the NHS is banned
but if you go private they can do it....would this be correct ? .....

Sure. I had a crown and an implant (started just before lockdown) completed
last month. I've always paid for dentistry in all the countries I've lived
in.

Company arrangement or subsidy scheme shurely sweaty?


--
Jimk


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

On 18/08/2020 23:06, michael adams wrote:

or the greatest
ever hoax and/or load of bulll****.

No, that's global warming.

Bill

On Wed, 19 Aug 2020 02:38:49 +0100, williamwright wrote:

On 18/08/2020 23:06, michael adams wrote:

or the greatest ever hoax and/or load of bulll****.

No, that's global warming.

Bill

Yup

michael adams wrote:

"Tim+" wrote in message
...
michael adams wrote:

On Tue, 18 Aug 2020 17:24:07 +0100, "Jim GM4DHJ ..."
wrote:

Got a text from my dentist saying aerosol work under the NHS is banned
but if you go private they can do it....would this be correct ? .....


According to Google "aerosol work" requires negative pressure rooms
or similar. Presumably the NHS is unwilling to cover the cost of
installing such rooms and so their use is confined to private
patients whose treatment will.

Or more likely, private dentists can just do what they like as they're not
restricted by NHS rules.

If they're not worried about the possibility of catching Covid9 themselves
and infecting all of their private patients into the bargain, and getting
sued as a result, then you're perfectly correct.

Private practice in medicine has a long history/tradition of cutting
corners/costs to increase profits at the expense of patient safety. I
doubt dentistry is any different.

Tim

--
Please don't feed the trolls

On 19/08/2020 06:56, jon wrote:
On Wed, 19 Aug 2020 02:38:49 +0100, williamwright wrote:

On 18/08/2020 23:06, michael adams wrote:

or the greatest ever hoax and/or load of bulll****.

No, that's global warming.

Bill

Yup

+1001

--
€œIt is not the truth of Marxism that explains the willingness of
intellectuals to believe it, but the power that it confers on
intellectuals, in their attempts to control the world. And since...it is
futile to reason someone out of a thing that he was not reasoned into,
we can conclude that Marxism owes its remarkable power to survive every
criticism to the fact that it is not a truth-directed but a
power-directed system of thought.€�
Sir Roger Scruton

On 19/08/2020 07:24, Tim+ wrote:
Private practice in medicine has a long history/tradition of cutting
corners/costs to increase profits at the expense of patient safety. I
doubt dentistry is any different.


I love a bit of proof by assertion in the morning.
Its actually the NHS that used to cut costs.

Tim


--
€œIt is not the truth of Marxism that explains the willingness of
intellectuals to believe it, but the power that it confers on
intellectuals, in their attempts to control the world. And since...it is
futile to reason someone out of a thing that he was not reasoned into,
we can conclude that Marxism owes its remarkable power to survive every
criticism to the fact that it is not a truth-directed but a
power-directed system of thought.€�
Sir Roger Scruton

"Tim+" wrote in message
...

Private practice in medicine has a long history/tradition of cutting
corners/costs to increase profits at the expense of patient safety. I
doubt dentistry is any different.

Its precisely the opposite. Private medicine often funded by insurance is what drives
a lot of research into new medicines and treatments, This goes for vets as well
as human doctors. Years ago if you took bonzo or tiddles to the vet with something
serious there would be a long face from the vet and advice to put them out of their
misery. Nowadays you can keep bonzo or tiddles alive almost indefinitely
providing once the pet insurance runs out, you've got the odd few grand to
spare every few months.

None of this would have happened without pet insurance or had people still been
taking their pets to free animal clinics,

And the same applies with the NHS. who are always playing catch up. Eithjer trying
to justify the cost of expensive new medicines and treatments developed on the back
of private health care funded by health insurance as featured on the front page of the
"Daily Express" or coming up with convincing reasons why people's "loved ones"* are being
condemned to a premature death.


michael adams

*I only just now made the connection between this execrable saccharine phrase and
Evelyn Waugh's novel of 1948 "the Loved One" - which is how US undertakers -
sorry morticians, refer to the stiffs consigned to their care when dealing with
grieving relatives. Maybe UK underatkers have caught up by now.

On 18/08/2020 18:14, Mike Halmarack wrote:
On Tue, 18 Aug 2020 17:24:07 +0100, "Jim GM4DHJ ..."
wrote:

Got a text from my dentist saying aerosol work under the NHS is banned
but if you go private they can do it....would this be correct ? .....

Not sure about the aerosol, it's the other end of the alimentary canal
that I'm having problems with.


Reminds me of the Swedish chemist sketch.

Chemist with swedish accent...

Chemist: May I help you sir?
Punter: Yes, I'm after some deoderant.
Chemist: Ball or aerosol?
Punter: Neither, it's for my armpits.

On 18/08/2020 23:06, michael adams wrote:


Which does of course depend on how you view the current pandemic. The greatest
ever threat to civilisation and the word economy as we know it, or the greatest
ever hoax and/or load of bulll****.


michael adams

....

Why does everything have to be binary? Is it some pervasive consequence
of having a digital world?

The truth lies somewhere in between. Covid is quite a serious threat, we
don't yet know quite how serious. AIDS turned out not to be as bad as it
could have been, at least in the more developed parts of the world.

Climate change is worth keeping an eye on, although to my mind the real
benefits might be in air pollution and the cost of current policies is
certainly significant.

Both Thatcher and Blair had some good policies.

The trouble with the binary view is that it gave us Hitler, Stalin, and
Mao, and it gives us Trump and Johnson now. It's easy to sell a simple
proposition, much more difficult to present a balanced view.

On 19/08/2020 10:06, newshound wrote:
On 18/08/2020 23:06, michael adams wrote:


Which does of course depend on how you view the current pandemic. The
greatest
ever threat to civilisation and the word economy as we know it, or the
greatest
ever hoax and/or load of bulll****.


michael adams

....

Why does everything have to be binary? Is it some pervasive consequence
of having a digital world?

No. its a consequence not very bright, but overeducated, people who have
learned to think, but only in binary terms

The truth lies somewhere in between. Covid is quite a serious threat, we
don't yet know quite how serious. AIDS turned out not to be as bad as it
could have been, at least in the more developed parts of the world.

Climate change is worth keeping an eye on, although to my mind the real
benefits might be in air pollution and the cost of current policies is
certainly significant.

There is no 'climate change' - not any more than there ever has been anyway.


Both Thatcher and Blair had some good policies.
Blair had no good policies,


The trouble with the binary view is that it gave us Hitler, Stalin, and
Mao, and it gives us Trump and Johnson now. It's easy to sell a simple
proposition, much more difficult to present a balanced view.


--
€œThe ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly is to
fill the world with fools.€�

Herbert Spencer

On 19/08/2020 08:46, michael adams wrote:
"Tim+" wrote in message
...

Private practice in medicine has a long history/tradition of cutting
corners/costs to increase profits at the expense of patient safety. I
doubt dentistry is any different.

Its precisely the opposite. Private medicine often funded by insurance is what drives
a lot of research into new medicines and treatments, This goes for vets as well
as human doctors. Years ago if you took bonzo or tiddles to the vet with something
serious there would be a long face from the vet and advice to put them out of their
misery. Nowadays you can keep bonzo or tiddles alive almost indefinitely
providing once the pet insurance runs out, you've got the odd few grand to
spare every few months.

None of this would have happened without pet insurance or had people still been
taking their pets to free animal clinics,

I don't keep pets, but it seems to me that people who do are condemned
to vast expense directly or via insurance premiums as a result of this
change in priorities.

--
Max Demian

On 19/08/2020 08:46, michael adams wrote:
"Tim+" wrote in message
...

Private practice in medicine has a long history/tradition of cutting
corners/costs to increase profits at the expense of patient safety. I
doubt dentistry is any different.

Its precisely the opposite. Private medicine often funded by insurance is what drives
a lot of research into new medicines and treatments,

Nonsense. Risk is shouldered by the taxpayer, with little of the return:

https://academic.oup.com/icc/article.../4/1093/753299


--
Cheers, Rob

On 19/08/2020 08:07, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 19/08/2020 06:56, jon wrote:
On Wed, 19 Aug 2020 02:38:49 +0100, williamwright wrote:

On 18/08/2020 23:06, michael adams wrote:

or the greatest ever hoax and/or load of bulll****.

No, that's global warming.

Bill

Yup

+1001


I'd save those +s for something else.

Two years on from her first school strike, activist attacks €˜ignorance
and unawareness

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/aug/19/another-two-years-lost-to-climate-inaction-says-greta-thunberg

--
Cheers, Rob

On Wed, 19 Aug 2020 10:06:14 +0100, newshound
wrote:

snip

Why does everything have to be binary?

It generally isn't of course, just that 'some people' see things so
simplistically / naively.

Is it some pervasive consequence
of having a digital world?

Only that they can deal with it via such extreme absolutes.

The truth lies somewhere in between.

Of course, as with most things.

Covid is quite a serious threat, we
don't yet know quite how serious. AIDS turned out not to be as bad as it
could have been, at least in the more developed parts of the world.

Yup.

Climate change is worth keeping an eye on,

I think it's more of the how much can we dismiss the likely impact of
doing things very differently over the last few hundred versus the ~5
million years of mankind's existence.

although to my mind the real
benefits might be in air pollution and the cost of current policies is
certainly significant.

As you say, a very big / analogue picture.

Both Thatcher and Blair had some good policies.

The trouble with the binary view is that it gave us Hitler, Stalin, and
Mao, and it gives us Trump and Johnson now.

All likely 'left brainers' as my friend defines them. A right brainer,
with more empathy and compassion couldn't do all the things the most
extreme left brainers can. It's patently obvious that both Trump and
Johnson are massive egotists, caring more about their self-centred
world than the actual world.

It's easy to sell a simple
proposition, much more difficult to present a balanced view.

Of course, you can even put the former on the side of a bus,
explaining why it's lies and BS takes more effort.

Cheers, T i m

"RJH" wrote in message
...
On 19/08/2020 08:46, michael adams wrote:
"Tim+" wrote in message
...

Private practice in medicine has a long history/tradition of cutting
corners/costs to increase profits at the expense of patient safety. I
doubt dentistry is any different.

Its precisely the opposite. Private medicine often funded by insurance is
what drives
a lot of research into new medicines and treatments,

Nonsense. Risk is shouldered by the taxpayer, with little of the return:

https://academic.oup.com/icc/article.../4/1093/753299


--
Cheers, Rob

quote

Abstract

We present a framework, called the Risk-Reward Nexus, to study
the relationship between innovation and inequality

[...]

We argue that it is the collective, cumulative, and uncertain
characteristics of the innovation process that make this disconnect
between risks and rewards possible.

[...]

William Lazonick, Center for Industrial Competitiveness, UMass Lowell,
O'Leary 500, 61 Wilder Street, Lowell, MA 01854, USA. e-mail

/quote

Presumably you have a subscription, have read the paper in full and
are familiar with the details of Professor Lazonick's argument in full.

Which as it stands is simply a bald assertion unsupported by either
argument or evidence.

Therefore for those readers of the Group without a subscription perhaps
you could summarise his argument - preferably in your own words - so
that its relevance to the present question can be better assessed.

Thank you.


michael adams

....

"newshound" wrote in message
o.uk...
On 18/08/2020 23:06, michael adams wrote:


Which does of course depend on how you view the current pandemic. The greatest
ever threat to civilisation and the word economy as we know it, or the greatest
ever hoax and/or load of bulll****.


michael adams

....

Why does everything have to be binary? Is it some pervasive consequence of having a
digital world?

The truth lies somewhere in between.

Indeed. But were you a patient contemplating having treatment from a private dentist
who regularly performed "aerosol work" without taking what some would regard as
adequate precautions, it would surely be advisable beforehand to form a definite
view on the matter ? Either way.

It would be little consolation, when lying back in the dentists chair with all this
potentially Covid laden aerosol flying about to speculate that possibly "the truth
lays somewhere in between", now would it ?


michael adams

....

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...

No. its a consequence not very bright, but overeducated, people who have learned to
think, but only in binary terms

So that according to you, there are only two sorts of people.

People who are not very bright, and can only think in binary terms,
and bright people who don't.

So what does that make you ?


michael adams

....

"Tim Streater" wrote in message
...

On 19 Aug 2020 at 10:06:14 BST, newshound

Why does everything have to be binary? Is it some pervasive consequence of having a
digital world?

Because that's how socialists think. You're either with them or against them.


So you're definitely not against socialists yourself then ?

It's still an open question.

As I must say your posts certainly don't give that impression


michael adams

.....

On Wed, 19 Aug 2020 10:06:14 +0100, newshound
wrote:

On 18/08/2020 23:06, michael adams wrote:


Which does of course depend on how you view the current pandemic. The greatest
ever threat to civilisation and the word economy as we know it, or the greatest
ever hoax and/or load of bulll****.


michael adams

....

Why does everything have to be binary? Is it some pervasive consequence
of having a digital world?

The truth lies somewhere in between. Covid is quite a serious threat, we
don't yet know quite how serious. AIDS turned out not to be as bad as it
could have been, at least in the more developed parts of the world.

Climate change is worth keeping an eye on, although to my mind the real
benefits might be in air pollution and the cost of current policies is
certainly significant.

Both Thatcher and Blair had some good policies.

The trouble with the binary view is that it gave us Hitler, Stalin, and
Mao, and it gives us Trump and Johnson now. It's easy to sell a simple
proposition, much more difficult to present a balanced view.

Beautifully well put.
--

Mike

On 19/08/2020 14:48, Mike Halmarack wrote:
On Wed, 19 Aug 2020 10:06:14 +0100, newshound
wrote:

The trouble with the binary view is that it gave us Hitler, Stalin, and
Mao, and it gives us Trump and Johnson now. It's easy to sell a simple
proposition, much more difficult to present a balanced view.
Beautifully well put.

I think I have reservations about putting Trump and Johnson in the same
bucket as Hitler, Stalin and Mao.

Andy

On Wednesday, 19 August 2020 16:37:38 UTC+1, Vir Campestris wrote:
I think I have reservations about putting Trump and Johnson in the same
bucket as Hitler, Stalin and Mao.

In terms of intelligence or evil?

Owain

On Wednesday, 19 August 2020 10:48:36 UTC+1, RJH wrote:
On 19/08/2020 08:07, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 19/08/2020 06:56, jon wrote:
On Wed, 19 Aug 2020 02:38:49 +0100, williamwright wrote:
On 18/08/2020 23:06, michael adams wrote:

or the greatest ever hoax and/or load of bulll****.

No, that's global warming.

Bill

Yup

+1001


I'd save those +s for something else.

Two years on from her first school strike, activist attacks €˜ignorance
and unawareness

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/aug/19/another-two-years-lost-to-climate-inaction-says-greta-thunberg

she certainly is impressively ignorant & unaware


NT

On 19/08/2020 11:09, T i m wrote:


Of course, you can even put the former on the side of a bus,
explaining why it's lies and BS takes more effort.

Interestingly, that's not a particularly new idea

https://www.quora.com/Whose-quote-A-...t-its-boots-on

On 19/08/2020 14:48, Mike Halmarack wrote:
On Wed, 19 Aug 2020 10:06:14 +0100, newshound
..

Why does everything have to be binary? Is it some pervasive consequence
of having a digital world?

The truth lies somewhere in between. Covid is quite a serious threat, we
don't yet know quite how serious. AIDS turned out not to be as bad as it
could have been, at least in the more developed parts of the world.

Climate change is worth keeping an eye on, although to my mind the real
benefits might be in air pollution and the cost of current policies is
certainly significant.

Both Thatcher and Blair had some good policies.

The trouble with the binary view is that it gave us Hitler, Stalin, and
Mao, and it gives us Trump and Johnson now. It's easy to sell a simple
proposition, much more difficult to present a balanced view.

Beautifully well put.

Thanks!

Trouble is, by the time you work this out everyone thinks you are just
old and cranky and ignores you anyway.

Tim Streater wrote:
On 19 Aug 2020 at 07:24:52 BST, Tim+ wrote:

michael adams wrote:

"Tim+" wrote in message
...
michael adams wrote:

On Tue, 18 Aug 2020 17:24:07 +0100, "Jim GM4DHJ ..."
wrote:

Got a text from my dentist saying aerosol work under the NHS is banned
but if you go private they can do it....would this be correct ? .....


According to Google "aerosol work" requires negative pressure rooms
or similar. Presumably the NHS is unwilling to cover the cost of
installing such rooms and so their use is confined to private
patients whose treatment will.

Or more likely, private dentists can just do what they like as they're not
restricted by NHS rules.

If they're not worried about the possibility of catching Covid9 themselves
and infecting all of their private patients into the bargain, and getting
sued as a result, then you're perfectly correct.

Private practice in medicine has a long history/tradition of cutting
corners/costs to increase profits at the expense of patient safety. I
doubt dentistry is any different.

Don't be a ****. They'd soon be struck off if many of their patients started
getting ill.

You are a naive fool. The out of hours care in your average private
hospital borders on being negligent in many cases. Few qualified staff
around, poor access to intensive care if things go wrong, consultant away
playing golf or performing NHS work at the same time when he/she should be
available to monitor their post-op private patients.

If only patients who think that private is best knew....

Tim

--
Please don't feed the trolls

"newshound" wrote in message
o.uk...

Why does everything have to be binary? Is it some pervasive consequence of having a
digital world?

The trouble with the binary view is that it gave us Hitler, Stalin, and Mao,

So that for you, with Hitler, Stalin, and Mao it's not an open and shut case then ?

Unlike "binary" people who condemn them out of hand, for you they also had their good
points.

Which then raises the question as to why you chose them as an example in the first place.

Does it not ?


michael adams

....

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 19/08/2020 07:24, Tim+ wrote:
Private practice in medicine has a long history/tradition of cutting
corners/costs to increase profits at the expense of patient safety. I
doubt dentistry is any different.


I love a bit of proof by assertion in the morning.
Its actually the NHS that used to cut costs.

Remind me, when did you actually work in the NHS? Oh, thats right, you
have no first hand experience. You lose.

Tim




--
Please don't feed the trolls

michael adams wrote:

"Tim+" wrote in message
...

Private practice in medicine has a long history/tradition of cutting
corners/costs to increase profits at the expense of patient safety. I
doubt dentistry is any different.

Its precisely the opposite. Private medicine often funded by insurance is what drives
a lot of research into new medicines and treatments,

I presume youve worked for the NHS and worked in private hospitals?

Neither system is perfect but corner cutting occurs in both systems. In the
NHS though there is probably more overview and regulation. In the private
sector you can get away with murder, sometimes literally.

Tim


--
Please don't feed the trolls

In article
, Tim+
wrote:
Tim Streater wrote:
On 19 Aug 2020 at 07:24:52 BST, Tim+ wrote:

michael adams wrote:

"Tim+" wrote in message
...
michael adams wrote:

On Tue, 18 Aug 2020 17:24:07 +0100, "Jim GM4DHJ ..."
wrote:

Got a text from my dentist saying aerosol work under the NHS is
banned but if you go private they can do it....would this be
correct ? .....


According to Google "aerosol work" requires negative pressure rooms
or similar. Presumably the NHS is unwilling to cover the cost of
installing such rooms and so their use is confined to private
patients whose treatment will.

Or more likely, private dentists can just do what they like as
they're not restricted by NHS rules.

If they're not worried about the possibility of catching Covid9
themselves and infecting all of their private patients into the
bargain, and getting sued as a result, then you're perfectly correct.

Private practice in medicine has a long history/tradition of cutting
corners/costs to increase profits at the expense of patient safety. I
doubt dentistry is any different.

Don't be a ****. They'd soon be struck off if many of their patients
started getting ill.

You are a naive fool. The out of hours care in your average private
hospital borders on being negligent in many cases. Few qualified staff
around, poor access to intensive care if things go wrong, consultant away
playing golf or performing NHS work at the same time when he/she should
be available to monitor their post-op private patients.

If only patients who think that private is best knew....

two advantages of 'Private:
1. you can have the op when you want
2, If you are seriously ill, as I was some 30 years ago, they have a bed.
Unlike my colleague told at an NHS hospital " Oh, you are ill, but we
haven't any beds. Go home."

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

"Tim+" wrote in message
...
michael adams wrote:

"Tim+" wrote in message
...

Private practice in medicine has a long history/tradition of cutting
corners/costs to increase profits at the expense of patient safety. I
doubt dentistry is any different.

Its precisely the opposite. Private medicine often funded by insurance is what drives
a lot of research into new medicines and treatments,

I presume you've worked for the NHS and worked in private hospitals?

I can't honestly see how that's relevant. Are you claiming to have worked in
numerous NHS and private hospitals yourself ? How can you be so certain
that the hospitals you worked in were "typical" of their sector ?


Neither system is perfect but corner cutting occurs in both systems. In the
NHS though there is probably more overview and regulation. In the private
sector you can get away with murder, sometimes literally.

People who can afford private medicine can also afford decent legal advice.

They also have higher expectations as they are paying for something which they
realise they could have had for free. They have a greater sense of entitlement.*

Such people would have no qualms about suing a private hospital for medical
negligence, whereas despite the entreaties of ambulance chasing lawyers only
the more mercenary patients would ever consider suing the NHS,

michael adams

* Although saying that, poor old Anthony Eden didn't fare too well with his
routine gallstone operation; but that was only because Churchill spooked his
surgeon of choice, Hume, by stressing the importance of the operation. Given
that Churchill himself could have had another stroke at any moment; not that
he mentioned that possibility of course.



....

charles wrote:
In article
, Tim+
wrote:
Tim Streater wrote:
On 19 Aug 2020 at 07:24:52 BST, Tim+ wrote:

michael adams wrote:

"Tim+" wrote in message
...
michael adams wrote:

On Tue, 18 Aug 2020 17:24:07 +0100, "Jim GM4DHJ ..."
wrote:

Got a text from my dentist saying aerosol work under the NHS is
banned but if you go private they can do it....would this be
correct ? .....


According to Google "aerosol work" requires negative pressure rooms
or similar. Presumably the NHS is unwilling to cover the cost of
installing such rooms and so their use is confined to private
patients whose treatment will.

Or more likely, private dentists can just do what they like as
they're not restricted by NHS rules.

If they're not worried about the possibility of catching Covid9
themselves and infecting all of their private patients into the
bargain, and getting sued as a result, then you're perfectly correct.

Private practice in medicine has a long history/tradition of cutting
corners/costs to increase profits at the expense of patient safety. I
doubt dentistry is any different.

Don't be a ****. They'd soon be struck off if many of their patients
started getting ill.

You are a naive fool. The out of hours care in your average private
hospital borders on being negligent in many cases. Few qualified staff
around, poor access to intensive care if things go wrong, consultant away
playing golf or performing NHS work at the same time when he/she should
be available to monitor their post-op private patients.

If only patients who think that private is best knew....

two advantages of 'Private:
1. you can have the op when you want
2, If you are seriously ill, as I was some 30 years ago, they have a bed.
Unlike my colleague told at an NHS hospital " Oh, you are ill, but we
haven't any beds. Go home."


Oh private medicine has its plus sides, I wouldnt deny that. Im just
trying to correct the notion that everything about private medicine is
better than NHS.

Tim

--
Please don't feed the trolls

michael adams wrote:

"Tim+" wrote in message
...
michael adams wrote:

"Tim+" wrote in message
...

Private practice in medicine has a long history/tradition of cutting
corners/costs to increase profits at the expense of patient safety. I
doubt dentistry is any different.

Its precisely the opposite. Private medicine often funded by insurance is what drives
a lot of research into new medicines and treatments,

I presume you've worked for the NHS and worked in private hospitals?

I can't honestly see how that's relevant. Are you claiming to have worked in
numerous NHS and private hospitals yourself ? How can you be so certain
that the hospitals you worked in were "typical" of their sector ?

Have you worked in *any*?

Of course I havent worked in them all, but the pressures that induce
private practitioners and hospitals to take risks with safety exist
everywhere.

Tim
--
Please don't feed the trolls