Australia Hospitals Beat the rest of World
Oct 31st 2002, 10:29 pm
#1
Banned
Thread Starter
Joined: Aug 2002
Location: Perth Arse end of the planet
Posts: 7,037
Australia Hospitals Beat the rest of World
At being the WORST , just something for you NHS whingers.
Patients face perils in the wards, says report
By Michael Bradley
SYDNEY
ONE in six patients suffer measurable harm while in Australian health care facilities because of human error, sub-standard products or drug side-effects, according to a World Health Organisation report.
Australia's 16.6 per cent probability is alarming, says the report released yesterday. The next highest figure was 10 per cent for Denmark and Britain. The United States figure was 3.8 per cent.
The World Health Report 2002 says risks accompany the benefits of modern health care.
"Studies estimate the probability of patients suffering measurable harm in acute care hospitals at an alarming 16.6 per cent in Australia," it said.
The report lists human short- comings, sub-standard or faulty products, side-effects of drugs and hazards posed by medical devices as possible causes of adverse events in hospitals and, as well, doctor's offices, nursing homes and pharmacies.
A spokesman for Federal Health Minister Kay Patterson questioned the report's accuracy and whether data gathered from each country was consistent.
She said comparisons between countries were difficult.
He attributed the higher Australian rate to the fact that local statistics were based on pre and post-hospital factors.
Patients face perils in the wards, says report
By Michael Bradley
SYDNEY
ONE in six patients suffer measurable harm while in Australian health care facilities because of human error, sub-standard products or drug side-effects, according to a World Health Organisation report.
Australia's 16.6 per cent probability is alarming, says the report released yesterday. The next highest figure was 10 per cent for Denmark and Britain. The United States figure was 3.8 per cent.
The World Health Report 2002 says risks accompany the benefits of modern health care.
"Studies estimate the probability of patients suffering measurable harm in acute care hospitals at an alarming 16.6 per cent in Australia," it said.
The report lists human short- comings, sub-standard or faulty products, side-effects of drugs and hazards posed by medical devices as possible causes of adverse events in hospitals and, as well, doctor's offices, nursing homes and pharmacies.
A spokesman for Federal Health Minister Kay Patterson questioned the report's accuracy and whether data gathered from each country was consistent.
She said comparisons between countries were difficult.
He attributed the higher Australian rate to the fact that local statistics were based on pre and post-hospital factors.
Last edited by pommie bastard; Oct 31st 2002 at 10:43 pm.
Nov 1st 2002, 2:12 am
#2
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Australia Hospitals Beat the rest of World
Originally posted by pommie bastard
At being the WORST , just something for you NHS whingers.
Patients face perils in the wards, says report
By Michael Bradley
SYDNEY
ONE in six patients suffer measurable harm while in Australian health care facilities because of human error, sub-standard products or drug side-effects, according to a World Health Organisation report.
Australia's 16.6 per cent probability is alarming, says the report released yesterday. The next highest figure was 10 per cent for Denmark and Britain. The United States figure was 3.8 per cent.
The World Health Report 2002 says risks accompany the benefits of modern health care.
"Studies estimate the probability of patients suffering measurable harm in acute care hospitals at an alarming 16.6 per cent in Australia," it said.
The report lists human short- comings, sub-standard or faulty products, side-effects of drugs and hazards posed by medical devices as possible causes of adverse events in hospitals and, as well, doctor's offices, nursing homes and pharmacies.
A spokesman for Federal Health Minister Kay Patterson questioned the report's accuracy and whether data gathered from each country was consistent.
She said comparisons between countries were difficult.
He attributed the higher Australian rate to the fact that local statistics were based on pre and post-hospital factors.
At being the WORST , just something for you NHS whingers.
Patients face perils in the wards, says report
By Michael Bradley
SYDNEY
ONE in six patients suffer measurable harm while in Australian health care facilities because of human error, sub-standard products or drug side-effects, according to a World Health Organisation report.
Australia's 16.6 per cent probability is alarming, says the report released yesterday. The next highest figure was 10 per cent for Denmark and Britain. The United States figure was 3.8 per cent.
The World Health Report 2002 says risks accompany the benefits of modern health care.
"Studies estimate the probability of patients suffering measurable harm in acute care hospitals at an alarming 16.6 per cent in Australia," it said.
The report lists human short- comings, sub-standard or faulty products, side-effects of drugs and hazards posed by medical devices as possible causes of adverse events in hospitals and, as well, doctor's offices, nursing homes and pharmacies.
A spokesman for Federal Health Minister Kay Patterson questioned the report's accuracy and whether data gathered from each country was consistent.
She said comparisons between countries were difficult.
He attributed the higher Australian rate to the fact that local statistics were based on pre and post-hospital factors.
The most serious public health issue of recent years is BSE-vCJD and this affects Britons migrating to oz. We don't want your blood!. An irish girl, bless her, tried to donate blood recently to the Bali victims and was refused. The story behind BSE is a monumental public health stuff up by the Thatcher government. Not only were Britons not kept adequately informed, but when the animal feed was known to be infected, it was banned for use in the uk but flogged off cheaply for 5 years to the third world. Who knows where BSE will occur. And that affects our trade in beef to other countries as their worried populations quit eating meat.
The issue is, PB, that Britons were the victims of poor agricultural practices and then British government bungling and cover up. And it may take 20 years to get the all clear. Oz cannot take an adversial or isolationist response to this - we are quite likely to have a vCJD case here at some stage in a British migrant, and it is a matter of cooperating to keep that risk low and limited. It is not just the problem, but the response that needs noting.
I have doubts that PB stands for pommie bastard. Maybe you are a perth bastard, trying to keep the poms away?
Nov 1st 2002, 3:03 am
#3
Banned
Thread Starter
Joined: Aug 2002
Location: Perth Arse end of the planet
Posts: 7,037
Re: Australia Hospitals Beat the rest of World
Originally posted by sydneyrose
The most serious public health issue of recent years is BSE-vCJD and this affects Britons migrating to oz. We don't want your blood!. An irish girl, bless her, tried to donate blood recently to the Bali victims and was refused. The story behind BSE is a monumental public health stuff up by the Thatcher government. Not only were Britons not kept adequately informed, but when the animal feed was known to be infected, it was banned for use in the uk but flogged off cheaply for 5 years to the third world. Who knows where BSE will occur. And that affects our trade in beef to other countries as their worried populations quit eating meat.
The issue is, PB, that Britons were the victims of poor agricultural practices and then British government bungling and cover up. And it may take 20 years to get the all clear. Oz cannot take an adversial or isolationist response to this - we are quite likely to have a v case here at some stage in a British migrant, and it is a matter of cooperating to keep that risk low and limited. It is not just the problem, but the response that needs noting.
I have doubts that PB stands for pommie bastard. Maybe you are a perth bastard, trying to keep the poms away?
The most serious public health issue of recent years is BSE-vCJD and this affects Britons migrating to oz. We don't want your blood!. An irish girl, bless her, tried to donate blood recently to the Bali victims and was refused. The story behind BSE is a monumental public health stuff up by the Thatcher government. Not only were Britons not kept adequately informed, but when the animal feed was known to be infected, it was banned for use in the uk but flogged off cheaply for 5 years to the third world. Who knows where BSE will occur. And that affects our trade in beef to other countries as their worried populations quit eating meat.
The issue is, PB, that Britons were the victims of poor agricultural practices and then British government bungling and cover up. And it may take 20 years to get the all clear. Oz cannot take an adversial or isolationist response to this - we are quite likely to have a v case here at some stage in a British migrant, and it is a matter of cooperating to keep that risk low and limited. It is not just the problem, but the response that needs noting.
I have doubts that PB stands for pommie bastard. Maybe you are a perth bastard, trying to keep the poms away?
CJD has been around for over 100years , the amount people who have it is very small less than 20 cases in a population of 60 million .Seeing as my wifes best friend tests bloody for red cross in Australia she yet has seen any case of Brit having it out of the many in Perth.
A british farmer went around the world to study it , and found that there was a link between food additive and CJD , this has popped up in most countries in the world including AUSTRALIA.
Anyway get back on tract Australian Hospitals have been proved to be poor , my wife who is a nurse would second this report on Aussie hospitals.
I for one would not waste my blood on you ungrateful bastards , the idea that your wonderful blood could be tainted by a Poms must be stopped even by bullshit .
Even if the poor old Poms have mad cow in their blood do you think that the DIMIA would let them in to bleed the already stuffed health system?
Sporadic CJD is numerically the most common form of CJD. It is not confined to the United Kingdom and, indeed, has been found in every country in the world where it has been looked for. In general, it affects about one person per million of the population. There are therefore some fifty to sixty deaths per year due to sporadic CJD in the United Kingdom. Similar figures are seen in other countries such as Australia, Canada and the USA. The cause of sporadic CJD remains uncertain. However, the most favoured current theory suggests that the normal prion protein in the brain undergoes a spontaneous change to the abnormal form, thereby resulting in disease. If this theory is correct (and it has not been proven at this point) then the disease arises simply as a chance event inside the brain. On this basis, it would not be "caught" in any way.
Last edited by pommie bastard; Nov 1st 2002 at 6:12 am.
Nov 1st 2002, 10:41 pm
#4
BE Enthusiast
Joined: Jul 2002
Location: was london now glenelg sa
Posts: 455
20 cases in 60 million? does this mean you are the only one in australia with this affliction?
Nov 3rd 2002, 10:42 pm
#5
Banned
Thread Starter
Joined: Aug 2002
Location: Perth Arse end of the planet
Posts: 7,037
Originally posted by jockney
20 cases in 60 million? does this mean you are the only one in australia with this affliction?
20 cases in 60 million? does this mean you are the only one in australia with this affliction?
Last edited by pommie bastard; Nov 4th 2002 at 7:16 am.
Nov 4th 2002, 3:26 am
#6
Banned
Thread Starter
Joined: Aug 2002
Location: Perth Arse end of the planet
Posts: 7,037
Originally posted by jockney
20 cases in 60 million? does this mean you are the only one in australia with this affliction?
20 cases in 60 million? does this mean you are the only one in australia with this affliction?
Nov 13th 2002, 8:52 pm
#7
BE Enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2002
Location: UK 2 Oz, Oz 2 UK, Been there, done that, got the tee-shirt!
Posts: 773
Re: Australia Hospitals Beat the rest of World
Originally posted by pommie bastard
At being the WORST , just something for you NHS whingers.
Patients face perils in the wards, says report
By Michael Bradley
SYDNEY
ONE in six patients suffer measurable harm while in Australian health care facilities because of human error, sub-standard products or drug side-effects, according to a World Health Organisation report.
Australia's 16.6 per cent probability is alarming, says the report released yesterday. The next highest figure was 10 per cent for Denmark and Britain. The United States figure was 3.8 per cent.
The World Health Report 2002 says risks accompany the benefits of modern health care.
"Studies estimate the probability of patients suffering measurable harm in acute care hospitals at an alarming 16.6 per cent in Australia," it said.
The report lists human short- comings, sub-standard or faulty products, side-effects of drugs and hazards posed by medical devices as possible causes of adverse events in hospitals and, as well, doctor's offices, nursing homes and pharmacies.
A spokesman for Federal Health Minister Kay Patterson questioned the report's accuracy and whether data gathered from each country was consistent.
She said comparisons between countries were difficult.
He attributed the higher Australian rate to the fact that local statistics were based on pre and post-hospital factors.
At being the WORST , just something for you NHS whingers.
Patients face perils in the wards, says report
By Michael Bradley
SYDNEY
ONE in six patients suffer measurable harm while in Australian health care facilities because of human error, sub-standard products or drug side-effects, according to a World Health Organisation report.
Australia's 16.6 per cent probability is alarming, says the report released yesterday. The next highest figure was 10 per cent for Denmark and Britain. The United States figure was 3.8 per cent.
The World Health Report 2002 says risks accompany the benefits of modern health care.
"Studies estimate the probability of patients suffering measurable harm in acute care hospitals at an alarming 16.6 per cent in Australia," it said.
The report lists human short- comings, sub-standard or faulty products, side-effects of drugs and hazards posed by medical devices as possible causes of adverse events in hospitals and, as well, doctor's offices, nursing homes and pharmacies.
A spokesman for Federal Health Minister Kay Patterson questioned the report's accuracy and whether data gathered from each country was consistent.
She said comparisons between countries were difficult.
He attributed the higher Australian rate to the fact that local statistics were based on pre and post-hospital factors.
Nov 13th 2002, 10:28 pm
#8
Banned
Thread Starter
Joined: Aug 2002
Location: Perth Arse end of the planet
Posts: 7,037
Re: Australia Hospitals Beat the rest of World
Originally posted by scrawni
The reason your percentage is higher could be because you have to wait at least 12 months to see a docter so he can say you can go on the waiting list for an opperation. So you see, our percentage is lower because nobody is getting treated.
The reason your percentage is higher could be because you have to wait at least 12 months to see a docter so he can say you can go on the waiting list for an opperation. So you see, our percentage is lower because nobody is getting treated.
PERTH'S biggest teaching hospital will pay almost $3.6 million to a woman disabled when she suffered a brain haemorrhage after being sent home with painkillers for an excruciating headache.
Last edited by pommie bastard; Nov 13th 2002 at 10:55 pm.
Nov 14th 2002, 3:18 am
#9
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Feb 2002
Location: Dream life UK....
Posts: 2,912
Australia has waiting list spanning years for many types of surgery.
Some figures out last week claimed Australians had a 30% chance of dying in Emergency from serious injuries, compared to 3% in the USA!
Why does anyone in the UK think it is different here?
People may not like what Pommie has to say, but a lot of it is just plain old truth.
Some figures out last week claimed Australians had a 30% chance of dying in Emergency from serious injuries, compared to 3% in the USA!
Why does anyone in the UK think it is different here?
People may not like what Pommie has to say, but a lot of it is just plain old truth.
