Discussion:
Perhaps he should write it on a bus?
(too old to reply)
Yellow
2019-11-05 16:32:49 UTC
Permalink
Where does the £500m figure come from?

Dr Hill, from the University of Liverpool, told the BBC that the £500m a
week figure, which comes from a report he co-wrote with academics at
Harvard University, was designed to illustrate how much more the US
currently pays for drugs than the UK.

"It's a guide to how much money could be involved but it's difficult to
predict how much money would be involved," he said.

To give an idea of the "worst case scenario", he said, the report's
authors compared how much was spent on medicines per person in the US
and the UK. The report said this was a way to "crudely estimate" how
much it would cost the NHS if it spent exactly the same as the US on
drugs per head of population:

The NHS in England spent an estimated £18bn on medicines in 2017-18

The US spent 2.5 times as much per head, according to the Organisation
for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)

Multiplying £18bn by 2.5 gives an annual cost of £45bn

That's an extra £27bn a year or about £519m a week

In practice it's highly unlikely that NHS spending on medicines per
person would end up being the same as the US's.

The Labour leader was asked about the £500m figure at his speech on
Tuesday and said: "I believe it to be an accurate and credible figure
and I'm very happy for anybody else to analyse it and tell me if I've
understated the case."

------

And Labour calls Boris a liar!


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-50295231
GB
2019-11-05 17:41:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Yellow
And Labour calls Boris a liar!
It's difficult to estimate what the cost of stopping NICE negotiating
prices would be. It seems highly likely to be a very large figure, and I
really don't see that it's crucial to the argument whether it's £500m or
say £200m a week.

Have you made an analysis, and if so what's your figure?

Or, do you simply think that Dr Hill's analysis is a bit simplistic? If
so, I tend to agree, but it's not my field, and I don't know how to
improve it or whether that's even possible.


Corbyn said "I'm very happy for anybody else to analyse it and tell me
if I've understated the case."

What Corbyn should have said is 'misstated', so he does appear to have
closed his mind. Nevertheless, here's the opportunity for you to use
your expertise and analyse it for him.
Post by Yellow
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-50295231
Pamela
2019-11-05 18:27:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by GB
Post by Yellow
And Labour calls Boris a liar!
It's difficult to estimate what the cost of stopping NICE negotiating
prices would be. It seems highly likely to be a very large figure, and I
really don't see that it's crucial to the argument whether it's £500m or
say £200m a week.
Have you made an analysis, and if so what's your figure?
Or, do you simply think that Dr Hill's analysis is a bit simplistic? If
so, I tend to agree, but it's not my field, and I don't know how to
improve it or whether that's even possible.
Corbyn said "I'm very happy for anybody else to analyse it and tell me
if I've understated the case."
What Corbyn should have said is 'misstated', so he does appear to have
closed his mind. Nevertheless, here's the opportunity for you to use
your expertise and analyse it for him.
The point remains that paying for health care the way Americans do is very
expensive. No developed country in the world has such a poor value health
system as America.

If Trump forces us to accept some mechanisms of the American health market,
by holding out on a trade deal until we accept then we will be worse off.

£500m or say £200m a week hardly makes a difference to the big picture.
Joe
2019-11-05 19:57:12 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 05 Nov 2019 18:27:06 GMT
Post by Pamela
If Trump forces us to accept some mechanisms of the American health
market, by holding out on a trade deal until we accept then we will
be worse off.
It's no big deal. We've never had a trade deal with the USA, neither
has the EU, and yet the USA is one of our largest trading partners. If
you both have what the other wants, who needs a deal?
--
Joe
m***@btopenworld.com
2019-11-05 20:34:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Joe
On Tue, 05 Nov 2019 18:27:06 GMT
Post by Pamela
If Trump forces us to accept some mechanisms of the American health
market, by holding out on a trade deal until we accept then we will
be worse off.
It's no big deal. We've never had a trade deal with the USA, neither
has the EU, and yet the USA is one of our largest trading partners. If
you both have what the other wants, who needs a deal?
--
Joe
Exactly!

Trade deals are for those who seek to open up other people's markets whilst protecting their own.
Pamela
2019-11-06 09:15:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Post by Joe
On Tue, 05 Nov 2019 18:27:06 GMT
Post by Pamela
If Trump forces us to accept some mechanisms of the American health
market, by holding out on a trade deal until we accept then we will
be worse off.
It's no big deal. We've never had a trade deal with the USA, neither
has the EU, and yet the USA is one of our largest trading partners. If
you both have what the other wants, who needs a deal?
--
Joe
Exactly!
Trade deals are for those who seek to open up other people's markets
whilst protecting their own.
That's exactly Trump's strategy. He wants to make America great again at the
expense of others.
Keema's Nan
2019-11-06 11:28:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Post by Joe
On Tue, 05 Nov 2019 18:27:06 GMT
Post by Pamela
If Trump forces us to accept some mechanisms of the American health
market, by holding out on a trade deal until we accept then we will
be worse off.
It's no big deal. We've never had a trade deal with the USA, neither
has the EU, and yet the USA is one of our largest trading partners. If
you both have what the other wants, who needs a deal?
--
Joe
Exactly!
Trade deals are for those who seek to open up other people's markets
whilst protecting their own.
That's exactly Trump's strategy. He wants to make America great again
Again?
at the
expense of others.
Pamela
2019-11-06 09:14:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Joe
On Tue, 05 Nov 2019 18:27:06 GMT
Post by Pamela
If Trump forces us to accept some mechanisms of the American health
market, by holding out on a trade deal until we accept then we will
be worse off.
It's no big deal. We've never had a trade deal with the USA, neither
has the EU, and yet the USA is one of our largest trading partners. If
you both have what the other wants, who needs a deal?
Donald Trump wants a deal. He becomes petulant if he doesn't get his way.
China knows and the EU knows how Donald intends to handle the Airbus affair.

We can't go back to a rosy tinted past when the world is moving in a
different direction.
The Marquis Saint Evremonde
2019-11-05 20:51:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by GB
Post by Yellow
And Labour calls Boris a liar!
It's difficult to estimate what the cost of stopping NICE negotiating
prices would be.
NICE doesn't negotiate prices, and nobody in government has suggested
that the people who *do* negotiate prices would stop doing it.
Post by GB
It seems highly likely to be a very large figure, and I really don't
see that it's crucial to the argument whether it's £500m or say £200m a
week.
Have you made an analysis, and if so what's your figure?
Or, do you simply think that Dr Hill's analysis is a bit simplistic?
It's more that there is not the slightest reason to think that the
Department of Health's policy on paying for drug imports might change
from the current system.
Post by GB
Post by Yellow
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-50295231
--
Evremonde
Yellow
2019-11-06 01:17:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by GB
Post by Yellow
And Labour calls Boris a liar!
It's difficult to estimate what the cost of stopping NICE negotiating
prices would be.
That was rather the point of my post and in particular the subject to
the post given the people who came up with the figure state it is a
worst case figure that it is unlikely to ever be.

Read the article, it is quite illuminating.
Loading...