I'm pissed off ...big time

peasant

There it was, a medical breakthrough:

Vaccination against cervical cancer in women, to erradicate cervical cancer pretty much forever.

The vaccination has to be done to teenage girls to have effect later in life. Our governement (even them!) saw the huge benefits of this and offered a free vaccination programme for all teenage girls in Ireland to erradicate cervical cancer from this Island.

The free vaccination programme was upposed to start next year.

Not any more.

Mary Harney announced tonight that his now won't happen (there's a recession on, don't you know), cuts have to be made, blah, blah ...

So 20 - 30 years from now, Irish women will still be dying needlessly of cervical cancer ...yet if you breed race horses you still don't pay tax.

Talk about priorities :mad:


I'm raging ... and I don't even have daughters

dresden8

I'll explain this again for those who haven't been listening.

Banks and rich people have to be bailed out for the good of the economy.

The economy doesn't give a flying fu*k if you and all your family die.

When I say the economy I mean the PD's, FF and the Greens, but more importantly, their paymasters. These political patsies and their paymaster are replicated internationally.

Now, what part of that statement is unclear?

jmayo

dresden8 wrote: »

I'll explain this again for those who haven't been listening.

Banks and rich people have to be bailed out for the good of the economy.

The economy doesn't give a flying fu*k if you and all your family die.

When I say the economy I mean the PD's, FF and the Greens, but more importantly, their paymasters. These political patsies and their paymaster are replicated internationally.

Now, what part of that statement is unclear?

It is socialism for the rich, the rich who made collosal amounts of money but screwed up bigtime get taxpayers money and the poor (i.e. anyone not earning huge amounts of money and having to pay normal income taxes), well you know they get royally shafted :rolleyes:
This is the type of socialism that is right down harney's street.
First tried in America and now coming over here.

In Ireland we must look after our builders come what may don't you know.

themadchef

Heard about it last night on the radio. It's a terrible decision imo.

BUT...Lets say for example the government were to fall for any particular reason. Another ching ching general election. Party number 2 gets in, are they not also going to make cuts that will infuriate the public? Where are the government getting their advice from?

I'm politically braindead maybe, but if every household ran their finances like the government we'd all be living in cardboard boxes!

asdasd

Harney has become a very very bad politician. We are at a stage where there would be a public acceptance of public service pay freezes and some higher level taxation on higher earners ( although this would be far more acceptable were it to come in for real high earners - 100K + ). Not these kind of drip feeds of silly cutbacks.

grahamo

She has basically sentenced 80 teenagers a year to a premature death. F***ing disgrace! The vaccine is 100% effective it will save lives.

Dirk Gently

announced on the night everyones eyes were on the US election. noice.

peasant

clown bag wrote: »

announced on the night everyones eyes were on the US election. noice.

Yes, that's what gets me too, the double cynicism.

Not only are we sentencing so many women to death, we'll do so on the sly ...wouldn't want another protest on our hands, now would we...

Despicable, words fail me ...

getz

what is the cost going private ?

Darragh29

Tell me this...??? Is this not a no -brainer in terms of being a pre-emptive solution to a problem, and also saving costs on that basis???

I don't know exactly how much cervical cancer treatment costs the state per year, I mean just leave aside for a minute, the much stronger moral/social argument about saving lives...

If we just look at the figures, surely when a young girl, in her adult life, ultimately ends up with cervical cancer because this vaccine wasn't available to her, then the cost of treatment I imagine will greatly greatly exceed the cost of giving that girl a preventative vaccine many years before she ended up having to be treated for cervical canver???

Sounds like the worst case of "penny wise-pound foolish" I've ever heard in my life... To be honest, we only have ourselves to blame, we ought to have chased this minister out of her office long ago...

delop

peasant wrote: »

I'm raging ... and I don't even have daughters

Yes terrible, I agree, but what are you going to do about it?

Darragh29

Fair play to the OP for highlighting this, I just read the press release from the www.dohc.ie website...

Folks, you couldn't make this sh*t, up, read an extract from her press release on this...!!!


The Minister for Health and Children, Mary Harney T.D. said today (4th Nov. 2008) "The economic situation has rapidly and seriously deteriorated. Public resources, including those for health, are very scarce indeed and will remain so. I have decided that the best that can be achieved in these circumstances is to prioritise funding for the development of the cervical screening programme and treatment services at the eight designated cancer centres, which includes the challenge of funding very expensive cancer drugs. I will not therefore be proceeding with the introduction of a HPV vaccination programme.

I don't think I've seen this kind of retarded rationality at work in this country before, which is making some statement.

She has said above that one of the biggest challenges is funding what she herself has described as "very expensive cancer drugs". I take this to mean that these drugs are for treating people who have cancer... Surely it must follow as night will follow day, that the logical reaction to this is to stop people getting cancer in the first place????

:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:

Darragh29

Minister's_Office@health.irlgov.ie

You know what to do... I'll post my mail up here in a few minutes...

is_that_so

Looks likes bean-counting although the fact that it doesn't exist yet means that no current services are affected. It's also the kind of proposal that can be stored away only to be popped out as good news when they claim to have a little more money.

In my view a very narrow-minded decision, but seeing as she has proposed extending screening one that is "balanced" to an extent. What it does, however is epitomise the government approach in the budget; hitting easy targets. Given that all eyes are looking at the US this week, it was perfect timing to release it and it'll just disappear.

brianthebard

themadchef wrote: »

Heard about it last night on the radio. It's a terrible decision imo.

BUT...Lets say for example the government were to fall for any particular reason. Another ching ching general election. Party number 2 gets in, are they not also going to make cuts that will infuriate the public? Where are the government getting their advice from?

I'm politically braindead maybe, but if every household ran their finances like the government we'd all be living in cardboard boxes!

As I said in the other thread, there are some things where money shouldn't be cut. It only costs a few million to get this working, for a national budget that's peanuts. The health of the population is important enough that they can borrow a few million if necessary.

ParkRunner

It's pretty shocking I agree! Maybe they could pay some of the money for the cervical cancer drug from the below! I don't think I could sleep at night as my conscience would be at me if I were to accept a large bonus and deny teenagers effective immunisation for a disease such as cervical cancer!

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2008/1003/breaking55.htm

HSE to pay bonuses totalling €1.4m to senior staff
External »

Health Service Executive (HSE) said today that its senior staff are to receive bonuses worth a total of €1.4 million, in respect of their work during 2007.

However, the HSE said the bonus to be awarded to its chief executive Prof Brendan Drumm was "still under consideration" by the board.

Those eligible for bonuses under the performance-related award scheme in the health sector are the chief executive, national directors, assistant national directors and hospital network managers.

The scheme was introduced on recommendation of the Review Body on Higher Remuneration in the Public Sector accepted by the Government.

In a statement confirming the amount of the bonuses to be awarded, the HSE said the scheme was operated "using strongly focused goals and targets which are specific and measurable".

The bonus payments were agreed upon by the executive's remuneration committee earlier this year.

Last year, controversy abounded when top managers in the HSE received a cumulative total of €1.15 million in performance-related bonus payments in respect of 2006.

Prof Brendan Drumm received a bonus of €80,000 on top of his salary of around €370,000.

Fine Gael today expressed outrage over suggestions that senior managers could be awarded bonuses at a time when cutbacks were taking place in the health service.

“This is an absolute insult to all the people who have paid for but do not get the health service they deserve and the frontline staff who are struggling under ever increasing cutbacks demanded by HSE Head Office, said Fine Gael Health spokesperson Dr James Reilly.

"It is unthinkable for front line services to be slashed, and ordinary taxpayers made to pay for fat bonuses for health chiefs. The Government was quick to protect banks who engaged in risky lending practices for years; they must not be slow about telling HSE management that financial priorities lie in front line services, not bonuses,” he added.

The Labour Party said the reports were "absolutely astounding".

"How can HSE bosses now have the moral authority to justify the swingeing cuts in services that seem almost inevitable in the weeks and months ahead, if they themselves are lining their own pockets at taxpayers expense?," said the party's health spokeswoman Jan O'Sullivan.

"Given that the HSE already has a €200 million shortfall this year, it blows my mind to think that they would even think of doing this. It is irresponsible in the extreme and I can?t see any reason why they should be given these bonuses."

The Irish Patients' Association said it would be difficult to defend such performance-related payments for senior HSE staff, particularly when the country was in the grip of an economic crisis.

IPA chairman Stephen McMahon said cutbacks to frontline services and difficulties experienced by patients meant the public must be told why these bonuses are being given.

“It’s very difficult to award bonuses to individuals when there are shortfalls that the man on the street can see,” he said.

“And it’s very difficult to justify bonuses when there’s such enormous economic strain on the system."

Nodin

brianthebard wrote: »

As I said in the other thread, there are some things where money shouldn't be cut. It only costs a few million to get this working, for a national budget that's peanuts. The health of the population is important enough that they can borrow a few million if necessary.

Slash a tax break. Tax second homes.....

Darragh29

For the attention of: Mary Harney, Minister for Health & Children.

Dear Minister Harney,

I have read with some considerable surprise and anger, your press release of 4th November 2008, with regard to your decision to not proceed with the HPV Vaccination Programme.

What infuriates me about how you appear to have arrived at this decision, is that in the very same statement that you have issued in respect of this clearly defective decision, you have made reference to the very high cost associated with acquiring drugs required to treat a cancer patient. However you then proceed to tell us that the best solution that you can come up with to address this, is to cancel a programme that would save considerable money by not just reducing but in fact ELIMINATING the incidence of cervical cancer and on the same basis ELIMINATING the costs associated with treating cervical and secondary cancer in this country.

Minister, I put it to you that even an idiot would be able to see that the most effective way of saving money with regard to the costs of medication required to treat a cancer patient, which you have said is a very considerable cost to your department, is to spend a much smaller amount of money preventing the cancer from occuring in the first place.

For a minister who has had an awful lot to say about value for money within your department, I find it difficult to understand how this decision has been made, because to my mind, value for money is best found by preventing problems before they occur, instead of ignoring a pre-emptive and extremely effective solution to a problem, but then having to provide for the substantially greater cost of treating that problem when it obviously will occur in the future, only because the correct and by far the most effective course of action, was not taken at the appropriate time by yourself.

I'm going to suggest that you call it a day in your brief and do us all a favour and resign as Minister for Health & Children, because it is obvious to me now after reading your press release on this matter that there is not a possibility on this earth of you sorting out our Health Service, with the kind of defective and highly questionable rationality I have elaborated upon above, which will ensure that more people will need to be treated for cancer that they should not even have in the future and ultimately, more people will die in this country from cancer.

If you are running a department in such a way that you don't have the funds to implement a programme that makes as much sense as this particular programme, given the potential savings, both in respect of human life and also the clear financial savings that would be possible through the elimination of this type of cancer, then I feel that you are the problem and you should vacate your position and let someone who might have a better grasp on things, get on with it and protect our citizens from life threatening health problems, where this is medically possible.

Yours sincerely...

Biggins

YET again, our children pay the price of Fianna Fails mis-management.

One question...

WHAT THE HELL IS THE GREEN PARTY DOING STILL PROPING UP THIS DISGUSTING, FARCE OF A GOVERNMENT???

I will NEVER vote Fianna Fail again EVER in my life time and NEVER for the Green Party.

ITS A DISGRACE!!!

jmayo

Biggins wrote: »

YET again, our children pay the price of Fianna Fails mis-management.

One question...

WHAT THE HELL IS THE GREEN PARTY DOING STILL PROPING UP THIS DISGUSTING, FARCE OF A GOVERNMENT???

I will NEVER vote Fianna Fail again EVER in my life time and NEVER for the Green Party.

ITS A DISGRACE!!!

I have one question for you.
Did you vote for them at the last election ?

Biggins

jmayo wrote: »

I have one question for you.
Did you vote for them at the last election ?

Yes and I was a member of the FF organisation but I have resigned/left in disgust.

jmayo

Biggins wrote: »

Yes and I was a member of the FF organisation but I have resigned/left in disgust.

As far as I am concerned you have SFA right to now start condemming them.
Sorry but you and the other grassroots cumann members helped elect these people and thus I hope you suffer the consequences more than most.
Do you want a clap on the back for suddenly seeing the light ?

If you have only left now then you didn't appear to have a problem with your party having members that were accussed and in some cases convicted of theft, bribery, stonewalling legal tribunals thus costing the taxpayers hundreds of millions.
There was the gross incompetence of ministers allowing the wastage of hundreds of millions of taxpayers money on egotrip projects (national stadium and e-voting), or a government with so much money to hand still allowing a health service slide to the point that it allowed the old and infirmed to die in nursing homes, the sick languish on A&E trolleys or be misdiagnosed ?
Obviously these weren't issues worth standing up for ?

PS the old and the weak were paying for FFs mismanagement long before this.
Ask the family of the man left to die in Lees Cross or the man left to bleed to death in Cavan or the young girl sent home with apprendix bleeding.

kleefarr

EF wrote:

HSE to pay bonuses totalling €1.4M to senior staff

I suppose they are able to do this due to the cancellation of the HPV vaccination program. :mad:

djpbarry

grahamo wrote: »

The vaccine is 100% effective it will save lives.

Nothing is 100% effective.

Mr.Nice Guy

asdasd wrote: »

Harney has become a very very bad politician.

She was always bad.

It's a disgraceful move on the part of politicians who are absolutely rotten to the core.

brianthebard

djpbarry wrote: »

Nothing is 100% effective.

Its a hundred percent more effective than not vaccinating.

Gandalf23

Interesting that the FF fanboys on boards.ie are so quiet in this thread.

djpbarry

brianthebard wrote: »

Its a hundred percent more effective than not vaccinating.

I suppose so.

Didn't mean to come across as pedantic or anything. Don't really have anything else to say as it's all been said.

dresden8

Gandalf23 wrote: »

Interesting that the FF fanboys on boards.ie are so quiet in this thread.

They've been much muted lately.

But they haven't gone away you know.

Biggins

jmayo wrote: »

If you have only left now then you didn't appear to have a problem with your party having members that were accussed and in some cases convicted of theft, bribery, stonewalling legal tribunals thus costing the taxpayers hundreds of millions.

For the record, I left them DURING the roaring Celtic Tiger. I could see things were being mismanaged to say the least and I could see the writing on the wall to come...

Sadly, I was proven right.

Breezer

djpbarry wrote: »

Nothing is 100% effective.

Just to clarify this from a medical perspective, HPV has a large number of serotypes (subgroups), and the vaccine does not cover all of these. Additionally, there are other causes of cervical cancer. Therefore, while it is between 80% and 100% effective against the serotypes it covers (which are the ones most likely to cause cancer), it is only about 70% effective overall.

Add to this the fact that the vaccine can only prevent new infections from occurring, not treat any existing cases (which may not yet be symptomatic but could go on to cause cancer), and the fact that the vaccine was only going to be given to girls aged 11-12, when the average age of onset of cervical cancer is between the ages of 25 and 40, and you can see why Harney is still putting emphasis on the necessity for a screening programme.

That said, this is a terrible decision and a major step backwards for the health service. We're so far behind other developed countries in both our vaccination and screening programmes that it's beyond a joke. The announcement of the HPV vaccine a few months back was the best thing I've heard from the Department of Health since the smoking ban, and to hear that it's been cancelled has left me speechless to be honest.