The Liberal Democrats have become increasingly popular in the UK, especially since the MP’s expenses scandal last year and has gained percentage points in recent polls in the run up to the general election. In the increasing likelihood of a hung parliament next month, Nick Clegg and his party will have a vital contribution to the running of the future government and their policies have come to the forefront of attention. In the final part of Freedom Healthnet’s election special, we look at the UK’s third party’s ideas for the NHS and the impact they could have on the private health insurance industry if their influence in Parliament grows.


The NHS budget could be under threat if the Lib Dem’s get their way. The party’s manifesto does not guarantee the future of the health services funding in a bid to cut the expenditure of the government. All political parties will be looking to save money where they can to help pay off the huge debt the country is now in, and Nick Clegg is planning to source some of this from the health budget. The Department of Health could be cut in half to make some of these efficiency savings. Some people may be worried that this could mean the quality of care could suffer as a result of this, and may take out a quote for private medical insurance to give themselves extra peace of mind.


Other proposed savings would come from a reorganisation of the structure of the NHS. Strategic health authorities would be scrapped, and giving the power to plan health services to elected local health boards. The Lib Dem’s answer for the controversial provision of out of hours GP care would be to give a greater role back to GPs in providing the service. It would mean some local doctors would have to be involved. This could be in response to concerns that some agency GPs have not been providing a high level of care, as seen high profile cases recently where patients have died and may have meant some people have opted for private health insurance to have affordable access to private doctors.

Politicians across the UK have been launching their election manifestos this week ahead of the general election on May 6th. Unsurprisingly, the NHS has come to the forefront of debate so Freedom Healthnet is taking a look at each of the main party’s visions for the health care of the future and the likely impact of this on private medical insurance.


The Labour Party

Primary care trusts are one of the main priorities for the Labour Party’s plans for the NHS. They are already established in much of England, but Gordon Brown wants every hospital to become one by 2015. This has been extended to previous targets and would mean a further 93 hospitals would have more control over how they are run. Critics have said this is a risky move though and could cause problems for the running of the hospital while the management changes hands. If a hospital’s services are not running to the highest quality they can be during a period of time, it could mean that people are tempted to get a quote for private health insurance to ensure that they will always have access to the highest quality of care possible should they become ill.


Gordon Brown has also set out his commitment to greater access to out of hours GP care. People can currently see a doctor at evenings and weekends in at least one health centre in every area of England, or at least will be able to at a shortly opening clinic. Out of hours GP care has been problematic for the NHS since it was reformed in 2004 and most doctors opted out of working the longer hours in favour of a pay cut. Tragic cases where people have suffered as a result have since been publicised and could have been a reason for people to take out a private medical insurance policy and gain affordable access to private sector GPs.

A campaign group has said that politicians shouldn’t be involved in the NHS. The claim was made just weeks before the general election by Helen Evans of Nurses for Reform who believe that the health service should be depoliticised. This comes just at the time when the NHS is becoming one of the central debates for campaigning politicians yet again, who are looking to persuade the general public that they are the ones that can bring those always needed improvements to the running of the country’s healthcare system. Nurses for Reform are in favour of drastic changes rather than the more subtle policies being suggested by the Labour, Conservative and Liberal Democrat parties and think that by putting the NHS in the hands of the independent sector would mean that patients needs would be properly met.


The proposals, outlined by the Nurses for Reform director Helen Evans in the Telegraph earlier this month, suggest that health provision should be handed over to the control of private companies. That includes both profit and not-for-profit ownership. This idea is based around the controversial concept of patients as consumers, but this has been proven successful in the private health care industry already. Private hospitals are among the highest quality treatment centres in the UK, and they lack the budget restrictions that limit much of what the NHS is able to do. Many people take out a private medical insurance policy to give them affordable access to private healthcare so they can avoid the waiting times and other problems that have come about as a result.

NHS patients have been treated in places like mop cupboards because there was no space left on a ward. That’s according to a survey of 900 nurses printed in the Nursing Times this month. Almost two-thirds of those who took part said they had experienced patients being treated in an area that hadn’t been specifically designated for treatment. Among the places named in the survey that were used when wards were full were kitchens and storerooms as well as mop cupboards and the majority of those nurses who were surveyed recognised that this could have caused added risk to patients. It is reports like these that show the strain the NHS is under that may encourage some people to get a quote for private medical insurance to gain access to a private hospital should they become ill, where demand is much less and quality of care is generally higher.


The Royal College of Nursing has expressed their concerns over these findings, whilst they recognise that in some instances it may be necessary to use non-clinical areas for treatment. Spokesperson, Janet Davies, told the BBC, "As pressures inside the NHS start to rise due to budget cutbacks, it is vital that nurses and other healthcare staff are confident that their concerns over failures in patient care will be heard." These pressures are becoming a concern for some people who decide to take out a private medical insurance policy to give themselves extra peace of mind. The Patient’s Association have also added their criticism to the findings of this study. Katherine Murphy, from the group also spoke to the BBC. "This is completely unacceptable. Yet again, this survey highlights the gap between rhetoric and reality in the NHS lottery of care."

Doctors have been adding their criticism to a controversial new NHS database that will hold digital patient records. The British Medical Association has now written a letter to the Health Secretary Andy Burnham to express their views on the proposed Summary Care Record System. The group says that while they agree to the ideas behind the new database, they are worried about certain aspects of it. Dr Grant Ingrams, a member of the BMA told ‘the Guardian’ that he thinks patient’s rights are not being respected. "It is about allowing patients to decide what information about them is used. This is information that belongs to them and may include embarrassing information," he said.


The new system has been criticised for many reasons. One is that it works upon the basis of assumed consent, which means that people who do not agree to their details being kept on such a record have to opt out of the scheme. Otherwise, the NHS will presume that you don’t mind being on this database. The health service claim that the system will help to improve the level of care that a patient receives if they visit a hospital or if they access out of hours services by allowing doctors and other nursing staff to see information that is normally only held by GPs. To begin with the Summary Care Records will only have basic information but with time the NHS intend to put most of a patient’s medical records on them. People who don’t like the idea of this system may wish to find an alternative to the NHS altogether, particularly if they wish to bypass waiting lists as well, and take out a quote for private medical insurance.

People may become reliant on private health insurance to gain access to homeopathy services if the latest recommendations for the government are carried out. A report from the science and technology parliamentary committee has advised that homeopathy should no longer be funded by the NHS. The government has recognised that there is no evidence that these sorts of treatments work and have been criticised for having no view on the ethics of providing placebo type healthcare. Despite these criticisms, alternative treatments like homeopathy have become increasingly popular in recent years and those people who feel that they have benefitted from it in the past may start to look for quotes for private medical insurance as a more affordable way of having the care if it the NHS stop providing it.


Not all private health insurance policies will pay for alternative treatments like acupuncture, chiropractic care, podiatry or indeed homeopathy. Freedom Healthnet will pay up to £1,000 a year for up to six visits to any of these on all level of cover if the policy holder opts to include outpatient care and subject to approval of claim. Physiotherapy is also included among these treatments and is rarely covered in a private health insurance policy. Waiting lists for physiotherapy on the NHS have reported to be quite lengthy in some areas of the UK and people who wish to bypass those queues via private healthcare may have to pay for the treatment themselves if their current health insurance policy does not include it. It is these people that should consider comparing the level of cover on a number of different types of policies across a wide range of providers before they commit to private health insurance that does not fulfil all their specific requirements and needs.

Healthcare debates in the Commons are likely to step up a level after a new report has been published this month on the challenges facing the NHS. The research, which was carried out by the Economist Intelligence Unit, discusses the main issues facing the health service and makes recommendations for improvements. The NHS is already a major policy area for political parties, even more so as the general election draws closer and MPs will be looking at how they can solve the problems defined in the report if they are a part of the successful government later this year. The main issues identified by the EIU were budget cuts, the quality of social care provisions and increasing waiting times for treatment. Long waiting lists are one of the most common reasons why people decide to get a quote for private medical insurance and consider an alternative to the NHS.


The report – ‘Doing more with less – Britain’s healthcare funding challenges’ deals with concerns about the almost inevitable cut in government funding for the NHS as politicians try to pay back some of the record amount of debt that the UK now has. It may not be that the NHS has a reduction in funding, but indeed it is unlikely that the huge increases in budget that it has received over the past few years will continue. Among the recommendations made by the study were to increase the role of the private sector in healthcare provision, including a better partnership between the two parts of the healthcare system. This could mean a greater number of people will opt to top up their NHS treatment by paying for the extra cost themselves or via a private medical insurance policy. Industry experts have also called for a tax break for people with private health cover to be considered by the next government.

Complaints from patients about NHS GPs have rocketed in the past year. Nearly 40,000 people weren’t happy with the service in the last 12 months, which is an increase of 12 percent. The rise in the number of complaints has coincided with the controversial change in out of hours care brought about back in 2004 which has come under fire a number of times since. The changes meant that Primary Care Trusts are now in control of the provision of GP health services in the evenings and at weekends rather than GPs themselves and gave physicians the choice to opt out of working the extra hours in favour of a £6,000 pay cut. The majority chose the wage drop and the NHS has been criticised since for mistakes made by out of hours doctors. This large number of complaints may signal a rise in the number of people taking out quotes for private medical insurance to gain access to private healthcare services.


The figures, which have been released by the NHS Information centre, show that the category which received the largest amount of complaints was clinical care. Almost 15,000 cases were reported where such instances as failure to refer a patient correctly to a consultant occurred. It is this sort of experience that may encourage people to look for an alternative to NHS treatment such as private health care to help avoid these errors. Private hospitals are much less busy and under less pressure than their NHS counterparts which reduces the chance that mistakes will be made and a higher quality of care to be possible. Private health insurance is a more affordable way of catering for private treatment, rather than forking out for the often large one off bills.

The private healthcare sector could help to solve the debate of how to deal with the NHS, says the group chief executive at one of the UK’s biggest health insurance providers. Speaking at the Conservative Manifesto Conference, head of AXA UK Nicolas Moreau, said, “Preserving and protecting the NHS should be at the forefront of Government policy but this comes at a cost. A future government will need to choose between a defined level of healthcare cover that should be provided by the NHS and what needs to be paid for by patients through top ups. The private sector has many solutions that will help.” The NHS is always a popular subject for politicians vying for public support, and with an election coming up in the next few months, the state of healthcare in the UK is almost certainly going to be brought to the forefront of party campaigns.


Increasing numbers of NHS patients are already being treated in private healthcare facilities in one controversial method of dealing with a shortage of beds. Other patients who are not happy with the level of care offered by the health service, are choosing to upgrade their treatment with the top ups mentioned by Moreau, and this is something that looks like is going to become even more popular as the NHS becomes even more limited by its budget. Cash plan private health insurance is ideal for covering the cost of topping up NHS treatment because it is much cheaper than other forms of private health insurance and is designed to supplement the NHS.

President Barack Obama’s plan to introduce an NHS-style healthcare system across the United Stated has taken a potentially serious setback today as the Democrats lost their control over Massachusetts. The state has been a Democrat stronghold since 1972, meaning that Scott Brown will be the first Republican senator there for over thirty five years. It is thought that Obama’s healthcare bill is one of the main reasons for the upset, and has been very controversial for the President despite the fact that many Americans do not have access to healthcare. Almost all the population of Massachusetts (98 percent) are covered by private health insurance so the new bill would not greatly benefit them. Brown told NBC, "We would have lesser care, longer lines and pay higher taxes and it makes no sense."


Criticisms of the NHS have come to the fore front in the debate over introducing universal health care into the United States and may have made people in this country consider covering themselves with a private medical insurance policy as an alternative. The huge cost of introducing it is one obstacle to begin with and many people are worried that the quality of their health services will suffer as a result. People in the UK have the option whether they would like to ‘upgrade’ their treatment with private healthcare if they are not happy with the services available and it is a popular choice for many. The NHS offers a good level of care to everyone, but it has its problems, including lengthy waiting times and issues of cleanliness and it is this that is forming the opinions of those people who oppose Obama’s plans. Brown also told NBC, "I believe everybody should have healthcare, it's just a question of how we do it." The Democrats will decide later today what should be done about the new law, but the election of Brown to the Senate means that the Republicans now have enough votes to stop the legislation passing through.

GP’s working hours could come back into debate once again in the House of Commons if the Conservatives get elected at the general election later this year. Shadow Health Spokesman, Andrew Lansley has said this week that the Conservative party will look to change rules brought in six years ago which meant GPs were no longer in control of out of hours care. It meant that Primary Care Trusts were given the responsibility instead and often brought in private companies to run the service, because 90 percent of GP’s decided to opt for a pay cut rather than work longer hours when given the choice back in 2004. But after the high profile case when German doctor Daniel Ubani gave a 70-year-old man too much diamorphine, later leading to his death, the Conservatives are looking to change this back to ensure that mistakes like this do not happen again. Lansley said, “When Labour took responsibility for out-of-hours care away from GPs they made a serious error.”


However, giving the decision back to GP’s might not be a solution to the problem of providing the out of hours care that is used by nine million people in the UK every year. The British Medical Association is expected to oppose this proposal, bringing back previous arguments that GP’s were overworked and underpaid. Either way, this is a problematic situation and these cases where people have died will have done nothing to help the NHS’ reputation. People who are concerned about the quality of care may take out a quote for private medical insurance which will provide them with more affordable access to private health care as an alternative.

It is predicted that life expectancy will increase in the next decade to over 80 or 90. However, long term chronic conditions are also likely to rise. To ease this burden on the NHS, doctors believe that we all need to change our attitude to health.

Although life expectancy is increasing, it does not necessarily mean that it will lead to extra years of healthy life. It is likely that we will suffer more from chronic conditions. For example heart disease and arthritis are more common and putting strain on the NHS. One research suggests that spending on dementia will need to double in the future. There is also the impact of obesity, high alcohol consumption and smoking to be considered.

The NHS needs to react now to curb the future increase in long term spending. One suggestion is to further invest in technology. At Swansea University they are researching ways to bring together systems across the NHS. For example, patients suffering from diabetes could test their blood sugar at home, and the results could be instantly sent to their GP. The idea is to give patients control to manage their health. Patients could even make GP appointments online and order repeat prescriptions.

Diseases from the past that have been uncommon in more recent years, such as tuberculosis need to be monitored to ensure they do not increase to prevent further cost to the Health Service.

With life expectancy increasing, the need for long term treatment of chronic conditions rising and further investment in technology required, the next ten years will be testing times for the NHS.

44,000 women and around 300 men are diagnosed with breast cancer every year in the UK alone. Furthermore there are currently around 172,000 currently living with the disease.

Together with these large numbers there are also large amounts of research being carried out in the cause, detection and treatment of breast cancer. Research by Dr Paul Pharoah in 2008 aims to reduce developing the cancer by creating a risk profile for each patient coupled with an individual screening programme.

Of the 44,000 cases diagnosed each year, research shows that faulty genes could be responsible for up to 10%. Therefore a programme that screens genes to detect potential sufferers could be a helpful tool in early detection.

As it currently stands however, GP practice guidelines state that if any patient consults their GP with a breast cancer concern and has a family history, they will be offered the highest level of support. Furthermore the NHS has announced that it will extend their national breast screening programme which is currently offered to 50-70 year olds to 47-73 year olds.

All research agrees on one fact – early detection can lead to a more simple and effective treatment programme. So to be more breast aware and consult a GP with any unusual changes seems to be the best current advice.

Source: The Guardian
Self examination is still the best to stop breast cancer

A member of one of the UK’s top health insurance trade associations says that a two tier health system is becoming inevitable due to some of the decisions made by the NHS. Mike Izzard, from the Association of Medical Insurance Intermediaries, told the Private Healthcare UK website, that the recommendations made to the NHS by NICE (National Institute for Clinical Excellence) about which drugs are the most cost effective are helping to maintain the strong position of private healthcare. One of the latest recommendations by NICE that yet another cancer drug, Avastin, is not a good use of NHS resources may be encouraging more people to avoid the NHS altogether by getting a quote for private health insurance and there by giving them affordable access to private treatment where drugs that are not provided by the NHS are more likely to be available.


The government would like to see a single tier of health service, where the NHS is suited to everyone’s needs but Mike Izzard says this is becoming less likely. “All the major political parties keep claiming they want the best healthcare service and they want to avoid a two-tier healthcare system with the NHS on one side and the private sector on the other. But bit-by-bit the NHS’s potential effectiveness keeps being eroded away by NICE. If the NHS cannot provide the possible live saving treatment which is now available, then the private sector will have to step in more and more with the result that a two tier system becomes inevitable, whatever the political ideals.”

Suggestions have been made that poorly performing NHS Trusts could be ran by private healthcare companies in the future. Similar moves have been made by the government to help improve some schools and local councils have increasingly been using private finance initiatives as a way of funding long term investment in certain infrastructures. Simon Heffer, speaking in ‘The Telegraph’, says that ‘private-sector hit squads’ should be sent in to sort out certain NHS Trusts like Basildon and Thurrock Trust. Although critics say that these private companies are there to make a profit, the NHS is already commissioning a considerable amount of private healthcare for their patients as part of the Choose and Book programme and deals with a large number of profit making businesses already, like drug companies for example.


The increased use of the private sector in state provided services is just a part of a long held belief that independent businesses can often supply a much better quality experience. This is one of the reasons why some people already choose to have their medical treatment in a private healthcare hospital than an NHS facility. The majority of these people will have a private medical insurance policy and by investing in their health in this way, they know that they will be treated in the one of the best facilities and in the shortest time possible if they should unfortunately become sick. Illness is one of the most unpredictable things in life, and so it is often very important for people to have that peace of mind that the best possible facilities are available to them if the circumstances arise.

The recession has caused many of us to think more carefully about the state of our health, according to a recent survey. The ‘Britain Under Pressure’ research, carried out for financial services group Friends Provident, found that up to 10 million of us are now feeling more fit and well because of this new found attitude. Nearly six in ten people said they would like to do more to take care of their health, with the majority of those doing this by changing their diets by swapping junk food and takeaways for healthier alternatives and starting to grow their own fruit and vegetables. For those people who have become increasingly aware of their health and wellbeing, private medical insurance could now be an attractive option.


Scare stories about the NHS, including people’s experiences of dirty wards and general unhygienic conditions, catching hospital acquired infections like MRSA and long waiting lists, may be the sort of thing that goes over the head of some people with a ‘it’ll never happen to me’ mindset. This change in attitude over the past year may be the sort of thing that opens some people’s eyes to the possibility of experiencing some of these troubles that the NHS has had in the past. Private medical insurance can be an affordable way to gain access to private hospitals where these sorts of issues haven’t been experienced certainly to the extent of the NHS. From just £10.88 a month, this could be just the same cost that buying extra fruit and vegetables is adding on to your shopping bill, perhaps less.

The British healthcare system is one of the best in the world, beating the American system in the results of a new survey. The study was carried out by the Commonwealth Fund across eleven countries around the world. The 10,000 doctors who took part rated the NHS highly for its provision of inexpensive healthcare that is available for everyone. It comes as American President Barack Obama is looking to introduce a more readily available healthcare system in the States, raising concerns among some people that they would have something similar to the NHS. While it provides a good standard of care for most people, there are still some patients in the UK who have a private medical insurance policy to give themselves the peace of mind that they will be treated in the best environment available.


Some Americans are concerned that if they have an NHS style healthcare service some of the criticisms of the UK system will transfer to their own level of healthcare including some people who believe that “death panels” will decide their fate. While having to pay for their treatment may be an inconvenience to some, and unaffordable for others, some Americans will be reassured that they will be getting the highest standard of healthcare. Patients in the UK who are covered by cash plan private medical insurance seem to have the best of both worlds. While they can have access to private hospitals and clinics, if they wish they can use their cash lump sum to supplement any costs incurred to them due to their illness and still use the NHS to have free healthcare. In the Commonwealth Fund survey, the UK was the only country where doctors felt that the quality of healthcare was improving so patients should take advantage of this if they wish. The NHS did come second to the US when it was judged against waiting times, with 28 percent of patients having to wait a long time to see a specialist in the UK, compared to 22 percent in the States. Private healthcare could then supplement the NHS where it doesn’t perform so strongly.

A union for workers in the public service has said that the NHS should employ more cleaners. The latest research sponsored by UNISON has found that just one extra cleaner on a hospital ward can reduce contamination in certain areas by nearly a third. Hospital acquired infections have been of great concern to patients in the UK over the past few years and has been a major influence in persuading people to get a quote for private medical insurance. The study found that in the six months that an extra cleaner was in place, the number of MRSA cases reduced. The NHS may see employing an extra member of staff as a great cost in the short term, but researchers estimated that the extra cleaner saved between five to nine lives from MRSA infection and up to £70,000 in NHS funds to treat them. This money is vital to any NHS Trust which will inevitably have to make cuts in the coming years as the government struggles to continue the huge cash injections that it has provided recently.


The number of cleaners in the NHS has been cut dramatically over the past thirty years, some say by up to a half. UNISON’s general secretary, Dave Prentis told Health Insurance and Protection Magazine, “UNISON will be arguing that every cleaner plays an invaluable part in the control of infections and employing more in the NHS is a win, win situation - lives are saved as well as much needed NHS money." But as it stands, the news that the number of cleaners has been cut by such a large amount could be a great concern to those people who are already worried about the state of hygiene in NHS hospitals. These people may wish to take out a private medical insurance policy to ensure that they are treated in a private clinic where the levels of cleanliness are at the highest standards.

British companies are selling their pioneering medical technologies abroad – because the NHS is so difficult to sell products to. One business, Touch Bionics, provided for the NHS for years before becoming the first company to move away from the health service in 2003. The American market in particular has been highly lucrative for these British companies, and they have been able to make huge profits from taking advantage of the large private health insurance sector. While this is fantastic news for British companies like Touch Bionics, who produces a bionic hand with moveable fingers, it could be frustrating for patients in the UK who could be benefitting from these technologies in their own country. Touch’s Director of Marketing, Phil Newman told the Telegraph, “We prefer the US model. The fragmentation of the marketplace means it's easier to get an entry into than a large institution like the NHS."


American patients have been benefitting from these new technologies for many years now. In fact, over 70 percent of the 1,000 Touch Bionic hands that have been produced and sold since September have been used on patients in the USA. This is nearly nine times the amount supplied to NHS patients – who only received 8 percent of those. People in the UK may wish to take out a private health insurance policy which would then allow them to travel to other countries like America for their medical treatment if they wish to do so. This could be especially important for those people who would highly benefit from these innovative technologies that even though they are supplied by British companies, are not readily available in the UK.

Private healthcare companies are now caring for four times the amount of NHS patients than it was less than two years ago. Figures from the Department of Health released this week show that a total of 8,400 NHS treatments were carried out by a private healthcare centre in August this year, compared to 2,100 procedures eighteen months previously. While some private health insurance customers are concerned that private hospitals should be differentiating between the level of care that a NHS patient receives compared to a paying customer, it means that the importance of patient choice is now being recognised by the government as well as some existing private health insurance providers like Freedom Healthnet. In fact, these cash plan policy holders have the benefit of choosing where and when they wish to be treated already, included in that is the choice to be treated in an NHS hospital if they wish. So cash plan health insurance customers like those with Freedom now have an even wider choice.

Some private hospitals have started to offer a premium service to those people who have paid, either through private health cover or by paying directly for their treatment. NHS patients now have the option to be treated in one of 149 private hospitals which provide healthcare at a quality standard ‘at a price acceptable to the NHS’. This number has almost doubled in the last year, as there was only 88 private hospitals to choose from in October 2008. Those cash plan private health insurance policy holders who choose to be treated one of these private facilities may then use the money they would have put towards the cost of the treatment on covering travel, money lost from taking time off work or other expenses that come as a result of their illness.

Concerns have been raised this month over the quality of NHS out of hours care, following the death of a 70 year old man. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) has been carrying out an investigation and has raised its worries over the level of monitoring of these services. Out of hours care passed to agencies in many primary care trusts across the country after the change of GP’s contracts in 2004, which meant that they could opt out of working in the evenings and at weekends if they wished. Patients, like David Gray, have suffered as a result. In this particular case, Mr Gray was given ten times the normal dose of the painkiller diamorphine. The CQC has now called for increased monitoring of these out of hours services, saying that the current situation is a “nationwide problem.” Concerns about NHS services are just one reason why some people decide to take out a quote for private medical insurance.


The case of this elderly man is not the only one to hit the headlines. A 41-year-old woman also died back in 2005 from organ failure after being seen by a total of eight doctors over just four days. An inquiry was carried out then into Penny Campbell’s death and found similar problems with out of hours services. Although these high profile cases only cover two areas of the country, the CQC has been investigating five areas which are covered by the Take Care Now programme – primary care trusts in Suffolk, Great Yarmouth and Waveney, Worcestershire, South West Essex and Cambridgeshire. The CQC’s chief executive, Cynthia Bower told The Times, “Although we are still in the early stages of our inquiries, we believe this may point towards a national problem. We are, therefore, encouraging PCTs across the country to scrutinise in more detail the out-of-hours services they commission.” Some people believe these services should become GP’s responsibility once more but until that happens, private health insurance might be one way to access private clinics to ensure a high quality of care. Take Care Now has welcomed the CQC’s findings and is continuing to work with them.

Over five million people in the UK could be put at risk of side effects in a new NHS cost cutting scheme. The health service is set to save over £70 million with the new rules which means that pharmacists must opt for a cheaper alternative of drugs if there is one available. It also means that pharmacists will be able to change a patient’s prescription without speaking with their doctor for the first time, excluding during an emergency. Asthma sufferers, epileptics and patients with bipolar disease are set to be among those affected. While the generic, unbranded alternatives are most of the time exactly the same as their more expensive counterparts, sometimes ingredients can differ within a certain percentage. Other factors, like colourings can also change within different versions of a drug and may cause side effects within some patients. Some critics have even said that the cost of treating in adverse effects of drugs could end up costing the NHS more money.


The NHS is more than likely going to have cut costs in many areas in the coming years as the government will struggle to carry on the amount of funding it has pumped in during the last decade. Some patients may be worried that these cuts could affect their health and experts are calling for some medications like some epilepsy drugs to be exempt from the new rules. Some people however, may wish to pay extra to ensure that they can carry on taking the more expensive drugs which they know suit them. Topping up treatment that is already available on the NHS is something which cash plan private medical insurance is ideal for. It is a low cost way for people to have access to private health care if they so wish.

One hundred people in the UK lose their sight everyday in the UK, but out of those only 8 will receive any counselling from the NHS. That’s according to the latest research from the Royal National Institute of Blind People who are concerned that many people could be at risk from conditions like depression without this help. They say that losing your sight is life changing and people often struggle to come to terms with it. Fazilet Hadi from the charity told the BBC there is "a systematic failure in the UK to provide vital support". The government say they are committed to providing help for disabled people but the RNIB say that a lot of people are left puzzled when the support they expect to receive doesn’t arrive.


Charities like the RNIB are often left to provide advice to people where other organisations like the NHS are not as effective as people might expect when their time of need comes about. Although this is one of the reasons why charities were set up in the first place, their resources cannot most of the time stretch to meet demand. The RNIB have said they can only help a third of the people who are facing losing their site under their current capabilities. This is just another example where people have to find an alternative source to the NHS to help them through their health issues and problems when they don’t feel that its services are sufficient. Getting a quote for private health insurance is the first step in ensuring that the best quality health care is available if a person would rather be treated in an alternative place to an NHS hospital or clinic.

Budget cuts to the NHS are seeming more and more inevitable over the coming years as the government begins to look at where it can start paying back the huge debt the UK is currently in. Where those cuts are likely to take hold is a hot subject for politicians at the moment with Labour MPs rejecting the recommendations of one report last week. Management consultants, McKinsey and Company proposed that 137,000 clinical and admin posts should be cut, saving the health service £20bn over the next five years. But while some people believe these sorts of roles are wasteful, the government believe that job cuts are not the way forward. Health Minister Mike O’Brien told the BBC, "The government does not believe the right answer to improving the NHS now or in the future is to cut the NHS workforce. In core frontline services like maternity, nursing and primary care we need more staff rather than fewer." Even the possibility that jobs could be lost, putting the NHS under more pressure, could be one reason why some people might get a quote for private medical insurance.


Cutting jobs is not the only suggestion for saving vital money within the NHS however. A recruitment freeze was also suggested by this latest report, as well as the possibility of medical school places being cut. This could be damaging in the long term as there could be fewer trained doctors and nurses in the future. The report also believes that £3 billion could be saved through improving staff productivity. Whatever the end solution, it seems that certain aspects of the health service will have to take priority as budgets become tighter and compromises will have to be made. Some people will not want to compromise when it comes to their health and may turn to private medical insurance to ensure themselves access to high quality treatment.

The future of the NHS’s budget looks more and more uncertain after Conservative MPs failed to back the party’s leader David Cameron’s plans to increase funding above the rate of inflation if he comes into power at the next election. It’s starting to seem as though the health service will be one of the top issues for debate over the coming months as cuts have to be made across all areas of the economy to begin to pay back the record amounts of debt the UK is now in. Since 1997, the Labour Party have pumped billions of pounds into the NHS to try and cut waiting times and improve general conditions but now it seems that this can no longer continue and some people are worried that standards will begin to fall again. Private medical insurance may start to become an attractive option for these people to guarantee themselves high quality treatment.

David Cameron’s commitment to the NHS may have been a reassurance for those people who are concerned that budget cuts could be damaging to the level of care on offer, but now it seems he could be over-ridden by his own party. A recent poll suggests that nearly two thirds of Tory MPs do not agree with Cameron’s ideas to spend above the rate of inflation on the health service. It is starting to seem inevitable that compromises are going to have to be made within the NHS as budgets are squeezed. Some people may not like to make compromises where their health is concerned and may get quotes for private health insurance to put their mind at ease.

Election debates are hotting up between the Conservatives and the current Labour government and the NHS is one of the top issues. This week, two thirds of Tories voted in favour of a tax relief on private health insurance compared to only 1 percent of the Labour Party, and 5 percent of the Liberal Democrats. But the issue has created even further problems within the Conservative party over the future of the NHS, as leader David Cameron has been a longstanding supporter of the health service. The shadow health secretary Andrew Lansley has said that the opposition party want to make sure that high quality healthcare services are available to people but it seems the Tories disagree on how this will be achieved.


A further two-thirds of the 150 Conservative MP’s who took part in the ComRes poll said they were in favour of people being treated partly on the NHS and partly privately paid for. This is something that is currently available to private health insurance customers who choose to top up their NHS treatment. If the Conservatives come into power at the next election, the income tax relief for private health insurance could encourage more people to enquire into quotes for health cover and take out policies. But this will depend on whether the Tories go for this option, rather than on Cameron’s current proposal to increase NHS spending above inflation, despite the government having to make inevitable cuts across the board as it attempts to pay off the country’s huge debts in the coming years. But Chancellor Alistair Darling told the Scotsman, "Tax breaks for private healthcare would take money away from the health service and undo the real progress we have made with the NHS over the last 12 years."

As President Obama heats up the debate in America about whether to introduce free healthcare for all, debates have started to arise here in the UK about our very own healthcare system. The NHS has always been criticised over one reason or another, whether this is over long waiting lists, hospital cleanliness or access to revolutionary, but expensive treatment. It is only really now though that politicians and speakers have begun to consider whether the future of the British healthcare system lies within the NHS. Some people abroad, in countries where thousands of people have to go without basic treatment because they simply cannot afford it, dream of a free healthcare service and in this case it might seem that we take the NHS for granted. But others, who favour private healthcare as a more favourable option look upon the NHS as one reason why a free healthcare system should not be introduced in the United States. British MP Hannan even joined in the criticism of a 60 year old service that has encouraged some people to choose to pay for their healthcare anyway, often through private health insurance.


The main advantage it seems to the British healthcare system is that people can have the best of both worlds. The NHS is excellent for emergency treatment, especially after incidents like road traffic accidents. For less unpredictable healthcare needs, private hospitals are a good way for people to upgrade their care if they feel they want to. Private health insurance is just one way that private healthcare can be accessed, but can make it much more affordable to a lot of people. Cash plan private health insurance in particular, is a much more cost effective way having that extra security and peace of mind, and has meant that private health care is no longer something that is considered a luxury and confined to the rich. David Cameron has said that he wants to open up the NHS debate even further, and with an election arising in the coming year, the next few months could be vital for the future of the NHS.

Over 100 women in the past year have had to turn to private medical insurance because the NHS hasn’t provided drugs that could significantly improve their health. Cancer drug, Herceptin, is a very expensive treatment, costing up to £20,000 for a year’s worth and cash strapped NHS trusts in certain parts of the country haven’t been able to provide it for patients with early stages of cancer. There have also been at least two high profile cases where women have gone to the High Court to fight for the right to be treated with the drug on the NHS. Although the majority of private health insurance policies do not include the treatment of cancer among the illnesses and conditions which they will pay out for the treatment of, Herceptin is just one drug which the health service won’t readily provide for patients, mainly due to the cost.


Top-ups are just one way in which more expensive treatments are now available, partly on the NHS. Until last year, if patients wanted to be treated with a drug not provided by the NHS, they would have to foot the whole cost. Since then the law has changed and patients can now pay the extra cost on top of what the NHS will pay towards medication. Cash plan private medical insurance, like the policies offered by Freedom Healthnet are ideal for paying for NHS top-ups. At a very low monthly premium, they are an affordable way of having access to more expensive, but often faster acting and innovative treatments.

Vital NHS funds – in the region of £300,000 – have been spent by a NHS Trust in Norfolk on private hospital beds that weren’t used. The ten beds were hired out by the Trust from the private Spire hospital as part of a wider contract between mid-March and mid April this year and a further five beds from mid-April to 19 July. The idea behind the scheme of hiring in help from the private healthcare sector is to relieve pressure on NHS facilities and this is something that has been used across various areas of the health service. However this particular deal has been criticised, not only because of the cost of beds that were never used, but because the cost of them were considerably more than the average cost of NHS beds. These Spire hospital beds are costing an average of around £392 each for every day of the contract, compared to between £180 and £270 for NHS beds.


Taxpayers are ultimately the ones who suffer from wasteful expenditures like this. The money that was spent on the help of private healthcare providers could have been spent on improving NHS facilities, treatments or hiring the staff that would have meant they didn’t need to use private beds in the first place. Norfolk NHS Trust say that the beds were hired at a particularly busy time for the hospital, and that after the first month the number of beds were reduced to five as they weren’t being used. They reassure that all beds are being used now, but some people may simply find the fact that this NHS Trust can’t keep up with demand at busy times a reason to get a quote for private medical insurance. We do not choose when we fall ill, and this could fall within the busiest time of year for an NHS hospital where facilities are tightly stretched.

NHS patient records could be stored by a private company like Google if plans put forward by the Tories get the go ahead. They are currently considering the option as an alternative to the current IT system overhaul under Labour. They are due to announce the results of a review in the next few weeks which is likely to consider handing over medical records to Google or Microsoft. It means that patients could potentially access their records from a home computer, and the Conservatives say that this system would be more secure because patients have to give their permission before NHS staff can access their records. But the plans have come under fire by doctors and other campaigners who say that this could be dangerous in an emergency situation where for instance an unconscious patient could not give their permission for medical staff to access vital information about their health. There is also concern that the database could be hacked into.


The new IT system that is being brought in by Labour, Connecting for Health is costing £12.4 billion and won’t be working until 2014. This has been delayed by four years and has been called ‘centrally determined and unresponsive’ by Tory leader David Cameron. But Cameron’s own proposal has been controversial, because of the Conservative’s close link with Google. The party has said that patients will have the option to have their information stored by one of a number of companies of which Google Health and Microsoft HealthVault have been confirmed possibilities. Patients will not have to opt in to the scheme, and those wishing to stay out of it will have their records kept on the current system, based at their doctor’s surgery. But despite this, some people may find that they wish to get a quote for private medical insurance to avoid this possible new system altogether if they are worried about the safety of their information.

A new ground breaking treatment is being made available to patients for the first time, through private healthcare provider Bupa. The APOS treatment, which is designed for knee and lower back pain, can eliminate the need for prescription pain relief for seven out of 10 people. Around 22 million people suffer from back pain across the UK and another 13 million are knee pain sufferers and this treatment could make the lives of these people much more comfortable. A private medical insurance policy could give access to this pioneering treatment, along with many other new solutions to certain illnesses that are not yet available on the NHS. Paying for these treatments is one option but could be expensive so a small monthly premium through private health cover would be one affordable way of having access to the best healthcare facilities available without a substantial bill at the end of it.


The APOS treatment improves the function of the joints and thereby reduces pain by introducing a mild instability through the use of specially designed footwear. This encourages the retraining of the systems that stabilise the joints. It is a two step process, the wearing of the high-tech shoes followed by six months of assessment to see how the patient’s walking pattern changes. The intensity of knee pain can be reduced by around 2 thirds after 8 weeks of the treatment and 86 percent of people would recommend it to someone else. For the millions of people that experience back and knee pain in the UK, this is certainly something that they will want to consider to try and reduce the suffering they often encounter every day, making their jobs and normal activities difficult in some situations. Some people may consider a quote for private medical insurance to make this possible.

Nurses could soon be feeling the effects of the recession, with thousands predicted to lose their jobs in the next five years. According to a new report published by Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development, up to 350,000 public sector workers including nurses could face the tough job cuts between 2010/2011 and 2014/2015. It’s all because of the government’s plans to tighten budgets across the board including the NHS. Chief Economist for the Institute, John Philpott, told the Nursing Times, “The public sector has yet to feel the full impact of the recession, and the resultant bloodbath in the public finances.” But the thought of even further restrictions on healthcare budgets could mean that increasing numbers of people decide to get a quote for private medical insurance.


Budget cuts for many are something that happen on paper, maybe affecting people in their own pay packets but with services like the NHS may only be noticeable if they have to experience healthcare treatment themselves. If nurses are likely to lose their jobs in the high numbers predicted, front line services will no doubt be affected. A lot of people will want to ensure that if they unfortunately become ill, especially in the next five years, that they will be able to be treated in the best healthcare facilities available and an increasingly stretched NHS is becoming less attractive. Private medical insurance offers a good alternative by allowing policy holders access to the best medical facilities available .A low monthly premium from providers like Freedom Healthnet give many people the peace of mind they are looking for.

The NHS can expect to have a shortfall of £15 billion over the space of five years according to the NHS confederation. The shortfall is likely to come following 2011 when the era of big spending will come to a sudden end. The problem has arisen from the culmination of a number of factors, including the recession, lower increases in budgets as well as rising costs. Top health service managers have warned this week in a report at the annual NHS confederation conference in Liverpool that action needs to be taken now to prevent bosses having to make major cuts when the shortfall comes into effect. Steve Barnett, the confederation's Chief Executive told The Telegraph, "Shortages in funding will translate to the kind of across the board cuts which could see waiting lists lengthen, standards fall and dissatisfaction with the service grow among patients and staff." This could cause even greater worry for those people who feel they need extra peace of mind by purchasing a private medical insurance policy.


The report, 'Dealing with the downturn: the NHS's greatest ever leadership challenge' said that if extra money isn't put into the NHS in the year 2011/2012, it may not be able to continue being free at the point of service. If this happens, people may have to take out private medical insurance to help cover the added costs. A cash plan private medical insurance policy like those offered by Freedom may be ideal because they already allow their customers to use the cash lump sum they recieve to subsidise the cost of NHS treatment. Even if costs aren't put in for the NHS, which the government will work very hard to avoid, quality of treatment may suffer if bosses like Steve Barnett's fears are confirmed. People who would like to be treated in a clinic where quality is guaranteed may like to take out a quote for private medical insurance to allow them access to private hospitals who are not affected by budget cuts in such a way as the NHS.

The government has lost millions of pounds in using private consultants to give advice to primary care trusts. The idea was aimed to save the NHS money but in fact it has cost the health service over £21 million. The figures have been released this week through Department of Health documents and just prove that the Government’s Framework for Procuring External Support for Commissioners (FESC) initiative has not achieved its goal to make efficient savings. Health publication ‘Pulse’ found that spending on private consultants had tripled over the past two years since it was launched, costing a total of £39.4 million but only bringing in £17.5 million worth of savings. This is money that could have been spent in another department of the NHS for example on buying new equipment. Dr Jonathan Fielden, chair of the BMA’s consultants committee told Pulse, “This is hundreds of millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money yet to be shown to have benefited patient care.” Despite this, the Department of Health still insists that 'tangible benefits' are being given.


Many people who turn to private medical insurance as an alternative to the NHS say that they do so because of the better access to high quality and brand new technologies available in private health care centres. The NHS is limited in providing access to these new innovative technologies because of its budget and government schemes like this one to encourage the use of private consultants where targets often get in the way. Private health insurance policies allow patients to use these top of the range facilities where they are not restricted by a budget in the same way. Being treated by the latest healthcare equipment and medicines could reduce recovery time and get patients back to full health in the shortest period possible which is inevitably a priority for most people when they undergo an operation or fall ill.

Household cleaning sprays linked to asthma in adults!
Regular use of household cleaning sprays could be to blame for one in seven cases of adult asthma, a new study has found.
Using a spray cleaner just once a week can increase the risk of developing asthma by as much as fifty per cent, according to the research.
The study’s lead author, Jan-Paul Zock, of the Municipal Institute of Medical Research in Barcelona, told The Times: “The relative risk rates of developing adult asthma in relation to exposure to cleaning products could account for as much as 15 per cent, or one in seven, of adult asthma cases.”
He said it was not yet known how sprays might actually cause asthma, but suggested the chemicals might provoke an inflammatory response that is part of asthma development.
The international study involved just over 3,500 people from ten European countries who used cleaning sprays and air fresheners. Researchers analysed their data for almost a decade. The results are published in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine.
The research found that six per cent of the participants had developed asthma symptoms and there was a link between the condition and the use of cleaning sprays in the home.
But no link was found between the development of asthma and the use of cleaning products that were not sprayed.
Howard Stoate, a GP, MP and chairman of the asthma all-party parliamentary group, told the Times: “There are a lot of gaps in our knowledge about asthma. Anything that fills those has to welcomed. Although asthma is on the increase worldwide no one can say why,”
Previous research has shown that industrial cleaners have increased the number of cases of asthma but this is the first time that domestic cleaners have been shown to pose a risk.
Professor Neil Barnes, of the British Lung Foundation, told the Daily Mail: "This latest research opens up an interesting avenue for further study, but more investigation is needed to establish whether spray cleaners can cause asthma rather than simply make existing symptoms worse."

Teenagers to get contraceptive pills over the counter
The contraceptive pill will be available without a doctor’s prescription in 2008 according to a report in the BBC. Instead, the Governement want to train pharmacists to prescribe the oral contraceptives in the same way a GP would.
Health Minister Lord Darzi, who is leading the review of the NHS, says a pilot scheme will involve women having a private consultation with a pharmacist, where health risks will be assessed, before obtaining the Pill for free.
Pharmacists will also be able to prescribe the Pill to girls under 16 without their parents consent in the same way doctors can, if they believe that the girl is at risk of becoming pregnant.
The Pill has been available in the UK since the 1960s and is now used by about four millon women. It is the most popular contraceptive in the country, with the condom in second place.
If the pilot is successful, the Pill will be available at chemists across the country. It is currently only available with a prescription from a doctor’s surgery or family planning clinic, but chemists can currently dispense the morning-after Pill without prescription.
The Royal Society of Medicine has been campaigning for easier access to oral contraceptives and believe this new move will help address the high rates of teenage pregnancy in Britain.
Lady Finlay, the president of the society said: "We have this catastrophic tidal wave of teenage and unwanted pregnancies, we are the worst in Europe, we cannot ignore that."
Figures here are twice as high as those in Germany, three times higher than in France and six times as high as in the Netherlands. Figures from the Office for National Statistics show that during 2005, a total of 7,462 girls under-16 became pregnant.
But Trevor Stammers, a GP and a trustee of education charity Family and Youth Concern, said that greater access to contraception, which is already widely available, was not the answer to the country’s sexual health crisis. He told The Times: “Because the Government refuses to contemplate sex education aimed at delaying young people’s sexual debut they have to put all their effort into increasing availability of contraception, but it will not work. They have increased availability of the morning-after Pill and it has made no difference at all in the number of unwanted pregnancies.”

ery year around 36,000 Britons develop bowel cancer – that's one every fifteen minutes - and nearly half that number die from the disease.
Although 90% of sufferers are over 55, with an average age of 70, a growing number of younger people are developing bowel cancer.
Our modern lifestyles may be increasing our risk of contracting the disease. Research has shown that a diet low in fatty food and caffeine but high in fibre and fresh fruit can reduce our chances of getting bowel cancer.
Fibre helps speed the passage of waste through the digestive system and fresh fruit and vegetables help the colon empty itself frequently. Increasing the amount of water you drink also helps to keep the motions soft and allows waste to pass more easily.
If you smoke, are overweight or take little exercise you are also more likely to develop the cancer. People with a family history of the disease also have an increased risk of becoming sufferers themselves.
Charities such as Bowel Cancer UK recommend we get to know our bowel pattern so we know what to look for if things do change. Symptoms of bowel cancer include; blood in or on the stools, unexplained weight loss, pain in the abdomen or changes in bowel habits such as constipation or diarrhoea that lasts longer than six weeks. However, in many cases these symptoms do not mean you have bowel cancer.
If you do notice anything unusual, it is important to see your doctor. If someone thinks they might have bowel cancer, their GP will perform an examination of the back passage and feel the abdomen. They may also ask for a stool sample so that it can be tested for blood. The patient might then be referred to a hospital specialist for a rectal examination.
If the disease is in its early stages the cancer can be completely removed by surgery and patients may not need any further treatment, although some need chemotherapy to reduce the risks of the cancer coming back.
However, if the cancer is in its advanced stage it may spread to the abdomen or liver and lungs. Advanced stage bowel cancer cannot usually be cured, but treatment, such as radiotherapy, may be able to control it.
Research shows that 84% of Britons would rather ignore their symptoms than talk to their doctor (UEGF 2003) but the longer it goes untreated, the less likely it is that the cancer can be cured.
As with other cancers, private medical insurance would cover this. If you or your family do fall ill with this disease and there is no prior medical history then you would be fully covered and able to have your treatement in a private medical facility to suit you. Many health insurance clients, if they do fall ill with cancer, research the best private hospital for their particular cancer and choose to be treated there. This is one key benefit for medical insurance policies by companies such as Freedom: you have the opportunity of selecting treatment in ANY hospital - in the UK or abroad. Get an instant online medical insurance quote for health insurance for your family. One client, for instance, chose treatment in America as she wanted to be treated by the best specialist in the world. She took the payout amount for her cancer claim and booked in for treatment with a top cancer specialist in the US. Because she had chosen an expensive venue for treatment, she made up the difference between the policy payout and the hospital quotation for treatment. Our client was delighted that she had that choice.
As with any service or product costs, the UK and abroad can vary immensely and treatment abroad can be substantially less than in the UK.

Guidelines on safe alcohol consumption limits introduced 20 years ago were based on little more than an “intelligent guess”.
According to a report in The Times newspaper, the weekly drinking limits of 21 units for men and 14 for women, first introduced in 1987, had no firm scientific basis.
Later studies found evidence that recommended that the guidelines should be raised, but numerous health ministers ignored them. One study showed that men drinking between 21 and 30 units of alcohol a week had the lowest mortality rates in the country, much higher than the 21 units the government recommends. Another study concluded that a man would have to consume 63 units a week to face the same risk of death as someone who does not drink at all.
Richard Smith, a member of the Royal College of Physicians working party, that produced the 1987 recommendations told the paper the guidelines were prompted by “a feeling that you had to say something”.
He said: "Those limits were really plucked out of the air. They were not based on any firm evidence at all. It was a sort of intelligent guess by a committee."
The committee's epidemiologist had confessed: "it's impossible to say what's safe and what isn't" because "we don't really have any data whatsoever", according to Mr Smith.
The former editor of the British Medical Journal said members of the working party were concerned by growing evidence of the damage caused by heavy long-term drinking and so they felt obliged to produced safe drinking guidelines.
The revelation casts doubt over a recent report, commissioned by the Government, that blamed middle-class wine drinkers for pushing some of Britain’s most affluent towns to the top of the ‘hazardous drinking’ list as it relied on the 1987 guidelines.
But a coalition of health organisations, headed by the Royal College of Physicians, is still building a campaign to force a 10 per cent increase in alcohol taxation and stricter regulation of the drinks industry and alcohol advertising.

Pregnant women may drink a small amount of alcohol every day without harming their child, according to new guidance, according to NICE, contradicting the advice given by the government's own health department.
The National Institute of Clinical Excellence recommends that pregnant women can drink up to 1.5 units of alcohol a day – equivalent to a single measure of spirit or a small glass of wine.
The NICE advisers, including doctors and midwives, said that small amounts of alcohol do not appear to harm unborn babies, other than possibly increasing the risk of miscarriage.
But this contradicts advice from the Department of Health, who advise pregnant women not to drink at all.
American research shows that as many as one in 100 unborn babies is damaged by alcohol, causing learning difficulties, hyperactivity and attention deficit disorders in later life.
The advice from NICE, however, concludes that there is no consistent evidence of problems caused by “low to moderate” consumption of alcohol during pregnancy.
Dr Raja Mukherjee, of St George's Hospital Medical School in London, told the “We simply do not know what level is safe.” He said: “There is only limited evidence, but it has been shown that if you drink even low levels when pregnant there is a permanent effect compared to women who don't drink. I would suggest the safer option is not to drink.”
A spokesman for NICE told the Daily Mail it was expected that the Department of Health would issue ‘clear advice’ on the subject when the final version of the NICE guidance is published in March.
However, the Department of Health said its advice to avoid drinking completely was ‘simple’ and ‘straightforward’.
Here at Freedom Health Insurance, our very own chief medical officer - a doctor with many years of experience - concurs with the Department of Health's stance in this matter. Reading the limited research and looking carefully at the evidence, he is able to identify negative effects from the consumption of alcohol whilst pregnant.

Hot on the heels of the previous article on HPV vaccinations for teenagers, a multitude of information about the virus and cervical cancer is hitting the public awareness. Every year around 4,000 women in the UK are diagnosed with cervical cancer, of whom, around 1,200 die from the disease. Generally, only 2 out of every 1,000 cancers diagnosed in women are cervical cancers, but it is the second most common cancer in women under the age of 35.

Cervical cancer is most commonly spread through the human papilloma virus, or HPV - generally known as the wart virus. HPVs are a group of more than 100 different viruses and they are given numbers to distinguish them. In this group, only 13 HPVs are capable of causing cancer and only five types commonly do so. In 70 to 80 per cent of cases of cervical cancer there is an association with an infection from HPV 16 and 18.

The viruses can be spread through any skin-to-skin contact, but when they affect the cervix it is spread through sexual intercourse. Evidence shows that as much as 80 per cent of women will contract some form of the virus before the age of 50, but in many cases the infection will clear up on its own.

A woman’s sexual behaviour may determine how much she is at risk from HPV. Early infection, commonly due to having sex at an early age, is shown to increase the likelihood of persistent infection and possible malignancy. If a woman is over 30 years old, she is also at a higher risk if HPV cultures remain in her cervix, although women of this age are less likely to contract the virus.

The number of sexual partners and sexual histories of those partners are also linked to the risk of HPV, as well as having sex with uncircumcised males as they are thought to be more likely to harbour the virus. Women who smoke and contract the HPV virus are also twice as likely to develop cervical cancer than a non-smoker.

HPV can be present for years with no symptoms and the viruses do not always cause obvious symptoms such as warts, so a person can have the infection and unknowingly pass it on. Recent studies have also shown that condoms do not completely protect against HPV as the virus can be spread through skin-to-skin contact with any infected area of the body.

The virus can also lay dormant for many years before it comes active, with the most common age of deaths due to the cancer in the early fifties. With girls becoming sexually active at a much younger age, the early vaccination scheme recently introduced by the Government is essential to cut the death rate for this disease.

Many experts argue that the programme should be extended to pre-pubescent boys, as well as girls, as the same types of HPV virus that cause cervical cancer are also linked to many cases of penile cancer in men, and to oral and anal cancer in both sexes.

The NHS are also considering introducing HPV testing for women with borderline or abnormal smears.

Cancer organisations Cancer Help and Cancer.org have more information about the HPV virus and Cervical Cancer.

Vaccinations against a virus that causes cervical cancer will soon be given to pre-teen girls.
From September, girls aged 12-13 will be given a jab that prevents the sexually transmitted human papilloma virus (HPV). The Government hopes the programme will save 400 lives every year.
In England alone, the project could cost up to £100 million a year and a catch-up programme for girls under the age of 18 will start in 2009, costing as much as £200 million a year.
Scotland and Wales have announced similar plans to introduce a vaccination and Northern Ireland will also be carrying out a programme for 12-year olds, but is yet to finalise the plans.
It is estimated that 70 per cent of cases of cervical cancer are caused by HPV. Each year, 3,000 women are diagnosed with the cancer and as many as 1,100 die from the disease. It is hoped that HPV jabs will revolutionise prevention of the disease.
The vaccine, which will cost around £300 for a full course, will be given in three injections over six months.
The HPV virus is most common amongst sexually active females aged between 18 and 28, infecting 80 per cent of women in some form by the age of 50. In the majority of cases, the infection will clear up on its own, but some will have continued infection.
Girls currently over the age of 16 will not be eligible for the programme but they will be able to have the vaccine privately. The injections will most likely be given in schools, but primary care trusts are responsible for planning how to deliver the vaccinations.
Two vaccines have been developed: Cervarix, made by GlaxoSmithKline, and Gardasil, made by Merck and Sanofi Pasteur, which has already been approved in 76 countries. The companies will now compete for the contract to provide the vaccinations, after the Government announced that only one is likely to be chosen. The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation has not made any recommendations over which one should be used.
Experts have said that the programme will be more expensive than other childhood immunisations and the results will not be seen for many years, but would eventually be worth the cost.
Alan Johnson, the health secretary, told the BBC: “As a society we need to do more to prevent disease and not just treat it.” “Now, more than ever before, we need to make the NHS a service that prevents ill health and prioritises keeping people well.”

Providing there is no pre-existing condition, cancers - including cervical cancer - are covered under private medical insurance policies to enable policyholders to benefit from prompt treatment at a time of their choosing in a private hospital of their choice.

Hot on the heels of recent stories of dirty hospitals raising the death toll, newspapers are reporting how vercrowded, filthy wards, shortages of nurses and financial difficulties led to 1,176 people contracting Clostridium difficile, according to the Healthcare Commission.
Over two and a half years, the infection outbreak at three Kent hospitals contributed to the deaths of 331 patients. The Healthcare Commission said that the infection – a severe form of infectious diarrhoea - probably or definitely caused the deaths of 90 patients and it was a contributing factor in the deaths of a further 241.
The number of deaths turned out to be far higher than originally declared to the media as the commission found cases where patients were probably killed by the superbug, but it was not reported on their death certificates.
A report by the commission said that some patients should have fully recovered from their initial illness but they caught the C Diff bug and died.
The report said there had been “significant failings” in infection control at the hospitals, causing the worst outbreak of a lethal superbug ever recorded in the NHS.
Dirty bathrooms and overflowing commodes were found at the Kent and Sussex, Pembury and Maidstone hospitals. Nurses were also too busy to clean their hands and equipment properly and infected patients were frequently moved in an attempt to meet waiting time targets.
The commission also said that managers at the Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust were too preoccupied with hitting Government targets and had been cutting nursing staff and closing beds to help balance the books.
In May 2004, the trust’s chief executive, Rose Gibb – who has recently resigned - told the BBC she had known about the problems with cleanliness for six months, according to The Telegraph.
The report has now been sent to the Health and Safety Executive and Kent Police, who will decide if there are grounds for criminal charges.
Health Secretary Alan Johnson has also told the Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust to withhold payments to Ms Gibb, pending legal advice.

Again, another story hits the national papers on the subject of the increasing risk of superbugs in hospitals. prompting individuals and families to take up health insurance and ensure that they are able to use a private hospital in the unfortunate situation of having to have medical treatment.

A recent investigation from the Healthcare Commission revealed appalling standards of hygiene at three hospitals in Kent, which allowed the killer bug Clostridium Difficile to directly cause the deaths of 90 patients.
Between 2004 and 2006, the bug infected more than 1,100 patients in hospitals run by the Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust, contributing to the deaths of 331 of them.
The commission found the standards of service were akin to those in the Third World, including dirty, understaffed wards and beds crammed together. Patients with severe diarrhea were even told to “go in the bed” as nurses were too busy to take them to the lavatory, according to the Independent.
Sadly, this is not an isolated case. In June, 99 NHS Trusts admitted to the Healthcare Commission that they were failing to meet hygiene standards and, according to the News of the World, many hospitals in England have twice as many cases of the killer C Diff bug as the Kent group, reports the News of the World.
The superbug is estimated to kill around 4,000 patients every year, yet some hospitals are able to control the spread. The Royal Bournemouth and Christchurch hospitals scored the lowest in the ranking for C Diff infection, thanks to their “clean your hands” campaign.
Many people think doctors may be to blame for the increase of superbugs, as they believe hospital staff have dismissed the problem as an inevitable complication of medical care.
Hospital targets may also be the cause of the problem. According to a report by the Government’s chief economist, Professor Barry McCormick, the most crowded hospitals had MRSA rates 42 per cent higher than average.
Proper cleaning however, is not enough to solve the problem of superbugs. C Difficile, for example, is mainly caused by over use of antibiotics. The treatment kills the ‘healthy’ bacteria in the gut, allowing the C Difficile bacteria, which are normally controlled in the body, to spread. Unfortunately increased cases of MRSA have resulted in increased prescriptions of antibiotics.
Last week the health department announced screenings of all patients for MRSA, which will mean those carrying the infection will be isolated on admission, but these measures will not provide the complete solution.
Only when hospitals monitor antibiotics prescriptions, increase hygiene standards and ensure all staff wash their hands between patients, can the problem of superbugs be eliminated.
The occurrence in private hospitals of these super bugs is substantially less than in public hospitals, which is part of the reason that individuals choose to use private hospitals for their medical treatment. Many families are planning for such eventualities by taking out private medical insurance to ensure that they get their treatment promptly and that they are treated in a private hospital to minimise the risk of contracting MRSA or C Difficile, for example.

Despite recent headlines claiming that flu jabs are failing to save the elderly, if you are wise, you will still have your vaccination.
A recently published paper from the Health Protection Agency suggested that flu vaccinations for the elderly had no effect on the number of hospital admissions due to respiratory conditions such as bronchitis, emphysema and pneumonia, the telegraph reports.
Yet the World Health Organisation (WHO) estimates that the vaccinations reduce the risk of serious complications and/or death by up to 85 per cent.
The problem lies in the science of developing flu vaccines. The seasonal jabs protect against strains of the virus judged by the WHO to be the most likely strains to be in circulation that winter. However, this prediction is often made an entire year before, so if a strain changes, or a new one appears, the vaccine will not protect against them.
Another problem with the vaccine is that older people’s immune systems are less responsive than those in younger people, so the vaccine works in them less well. This is due to a phenomenon called immunosenescence, where the body’s immune system weakens with age.
But some people do respond to the vaccines very well. A spokesman for the Department of Health told the Telegraph: “Although vaccination may not protect all elderly people, experts advise that the majority of them benefit by at least having a less severe illness.”
The Health Protection Agency researchers are in fact insisting that ministers should not abandon vaccination, yet they are urging them to consider public health measures such as improved housing, smoking clinics and research into other illnesses associated with winter colds and flu.
More research is also being done into vaccines that protect, even if a flu strain has changed a little. Meanwhile, if you’re aged over 65, or in one of the groups most at risk from flu, a flu jab could still save your life this winter.
It is important to note that acute conditions such as Bronchitis and Pneumonia are covered by private medical insurance, subject to whether these are pre-existing conditions, and that you can claim on your health insurance policy for treatment in a private hospital, in your own room.

The Health foundation, Think-Tank, has recently released their study on the UK healthcare system. Within its findings was worrying news about how waiting lists for non-emergency operations and treatments were getting longer and how trying to visit a GP out of hours is increasingly difficult. The study looked at the UK health system and compared it with those of our neighbours in Europe and other first world nations.

The foundation learned that 55% of patients within the UK had problems accessing their GP at night and at the weekends with Great Britain coming in well behind countries like The Netherlands and Germany. Additionally, waiting times were worse in the UK compared to its European neighbours with 15% patients waiting over 6 months for treatment.

It is studies like this which worry consumers and make individuals consider buying private health insurance to ensure peace of mind.

Unlike the growing trend of British citizens travelling abroad for medical treatment which they pay for privately or via their health insurance policies, a confidential internal report estimates the cost of treating patients from outside the European Union amounts to at least £62 million a year, according to The Times.
This figure is “bound to be an underestimate” as new rules that are supposed to prevent foreign patients abusing the NHS are being ignored, according to the report.
The NHS is obligated to treat anyone who requires urgent medical care. Patients from outside the EU are supposed to prove that they can pay for medical treatment in advance.
But a survey has discovered that NHS managers aren’t guaranteeing that patients prove their eligibility for free health care. The survey also suggests that only around half the debts are being chased, costing UK taxpayers more than £30 million a year. Only part of the £62 million is paid back by the patients.
The problem persists, despite the Government promising a crack-down on unpaid bills in 2004. Hospitals were told to make patients pay for their treatment if they were not residents in Britain or from countries with reciprocal arrangements. The Health Minister at the time, John Hutton, said in April 2004: “I expect trusts to make enforcement of the regulations part of their core business.”
Ministers have repeatedly said that statistics are not collected on the amount of patients being treated who are not entitled to free care and have frequently refused to state how much health tourism costs the NHS.
An internal investigation estimated the scale of the abuse after the new regulations were introduced. In September the Department of Health lost an 18-month struggle to stifle the findings of an internal report when they were revealed to Conservative MP Ben Wallace under the Freedom of Information Act.
As well as the first official estimates, the document also revealed that maternity and HIV services were being demanded the most. “Maternity . . . was frequently mentioned as an issue,” the report states. At the time, officials even suggested that the Government should contact air-lines to ask them to stop heavily pregnant women from Nigeria, India and Pakistan flying in to the UK.
According to the Telegraph, the largest single unsettled bill was for the treatment of a newborn baby, between December 2005 and March this year, at University Hospitals of Leicester. The care given to the child, which included four months in intensive care, cost the taxpayer £208,259.
Treatment for HIV was also “widely recognised to be a problem area” as many health workers were “hostile” to the idea of making foreign patients pay for their treatment. In one hospital, Department of Health officials discovered that the person responsible for checking patient’s eligibility “was not welcome” in the HIV ward.
In September, a spokeswoman for the Department of Health said that it refused to accept the conclusions of its own report, according to the Times. She claimed that the investigation was based on a sample of just 12 trusts. She added that the “situation is much better than it was three years ago” but admitted that figures could not be produced to prove it.
She also said: “We are in the middle of a review with the Home Office, which is looking at tightening up enforcement of the regulations.”
MP Ben Wallace, who exposed the report, told The Times: “This Government is conniving at a ‘Don’t ask, don’t charge and don’t chase’ policy that is leaving the NHS wide open to abuse.”

Family doctors may soon be able to tell patients how altering their habits may help them to live longer - with the associated implications for private health insurance and the potential for reducing premiums.

Dr Chris Martin, a researcher and GP in Laindon, Essex, has developed a computer program that can outline how long a person may live, depending on simple information such as smoking habits, age and blood pressure.

By next year, Dr Martin hopes to have refined the model to include factors such as stress and ethnicity. People from the sub-continent, for example, are more likely to develop cardio-vascular diseases.

The results of his model are displayed in a simple graph that shows how many more years a person can expect to live after making changes to their lifestyle. The graph can show, for example, greater changes in life expectancy if a patient were to give up smoking, which affects the risk of lung cancer and heart disease. The program can also display the benefits of other lifestyle changes, such as lowering blood pressure and cholesterol.

GPs already use a risk calculator to evaulate how likely individuals are to have a heart attack but this is typically based on percentages, which Dr Martin says a lot of the public do not understand. His program, which he calls the Laingdon Model, produces a picture of the risks and the effects that different changes in lifestyle would have on lowering them.

Results are not displayed in percentages, but on a set of curves on a computer screen. These graphs show how likely a person is to still be living at any future age, up to 85 and how the chances can be improved by lowering cholesterol, quitting smoking or making other changes.

The graph shows that without making any changes, the chances of living to be 80 years old are around 25 per cent. But giving up smoking could increase that chance to fifty per cent.

A different graph shows that controlling blood pressure would also benefit life expectancy, but this does not make as great a difference as smoking. For example, a person who does not control their blood pressure has an estimated 80 per cent chance of living to be 60, but this can be raised to just over 90 per cent.

Dr Martin told The Telegraph: “I came up with the idea primarily to scare people out of smoking. And, anecdotally, it seems to work in at least half of the cases.”

He suggests three furthur changes that will help increase lifespan. The most beneficial is eating lots of fruit and veg, which will help to reduce the risk of heart failure and cancer. Doing plenty of exercise will also help to reduce the chances of developig heart disease. And reducing your stress levels can also help. But he told The Telegraph that there are no guarantees: “I deal in probabilities. Diseases in the body are biological car crashes. Some smokers will live to 85: most won’t.”

He tested the system by using information from a previous study, on a sample of people in Whickham, near Newcastle upon Tyne. Data was gathered between 1972 and 1974 about a group of individuals, who were chosen to representative of the general population. The group were then followed up for 20 years by the original authors of the study.

Dr Martin fed this information into his model, which estimated how many of them would have still been living after 20 years. His model predicted 75 per cent, whereas the follow up study showed that 75.4 per cent of the group survived.

He expects the models main use will be for GPs and for health advice. “If you show patients a graph it really brings it home to them,” he told The Times.

The model is already in use in some doctors surgeries in South Essex, after being taken up by Health Enterprise East, the NHS Innovations Hub for the East of England.

Dr Martin’s model was the subject of his dissertation when he was studying a course a Health Informatics at University College London. The MSc course is designed to help medical workers use their IT skills to improve patient care.