Prompt blood tests saved woman's life

First published in Local News

A CANCER survivor says her life was saved by the fast turnaround of a routine blood test by the people working in the pathology lab at Southend Hospital.

Yet these types of tests are from April being transferred to Bedford Hospital for screening under plans by NHS Midlands and East.

The Echo is running a  campaign against the proposal after being inundated by concerned patients, GPs and consultants.

Leukaemia survivor Peggy Tomlins, 63, described the pathologists as unsung heroes who work diligently so patients like her live to tell their tale.

Mrs Tomlins returned from a six week holiday to Menorca having been feeling unwell for several weeks.

She said: “I knew I wasn’t well, I was getting really breathless and struggled to get up stairs. I couldn’t walk far without sitting down. I had all these bruises come up on my leg and joked ‘I hope I haven’t got leukaemia’.

“I saw the doctor the day after we got back and because I was worried it was my heart I had an ECG which was fine.

“The doctor called me at home and asked me to get a routine blood test done so we went to Canvey for the test.

“Two hours later the doctor and hospital rang and told me to come to hospital Immediately.”

Her blood count was so dangerously low doctors were surprised she was able to walk.

Mrs Tomlins said: “They told me the devastating news I had leukaemia. I was so close to not being here. My blood count was just 3. That quick blood result saved my life. If not, if it had gone all the way to Bedford, I dread to think what would’ve happened.

“I was admitted straight away and had three blood transfusions then was transferred to Barts in London and stayed there for six months.”

She had intensive chemtherapy and took part in a clinical trial of a new drug but now three years on Mrs Tomlins, of Rayleigh Downs Road, Rayleigh, is still in remission and having regular checkups.

Her husband John, 73, said: “We fully support the Echo campaign. The blood travelled from Canvey to Southend Hospital, was processed and the results sent to the doctor and hospital all within two hours. What were the people thinking of when they came up with this crackpot idea to move it away? And who are they?

“We feel so sorry for the staff who may lose their jobs they did an amazing job for us.”

Sign our paper petition or go online to http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/43260 where more than 2,850 people have joined the campaign.

Comments (35)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:55am Sun 13 Jan 13

GentleGiant says...

They would have responded just as quick if the bloods had gone to Bedford - okay maybe an hour later, but hardly a long time to make a difference.

This is simply the testing centre discovering something wrong and alerting the doctor. Bedford would have done exactly the same.
They would have responded just as quick if the bloods had gone to Bedford - okay maybe an hour later, but hardly a long time to make a difference. This is simply the testing centre discovering something wrong and alerting the doctor. Bedford would have done exactly the same. GentleGiant
  • Score: 0

12:42pm Sun 13 Jan 13

A Dermot says...

...and in the future if a mad Doctor from Southend had been standing in front of the van taking the tests to Bedford as he is threatening to do then you could be waiting ages for the results.
...and in the future if a mad Doctor from Southend had been standing in front of the van taking the tests to Bedford as he is threatening to do then you could be waiting ages for the results. A Dermot
  • Score: 0

12:51pm Sun 13 Jan 13

Elephantman2 says...

GentleGiant wrote:
They would have responded just as quick if the bloods had gone to Bedford - okay maybe an hour later, but hardly a long time to make a difference.

This is simply the testing centre discovering something wrong and alerting the doctor. Bedford would have done exactly the same.
You are talking rubbish; I can say that as somone who travels the country and specifcially Bedford. Southend to Bedford you need to allow 2-3 hours by road on a normal working dayThe lab at Bedford was underporforming so was privatised; the politicians want the NHS privatised so they have allowed a corrupted bidding process to stand. Southend isn't some hick town in the middle of nowhere; it is a major conurbation and is more than able to justify retaining and paying the hospital services it needs. If the test had gone to Bedford this woman would be dead.
[quote][p][bold]GentleGiant[/bold] wrote: They would have responded just as quick if the bloods had gone to Bedford - okay maybe an hour later, but hardly a long time to make a difference. This is simply the testing centre discovering something wrong and alerting the doctor. Bedford would have done exactly the same.[/p][/quote]You are talking rubbish; I can say that as somone who travels the country and specifcially Bedford. Southend to Bedford you need to allow 2-3 hours by road on a normal working dayThe lab at Bedford was underporforming so was privatised; the politicians want the NHS privatised so they have allowed a corrupted bidding process to stand. Southend isn't some hick town in the middle of nowhere; it is a major conurbation and is more than able to justify retaining and paying the hospital services it needs. If the test had gone to Bedford this woman would be dead. Elephantman2
  • Score: 0

1:08pm Sun 13 Jan 13

alongtheway says...

Messrs Duddridge and Amess were elected to represent their constituents when all they have done is gone into hiding.MPs care only about one thing- themselves- yet somehow they can support Gay Marriages.
Messrs Duddridge and Amess were elected to represent their constituents when all they have done is gone into hiding.MPs care only about one thing- themselves- yet somehow they can support Gay Marriages. alongtheway
  • Score: 0

1:24pm Sun 13 Jan 13

GentleGiant says...

Elephantman2 wrote:
GentleGiant wrote:
They would have responded just as quick if the bloods had gone to Bedford - okay maybe an hour later, but hardly a long time to make a difference.

This is simply the testing centre discovering something wrong and alerting the doctor. Bedford would have done exactly the same.
You are talking rubbish; I can say that as somone who travels the country and specifcially Bedford. Southend to Bedford you need to allow 2-3 hours by road on a normal working dayThe lab at Bedford was underporforming so was privatised; the politicians want the NHS privatised so they have allowed a corrupted bidding process to stand. Southend isn't some hick town in the middle of nowhere; it is a major conurbation and is more than able to justify retaining and paying the hospital services it needs. If the test had gone to Bedford this woman would be dead.
Sorry, you are talking rubbish - she would not be dead - why do people believe the propaganda that they are fed?
[quote][p][bold]Elephantman2[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GentleGiant[/bold] wrote: They would have responded just as quick if the bloods had gone to Bedford - okay maybe an hour later, but hardly a long time to make a difference. This is simply the testing centre discovering something wrong and alerting the doctor. Bedford would have done exactly the same.[/p][/quote]You are talking rubbish; I can say that as somone who travels the country and specifcially Bedford. Southend to Bedford you need to allow 2-3 hours by road on a normal working dayThe lab at Bedford was underporforming so was privatised; the politicians want the NHS privatised so they have allowed a corrupted bidding process to stand. Southend isn't some hick town in the middle of nowhere; it is a major conurbation and is more than able to justify retaining and paying the hospital services it needs. If the test had gone to Bedford this woman would be dead.[/p][/quote]Sorry, you are talking rubbish - she would not be dead - why do people believe the propaganda that they are fed? GentleGiant
  • Score: 0

1:53pm Sun 13 Jan 13

Shoebury_Cyclist says...

alongtheway wrote:
Messrs Duddridge and Amess were elected to represent their constituents when all they have done is gone into hiding.MPs care only about one thing- themselves- yet somehow they can support Gay Marriages.
Duddridge said:

“Blood testing has been transferred to another location in Wales before, and it was done so with relatively few problems.

“I understand it is worrying to hear about a change like this, but that does not always mean a worse service.”


So basically the useless sack of sh*t is toeing his party line of privatising the NHS at any cost and doesn't give a **** about his constituents.
[quote][p][bold]alongtheway[/bold] wrote: Messrs Duddridge and Amess were elected to represent their constituents when all they have done is gone into hiding.MPs care only about one thing- themselves- yet somehow they can support Gay Marriages.[/p][/quote]Duddridge said: “Blood testing has been transferred to another location in Wales before, and it was done so with relatively few problems. “I understand it is worrying to hear about a change like this, but that does not always mean a worse service.” So basically the useless sack of sh*t is toeing his party line of privatising the NHS at any cost and doesn't give a **** about his constituents. Shoebury_Cyclist
  • Score: 0

2:01pm Sun 13 Jan 13

Point-of-view says...

GentleGiant wrote:
They would have responded just as quick if the bloods had gone to Bedford - okay maybe an hour later, but hardly a long time to make a difference.

This is simply the testing centre discovering something wrong and alerting the doctor. Bedford would have done exactly the same.
The delay in sending the sample to Bedford instead of analysis at Southend would have been at least 6-7 hours (and I'm being kind to Bedford), The transportation of the samples to Bedford.. after a stop-off to be centrifuged, then processing the sample (finding the sample among the 100's or more that will go there each day, inputting info into the computer system, putting the sample on the analyser), waiting for the results..which can take an hour or so, then Bedford contacting Southend Pathology to tell them the result (because Bedford don't hold all Southend patients details), then Southend attempting to contact the patient or her GP.
Analysis at Southend hospital: sample taken in clinic, sent upstairs to the Lab, centrifuged, analysed, results ready to phone to GP/Patient....1.5 hours (ish!)
I take it Gentle Giant that you have "insider info"???
And yes, a delay like that CAN and WILL put patients lives at risk.
[quote][p][bold]GentleGiant[/bold] wrote: They would have responded just as quick if the bloods had gone to Bedford - okay maybe an hour later, but hardly a long time to make a difference. This is simply the testing centre discovering something wrong and alerting the doctor. Bedford would have done exactly the same.[/p][/quote]The delay in sending the sample to Bedford instead of analysis at Southend would have been at least 6-7 hours (and I'm being kind to Bedford), The transportation of the samples to Bedford.. after a stop-off to be centrifuged, then processing the sample (finding the sample among the 100's or more that will go there each day, inputting info into the computer system, putting the sample on the analyser), waiting for the results..which can take an hour or so, then Bedford contacting Southend Pathology to tell them the result (because Bedford don't hold all Southend patients details), then Southend attempting to contact the patient or her GP. Analysis at Southend hospital: sample taken in clinic, sent upstairs to the Lab, centrifuged, analysed, results ready to phone to GP/Patient....1.5 hours (ish!) I take it Gentle Giant that you have "insider info"??? And yes, a delay like that CAN and WILL put patients lives at risk. Point-of-view
  • Score: 0

3:30pm Sun 13 Jan 13

Shoebury_Cyclist says...

List of MPs set to benefit financially from NHS privatisation:

http://www.dailysham
e.co.uk/2012/09/sati
re/nhs-disbanded-and
-sold-off-your-mps-p
rofit-financially/
List of MPs set to benefit financially from NHS privatisation: http://www.dailysham e.co.uk/2012/09/sati re/nhs-disbanded-and -sold-off-your-mps-p rofit-financially/ Shoebury_Cyclist
  • Score: 0

3:38pm Sun 13 Jan 13

abd123 says...

The woman with the low blood count - how long had it been low? Nobody knows and she had been unwell for a long time. It is not possible to say if the difference between Bedford and Southend testing would put lives at risk. All you can say is there will be a time difference. You cannot extrapolate that to lives at risk.
The woman with the low blood count - how long had it been low? Nobody knows and she had been unwell for a long time. It is not possible to say if the difference between Bedford and Southend testing would put lives at risk. All you can say is there will be a time difference. You cannot extrapolate that to lives at risk. abd123
  • Score: 0

5:08pm Sun 13 Jan 13

Elephantman2 says...

I don't understand why anyone who lives locally would support this move or even argue the case for it unless they have interests in it happening. This will cause delays and delays can cost somone their life, you don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure that out. It's common sense; but the challenge with commeon sense is it isn't that common.
I don't understand why anyone who lives locally would support this move or even argue the case for it unless they have interests in it happening. This will cause delays and delays can cost somone their life, you don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure that out. It's common sense; but the challenge with commeon sense is it isn't that common. Elephantman2
  • Score: 0

5:22pm Sun 13 Jan 13

GentleGiant says...

Point-of-view wrote:
GentleGiant wrote:
They would have responded just as quick if the bloods had gone to Bedford - okay maybe an hour later, but hardly a long time to make a difference.

This is simply the testing centre discovering something wrong and alerting the doctor. Bedford would have done exactly the same.
The delay in sending the sample to Bedford instead of analysis at Southend would have been at least 6-7 hours (and I'm being kind to Bedford), The transportation of the samples to Bedford.. after a stop-off to be centrifuged, then processing the sample (finding the sample among the 100's or more that will go there each day, inputting info into the computer system, putting the sample on the analyser), waiting for the results..which can take an hour or so, then Bedford contacting Southend Pathology to tell them the result (because Bedford don't hold all Southend patients details), then Southend attempting to contact the patient or her GP.
Analysis at Southend hospital: sample taken in clinic, sent upstairs to the Lab, centrifuged, analysed, results ready to phone to GP/Patient....1.5 hours (ish!)
I take it Gentle Giant that you have "insider info"???
And yes, a delay like that CAN and WILL put patients lives at risk.
6 or 7 hours lol

It does not take that long to drive to Bedford, where I am sure more modern testing routines would be available. I would also say that Bedford, once up and running, would process the bloods as fast if not faster than anything locally, apart from travel time to the center. Therefore adding an hour or so to any processing.

The simple fact is hospital services have to be regionalised - our country cannot afford localised services of everything and nor can many others - whether that be burns units, child specialists, head specialists etc. Blood is no different.

Remember urgent bloods will still be done locally - if this was deemed to be urgent, it would still have been tested locally - so in that case would have made no difference if the majority of bloods were tested in Bedford.

I would suggest that a very high percentage of blood tests do not need to be back instantly.
[quote][p][bold]Point-of-view[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GentleGiant[/bold] wrote: They would have responded just as quick if the bloods had gone to Bedford - okay maybe an hour later, but hardly a long time to make a difference. This is simply the testing centre discovering something wrong and alerting the doctor. Bedford would have done exactly the same.[/p][/quote]The delay in sending the sample to Bedford instead of analysis at Southend would have been at least 6-7 hours (and I'm being kind to Bedford), The transportation of the samples to Bedford.. after a stop-off to be centrifuged, then processing the sample (finding the sample among the 100's or more that will go there each day, inputting info into the computer system, putting the sample on the analyser), waiting for the results..which can take an hour or so, then Bedford contacting Southend Pathology to tell them the result (because Bedford don't hold all Southend patients details), then Southend attempting to contact the patient or her GP. Analysis at Southend hospital: sample taken in clinic, sent upstairs to the Lab, centrifuged, analysed, results ready to phone to GP/Patient....1.5 hours (ish!) I take it Gentle Giant that you have "insider info"??? And yes, a delay like that CAN and WILL put patients lives at risk.[/p][/quote]6 or 7 hours lol It does not take that long to drive to Bedford, where I am sure more modern testing routines would be available. I would also say that Bedford, once up and running, would process the bloods as fast if not faster than anything locally, apart from travel time to the center. Therefore adding an hour or so to any processing. The simple fact is hospital services have to be regionalised - our country cannot afford localised services of everything and nor can many others - whether that be burns units, child specialists, head specialists etc. Blood is no different. Remember urgent bloods will still be done locally - if this was deemed to be urgent, it would still have been tested locally - so in that case would have made no difference if the majority of bloods were tested in Bedford. I would suggest that a very high percentage of blood tests do not need to be back instantly. GentleGiant
  • Score: 0

5:49pm Sun 13 Jan 13

Shoebury_Cyclist says...

GentleGiant wrote:
Point-of-view wrote:
GentleGiant wrote:
They would have responded just as quick if the bloods had gone to Bedford - okay maybe an hour later, but hardly a long time to make a difference.

This is simply the testing centre discovering something wrong and alerting the doctor. Bedford would have done exactly the same.
The delay in sending the sample to Bedford instead of analysis at Southend would have been at least 6-7 hours (and I'm being kind to Bedford), The transportation of the samples to Bedford.. after a stop-off to be centrifuged, then processing the sample (finding the sample among the 100's or more that will go there each day, inputting info into the computer system, putting the sample on the analyser), waiting for the results..which can take an hour or so, then Bedford contacting Southend Pathology to tell them the result (because Bedford don't hold all Southend patients details), then Southend attempting to contact the patient or her GP.
Analysis at Southend hospital: sample taken in clinic, sent upstairs to the Lab, centrifuged, analysed, results ready to phone to GP/Patient....1.5 hours (ish!)
I take it Gentle Giant that you have "insider info"???
And yes, a delay like that CAN and WILL put patients lives at risk.
6 or 7 hours lol

It does not take that long to drive to Bedford, where I am sure more modern testing routines would be available. I would also say that Bedford, once up and running, would process the bloods as fast if not faster than anything locally, apart from travel time to the center. Therefore adding an hour or so to any processing.

The simple fact is hospital services have to be regionalised - our country cannot afford localised services of everything and nor can many others - whether that be burns units, child specialists, head specialists etc. Blood is no different.

Remember urgent bloods will still be done locally - if this was deemed to be urgent, it would still have been tested locally - so in that case would have made no difference if the majority of bloods were tested in Bedford.

I would suggest that a very high percentage of blood tests do not need to be back instantly.
It takes minutes to walk a blood sample from the patient to the path lab in Southend hospital.

How is exchanging that for an 80 odd mile journey by road through the the worst congestion in the UK an improvement?


One day it could be your relative waiting for a blood test result to identify meningitis, where minutes matter. Let's see if you 'lol' about it then.
[quote][p][bold]GentleGiant[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Point-of-view[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GentleGiant[/bold] wrote: They would have responded just as quick if the bloods had gone to Bedford - okay maybe an hour later, but hardly a long time to make a difference. This is simply the testing centre discovering something wrong and alerting the doctor. Bedford would have done exactly the same.[/p][/quote]The delay in sending the sample to Bedford instead of analysis at Southend would have been at least 6-7 hours (and I'm being kind to Bedford), The transportation of the samples to Bedford.. after a stop-off to be centrifuged, then processing the sample (finding the sample among the 100's or more that will go there each day, inputting info into the computer system, putting the sample on the analyser), waiting for the results..which can take an hour or so, then Bedford contacting Southend Pathology to tell them the result (because Bedford don't hold all Southend patients details), then Southend attempting to contact the patient or her GP. Analysis at Southend hospital: sample taken in clinic, sent upstairs to the Lab, centrifuged, analysed, results ready to phone to GP/Patient....1.5 hours (ish!) I take it Gentle Giant that you have "insider info"??? And yes, a delay like that CAN and WILL put patients lives at risk.[/p][/quote]6 or 7 hours lol It does not take that long to drive to Bedford, where I am sure more modern testing routines would be available. I would also say that Bedford, once up and running, would process the bloods as fast if not faster than anything locally, apart from travel time to the center. Therefore adding an hour or so to any processing. The simple fact is hospital services have to be regionalised - our country cannot afford localised services of everything and nor can many others - whether that be burns units, child specialists, head specialists etc. Blood is no different. Remember urgent bloods will still be done locally - if this was deemed to be urgent, it would still have been tested locally - so in that case would have made no difference if the majority of bloods were tested in Bedford. I would suggest that a very high percentage of blood tests do not need to be back instantly.[/p][/quote]It takes minutes to walk a blood sample from the patient to the path lab in Southend hospital. How is exchanging that for an 80 odd mile journey by road through the the worst congestion in the UK an improvement? One day it could be your relative waiting for a blood test result to identify meningitis, where minutes matter. Let's see if you 'lol' about it then. Shoebury_Cyclist
  • Score: 0

5:55pm Sun 13 Jan 13

GentleGiant says...

If it was urgent then it will still be carried out locally. FACT!

Not sure what people are worrying about!

People need to get hold of the facts, rather than reading headlines.

Still, why let the truth get in the way of a good story.
If it was urgent then it will still be carried out locally. FACT! Not sure what people are worrying about! People need to get hold of the facts, rather than reading headlines. Still, why let the truth get in the way of a good story. GentleGiant
  • Score: 0

6:45pm Sun 13 Jan 13

jayman says...

it does not matter too much really. the Tory self serving position is clear. They hate anything which they may be judged harshly for at election time, come to think of it, so do labour. Basically, what im saying is. the NHS is doomed to privatisation along with other much loved public services.

If you want to save the NHS then take to the streets in protest. start an e-petition, write (not that it will do much good with our deaf, distracted and hopelessly self interested MP's) to your local MP. just don't rely on the echo to speak for you. And don't think that common sense will prevail. It rarely does when a public asset is being fattened up to sell to the highest and most unethical bidder. By the only political part designed to do so 'the Tory party'
it does not matter too much really. the Tory self serving position is clear. They hate anything which they may be judged harshly for at election time, come to think of it, so do labour. Basically, what im saying is. the NHS is doomed to privatisation along with other much loved public services. If you want to save the NHS then take to the streets in protest. start an e-petition, write (not that it will do much good with our deaf, distracted and hopelessly self interested MP's) to your local MP. just don't rely on the echo to speak for you. And don't think that common sense will prevail. It rarely does when a public asset is being fattened up to sell to the highest and most unethical bidder. By the only political part designed to do so 'the Tory party' jayman
  • Score: 0

6:55pm Sun 13 Jan 13

Elephantman2 says...

GentleGiant wrote:
If it was urgent then it will still be carried out locally. FACT!

Not sure what people are worrying about!

People need to get hold of the facts, rather than reading headlines.

Still, why let the truth get in the way of a good story.
If you have the facts you are deliberately misleading people with your posts. I have the facts and it is frigtening what they are attempting to get away with. As posted earlier anyone who supports this move must by definition either not have the facts or have an interest in supporting the move. The facts are damning and speak for themselves; but of course we are unlikely to get them from our Local MP's or the NHS Managment. The costs to the NHS will increase because of this change, but we won't be told that because some people will be making money from it.

Southend Path labs are highly regarded and highly rated; unlike Bedford which was privatised because it was failing so badly. The owners may have changed but the people working their haven't.

So define an urgent blood test smart Alec, you can't in many cases, you don't know how urgent it was until you have the result. The urgent bit is after they have got the result so that they can begin urgent treatment.
[quote][p][bold]GentleGiant[/bold] wrote: If it was urgent then it will still be carried out locally. FACT! Not sure what people are worrying about! People need to get hold of the facts, rather than reading headlines. Still, why let the truth get in the way of a good story.[/p][/quote]If you have the facts you are deliberately misleading people with your posts. I have the facts and it is frigtening what they are attempting to get away with. As posted earlier anyone who supports this move must by definition either not have the facts or have an interest in supporting the move. The facts are damning and speak for themselves; but of course we are unlikely to get them from our Local MP's or the NHS Managment. The costs to the NHS will increase because of this change, but we won't be told that because some people will be making money from it. Southend Path labs are highly regarded and highly rated; unlike Bedford which was privatised because it was failing so badly. The owners may have changed but the people working their haven't. So define an urgent blood test smart Alec, you can't in many cases, you don't know how urgent it was until you have the result. The urgent bit is after they have got the result so that they can begin urgent treatment. Elephantman2
  • Score: 0

8:51pm Sun 13 Jan 13

GentleGiant says...

Sadly you along with many others are simply blinded by the propaganda that you are fed.

If the GP or hospital does not consider it to be urgent, then it is not - simples.

Let us face facts - if your GP sends you for a blood test, you will not be seen straight away - might be a few days time - are you telling me that given the fact that the blood test has already been delayed another few hours is going to make a difference? Of course it is not!

If your GP decides you urgently need a blood test, then the result may also urgently be needed.

Simple, isn't it!

Of course I do not expect everyone to understand simple facts.
Sadly you along with many others are simply blinded by the propaganda that you are fed. If the GP or hospital does not consider it to be urgent, then it is not - simples. Let us face facts - if your GP sends you for a blood test, you will not be seen straight away - might be a few days time - are you telling me that given the fact that the blood test has already been delayed another few hours is going to make a difference? Of course it is not! If your GP decides you urgently need a blood test, then the result may also urgently be needed. Simple, isn't it! Of course I do not expect everyone to understand simple facts. GentleGiant
  • Score: 0

8:55pm Sun 13 Jan 13

whataday says...

GentleGiant wrote:
They would have responded just as quick if the bloods had gone to Bedford - okay maybe an hour later, but hardly a long time to make a difference.

This is simply the testing centre discovering something wrong and alerting the doctor. Bedford would have done exactly the same.
By the time blood had got to the lab in Bedford it may have been too late to get hold of GP on same day as test results could have been analysed after GP surgery closed.
You also have to remember although there may be some lab technicians left at Southend they could become de-skilled as they wouldn't be interpreting so many results.
This is all privatisation by the back door.
[quote][p][bold]GentleGiant[/bold] wrote: They would have responded just as quick if the bloods had gone to Bedford - okay maybe an hour later, but hardly a long time to make a difference. This is simply the testing centre discovering something wrong and alerting the doctor. Bedford would have done exactly the same.[/p][/quote]By the time blood had got to the lab in Bedford it may have been too late to get hold of GP on same day as test results could have been analysed after GP surgery closed. You also have to remember although there may be some lab technicians left at Southend they could become de-skilled as they wouldn't be interpreting so many results. This is all privatisation by the back door. whataday
  • Score: 0

9:16pm Sun 13 Jan 13

abd123 says...

I support this move because it will mean more money for another NHS service. The NHS budget is rising not being cut as some people think.
I support this move because it will mean more money for another NHS service. The NHS budget is rising not being cut as some people think. abd123
  • Score: 0

9:27pm Sun 13 Jan 13

asbo. just the truth says...

abd123 wrote:
I support this move because it will mean more money for another NHS service. The NHS budget is rising not being cut as some people think.
that'll please our resident panel of hate anything tory on principle posters
[quote][p][bold]abd123[/bold] wrote: I support this move because it will mean more money for another NHS service. The NHS budget is rising not being cut as some people think.[/p][/quote]that'll please our resident panel of hate anything tory on principle posters asbo. just the truth
  • Score: 0

10:29pm Sun 13 Jan 13

jayman says...

abd123 wrote:
I support this move because it will mean more money for another NHS service. The NHS budget is rising not being cut as some people think.
I don't hate the Tories on principle.

I despise them due to their methods, their ideology and their overwhelming gravitational pull to the self serving, corrupt, god obsessed, deceitful swine's that form its membership.

If you are of a right wing Persuasion and you value the NHS, the armed forces, the emergency services and the services that stop this country generally ripping itself apart due to social unrest, I suggest you have a hard look in the mirror and stop hating everything that the Tory party want you to hate and learn the past (our awful history). consider the reality of what the Tory party want to send us poor plebs back to.

Reality must be a million miles away from the bullingdon club or the secret societies that the lower ranks of the conservatives belong to..
[quote][p][bold]abd123[/bold] wrote: I support this move because it will mean more money for another NHS service. The NHS budget is rising not being cut as some people think.[/p][/quote]I don't hate the Tories on principle. I despise them due to their methods, their ideology and their overwhelming gravitational pull to the self serving, corrupt, god obsessed, deceitful swine's that form its membership. If you are of a right wing Persuasion and you value the NHS, the armed forces, the emergency services and the services that stop this country generally ripping itself apart due to social unrest, I suggest you have a hard look in the mirror and stop hating everything that the Tory party want you to hate and learn the past (our awful history). consider the reality of what the Tory party want to send us poor plebs back to. Reality must be a million miles away from the bullingdon club or the secret societies that the lower ranks of the conservatives belong to.. jayman
  • Score: 0

10:51pm Sun 13 Jan 13

jayman says...

saying "I'm a member of the Tory party" in public or at a social occasion must feel like this.

"aunt sally... you cant have the cancer treatment you need because the lot i belong to will make you pay £17,500 for it. I know you are on basic income so that's bad luck for you. It's just business you understand"

"brother Frank, your unemployed and the lot I choose to vote for think that you are a scrounger, despite what i know. So I've got some heroin and a stained tracksuit here to start you on your journey in fitting in with the model of conservative prejudice"

"mum! I know you raised me as a single mum, but as you where an 80's single mum you have fallen under 1980's single mum political scapegoat and hate-mongering philosophy. so you owe the government £67.000 for backdated benefits that you where not entitled to for feeding and clothing me"
saying "I'm a member of the Tory party" in public or at a social occasion must feel like this. "aunt sally... you cant have the cancer treatment you need because the lot i belong to will make you pay £17,500 for it. I know you are on basic income so that's bad luck for you. It's just business you understand" "brother Frank, your unemployed and the lot I choose to vote for think that you are a scrounger, despite what i know. So I've got some heroin and a stained tracksuit here to start you on your journey in fitting in with the model of conservative prejudice" "mum! I know you raised me as a single mum, but as you where an 80's single mum you have fallen under 1980's single mum political scapegoat and hate-mongering philosophy. so you owe the government £67.000 for backdated benefits that you where not entitled to for feeding and clothing me" jayman
  • Score: 0

11:31pm Sun 13 Jan 13

asbo. just the truth says...

only in your warped mind. facts are clearly immaterial for you but as stated, before you mouth foaming incident commenced, the nhs budget is rising.
only in your warped mind. facts are clearly immaterial for you but as stated, before you mouth foaming incident commenced, the nhs budget is rising. asbo. just the truth
  • Score: 0

11:48pm Sun 13 Jan 13

jayman says...

asbo. just the truth wrote:
only in your warped mind. facts are clearly immaterial for you but as stated, before you mouth foaming incident commenced, the nhs budget is rising.
no its not. the NHS funding increase is to fund structural reforms *'GP consortia' we where told we would not get.

try again

*prelude to privatisation. because it will all go wrong on a orchestrated and grand Tory gesture fashion. to which point, circle healthcare and others will buy it all up at a knocked down price. that's why the Tories want a fat asset wealth through the NHS.

prior to selling any 'business' the business itself needs to be streamlined, It needs to be asset rich to make it highly attractive to Inverters (all the new local health centres being built) and it Needs a chaos in which its service users/customers can be lead to believe it is being rescued from. and it needs a cast iron guarantee from government that private profit potential will not be restricted by central government by way of legislation...

~ta da~
[quote][p][bold]asbo. just the truth[/bold] wrote: only in your warped mind. facts are clearly immaterial for you but as stated, before you mouth foaming incident commenced, the nhs budget is rising.[/p][/quote]no its not. the NHS funding increase is to fund structural reforms *'GP consortia' we where told we would not get. try again *prelude to privatisation. because it will all go wrong on a orchestrated and grand Tory gesture fashion. to which point, circle healthcare and others will buy it all up at a knocked down price. that's why the Tories want a fat asset wealth through the NHS. prior to selling any 'business' the business itself needs to be streamlined, It needs to be asset rich to make it highly attractive to Inverters (all the new local health centres being built) and it Needs a chaos in which its service users/customers can be lead to believe it is being rescued from. and it needs a cast iron guarantee from government that private profit potential will not be restricted by central government by way of legislation... ~ta da~ jayman
  • Score: 0

11:50pm Sun 13 Jan 13

jayman says...

typo 'inverters' should have been investors'
typo 'inverters' should have been investors' jayman
  • Score: 0

8:52am Mon 14 Jan 13

GentleGiant says...

abd123 wrote:
I support this move because it will mean more money for another NHS service. The NHS budget is rising not being cut as some people think.
Indeed - but why should people worry about facts?

All they hear is what they are told either in the pub or on the news.

It is sad that so many have a blinkered view on life and are so gullible.

There are so many wasted resources in the NHS, Schools, public services etc., and these need to be cut out.

How many pages of paper for example does the average school waste daily in sending out letters? This could be so easily done via email or SMS. Multiply that one school across the country and it is a lot of paper.
[quote][p][bold]abd123[/bold] wrote: I support this move because it will mean more money for another NHS service. The NHS budget is rising not being cut as some people think.[/p][/quote]Indeed - but why should people worry about facts? All they hear is what they are told either in the pub or on the news. It is sad that so many have a blinkered view on life and are so gullible. There are so many wasted resources in the NHS, Schools, public services etc., and these need to be cut out. How many pages of paper for example does the average school waste daily in sending out letters? This could be so easily done via email or SMS. Multiply that one school across the country and it is a lot of paper. GentleGiant
  • Score: 0

9:03am Mon 14 Jan 13

Shoebury_Cyclist says...

abd123 wrote:
I support this move because it will mean more money for another NHS service. The NHS budget is rising not being cut as some people think.
Who will be charged to pay this company for their service? The NHS. Try again.
[quote][p][bold]abd123[/bold] wrote: I support this move because it will mean more money for another NHS service. The NHS budget is rising not being cut as some people think.[/p][/quote]Who will be charged to pay this company for their service? The NHS. Try again. Shoebury_Cyclist
  • Score: 0

9:05am Mon 14 Jan 13

Shoebury_Cyclist says...

asbo. just the truth wrote:
abd123 wrote:
I support this move because it will mean more money for another NHS service. The NHS budget is rising not being cut as some people think.
that'll please our resident panel of hate anything tory on principle posters
Just when you thought Jimmy Savile's reputation couldn't get any worse it was revealed he counted Thatcher as a friend.
[quote][p][bold]asbo. just the truth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]abd123[/bold] wrote: I support this move because it will mean more money for another NHS service. The NHS budget is rising not being cut as some people think.[/p][/quote]that'll please our resident panel of hate anything tory on principle posters[/p][/quote]Just when you thought Jimmy Savile's reputation couldn't get any worse it was revealed he counted Thatcher as a friend. Shoebury_Cyclist
  • Score: 0

9:26am Mon 14 Jan 13

Elephantman2 says...

Again I will state taht this change will cost us all more due to the bidding process that was corrupted and failed to compare apples to apples. Southend 's bid included the pathology and collection of the samples and was more expensive than Bedford's bid that did not include the collection of the samples. Bedford's bid plus the additional costs of collectinmg the samples is more expensive but nobody wants to talk about that becasue the NHS is being privatised.

Stolen from wiki:

The Big Lie (German: Große Lüge) is a propaganda technique. The expression was coined by Adolf Hitler, when he dictated his 1925 book Mein Kampf, about the use of a lie so "colossal" that no one would believe that someone "could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously."

The current coalition government are employing this technique on anything to do with the welfare state and they are getting away with it!
Again I will state taht this change will cost us all more due to the bidding process that was corrupted and failed to compare apples to apples. Southend 's bid included the pathology and collection of the samples and was more expensive than Bedford's bid that did not include the collection of the samples. Bedford's bid plus the additional costs of collectinmg the samples is more expensive but nobody wants to talk about that becasue the NHS is being privatised. Stolen from wiki: The Big Lie (German: Große Lüge) is a propaganda technique. The expression was coined by Adolf Hitler, when he dictated his 1925 book Mein Kampf, about the use of a lie so "colossal" that no one would believe that someone "could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously." The current coalition government are employing this technique on anything to do with the welfare state and they are getting away with it! Elephantman2
  • Score: 0

10:36am Mon 14 Jan 13

jayman says...

why is it that DC keeps saying "we have to make tough decisions" but yet looks like a man that been given an excuse to do what he wanted to do in the first place.
why is it that DC keeps saying "we have to make tough decisions" but yet looks like a man that been given an excuse to do what he wanted to do in the first place. jayman
  • Score: 0

11:21am Mon 14 Jan 13

Elephantman2 says...

jayman wrote:
why is it that DC keeps saying "we have to make tough decisions" but yet looks like a man that been given an excuse to do what he wanted to do in the first place.
Because the other big lie is that "we don't want to be like Greece and Spain".

This is the biggest lie of all as it has been used to justify the carange that this coalition government has caused to the economy. The UK is nothing like Greece and Spain. 30 years ago they were still peasant economies were the donkey and cart were a popular forms of transport. The UK was the cradle of the industrial revolution which started in the 1820's nearly 200 years ago; since then the UK has maintained is position in the top five wealthiest nations in the world.

This isn't quite as it seems we are not one of the top five wealthiest populations because the wealth is controlled by an elite few (Cameron/Osborne come to mind). To maintain their wealth this government has saddled the burden of the UL debt caused by the world wide finacial crisis on the general population rather than spreading the burden to those that can best pay.

Tax Evasion is losing this country £70bn per year; fraudulent benifit payments cost £10bn per year, Yet this mob target the small number not the big number; the reason is that it is easy to find scapegoats amongst the poor and the rich are their mates so they are not going to target them are they?

DC isn't making tough decisons, they have consistently misinformed and lied to the British public and we are sat there letting them do what they want as we've believed their lies.
[quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: why is it that DC keeps saying "we have to make tough decisions" but yet looks like a man that been given an excuse to do what he wanted to do in the first place.[/p][/quote]Because the other big lie is that "we don't want to be like Greece and Spain". This is the biggest lie of all as it has been used to justify the carange that this coalition government has caused to the economy. The UK is nothing like Greece and Spain. 30 years ago they were still peasant economies were the donkey and cart were a popular forms of transport. The UK was the cradle of the industrial revolution which started in the 1820's nearly 200 years ago; since then the UK has maintained is position in the top five wealthiest nations in the world. This isn't quite as it seems we are not one of the top five wealthiest populations because the wealth is controlled by an elite few (Cameron/Osborne come to mind). To maintain their wealth this government has saddled the burden of the UL debt caused by the world wide finacial crisis on the general population rather than spreading the burden to those that can best pay. Tax Evasion is losing this country £70bn per year; fraudulent benifit payments cost £10bn per year, Yet this mob target the small number not the big number; the reason is that it is easy to find scapegoats amongst the poor and the rich are their mates so they are not going to target them are they? DC isn't making tough decisons, they have consistently misinformed and lied to the British public and we are sat there letting them do what they want as we've believed their lies. Elephantman2
  • Score: 0

12:53pm Mon 14 Jan 13

Shoebury_Cyclist says...

Elephantman2 wrote:
jayman wrote:
why is it that DC keeps saying "we have to make tough decisions" but yet looks like a man that been given an excuse to do what he wanted to do in the first place.
Because the other big lie is that "we don't want to be like Greece and Spain".

This is the biggest lie of all as it has been used to justify the carange that this coalition government has caused to the economy. The UK is nothing like Greece and Spain. 30 years ago they were still peasant economies were the donkey and cart were a popular forms of transport. The UK was the cradle of the industrial revolution which started in the 1820's nearly 200 years ago; since then the UK has maintained is position in the top five wealthiest nations in the world.

This isn't quite as it seems we are not one of the top five wealthiest populations because the wealth is controlled by an elite few (Cameron/Osborne come to mind). To maintain their wealth this government has saddled the burden of the UL debt caused by the world wide finacial crisis on the general population rather than spreading the burden to those that can best pay.

Tax Evasion is losing this country £70bn per year; fraudulent benifit payments cost £10bn per year, Yet this mob target the small number not the big number; the reason is that it is easy to find scapegoats amongst the poor and the rich are their mates so they are not going to target them are they?

DC isn't making tough decisons, they have consistently misinformed and lied to the British public and we are sat there letting them do what they want as we've believed their lies.
The actual figure for annual benefit fraud is approx. £1.5 billion, not £10 billion.

Source:

http://blogs.channel
4.com/factcheck/how-
much-does-benefit-fr
aud-cost/3423
[quote][p][bold]Elephantman2[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: why is it that DC keeps saying "we have to make tough decisions" but yet looks like a man that been given an excuse to do what he wanted to do in the first place.[/p][/quote]Because the other big lie is that "we don't want to be like Greece and Spain". This is the biggest lie of all as it has been used to justify the carange that this coalition government has caused to the economy. The UK is nothing like Greece and Spain. 30 years ago they were still peasant economies were the donkey and cart were a popular forms of transport. The UK was the cradle of the industrial revolution which started in the 1820's nearly 200 years ago; since then the UK has maintained is position in the top five wealthiest nations in the world. This isn't quite as it seems we are not one of the top five wealthiest populations because the wealth is controlled by an elite few (Cameron/Osborne come to mind). To maintain their wealth this government has saddled the burden of the UL debt caused by the world wide finacial crisis on the general population rather than spreading the burden to those that can best pay. Tax Evasion is losing this country £70bn per year; fraudulent benifit payments cost £10bn per year, Yet this mob target the small number not the big number; the reason is that it is easy to find scapegoats amongst the poor and the rich are their mates so they are not going to target them are they? DC isn't making tough decisons, they have consistently misinformed and lied to the British public and we are sat there letting them do what they want as we've believed their lies.[/p][/quote]The actual figure for annual benefit fraud is approx. £1.5 billion, not £10 billion. Source: http://blogs.channel 4.com/factcheck/how- much-does-benefit-fr aud-cost/3423 Shoebury_Cyclist
  • Score: 0

2:09pm Mon 14 Jan 13

jayman says...

GentleGiant wrote:
abd123 wrote:
I support this move because it will mean more money for another NHS service. The NHS budget is rising not being cut as some people think.
Indeed - but why should people worry about facts?

All they hear is what they are told either in the pub or on the news.

It is sad that so many have a blinkered view on life and are so gullible.

There are so many wasted resources in the NHS, Schools, public services etc., and these need to be cut out.

How many pages of paper for example does the average school waste daily in sending out letters? This could be so easily done via email or SMS. Multiply that one school across the country and it is a lot of paper.
you make two wrong assumptions.

1) that I go to the pub
2) that i have made an incorrect analysis on the state of affairs within the NHS and the Tory blueprint to privatise it along with everything else.
3) that i have come to this conclusion based on news headlines and not on what DC and his fellow Oxbridge educated millionaire fellows have directly said, wrote and legislated.

If privatising the NHS had substance that could be looked at, it would look remarkably like this. in fact, if I was advising anyone how to do it, then government behaviour to date would be bang on my advise.
[quote][p][bold]GentleGiant[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]abd123[/bold] wrote: I support this move because it will mean more money for another NHS service. The NHS budget is rising not being cut as some people think.[/p][/quote]Indeed - but why should people worry about facts? All they hear is what they are told either in the pub or on the news. It is sad that so many have a blinkered view on life and are so gullible. There are so many wasted resources in the NHS, Schools, public services etc., and these need to be cut out. How many pages of paper for example does the average school waste daily in sending out letters? This could be so easily done via email or SMS. Multiply that one school across the country and it is a lot of paper.[/p][/quote]you make two wrong assumptions. 1) that I go to the pub 2) that i have made an incorrect analysis on the state of affairs within the NHS and the Tory blueprint to privatise it along with everything else. 3) that i have come to this conclusion based on news headlines and not on what DC and his fellow Oxbridge educated millionaire fellows have directly said, wrote and legislated. If privatising the NHS had substance that could be looked at, it would look remarkably like this. in fact, if I was advising anyone how to do it, then government behaviour to date would be bang on my advise. jayman
  • Score: 0

2:11pm Mon 14 Jan 13

jayman says...

sorry that should have been 'too many' not 'two'
sorry that should have been 'too many' not 'two' jayman
  • Score: 0

7:41pm Tue 15 Jan 13

Saisho says...

GentleGiant wrote:
If it was urgent then it will still be carried out locally. FACT!

Not sure what people are worrying about!

People need to get hold of the facts, rather than reading headlines.

Still, why let the truth get in the way of a good story.
As someone who knows.... this has NOT yet been negotiated FACT!
[quote][p][bold]GentleGiant[/bold] wrote: If it was urgent then it will still be carried out locally. FACT! Not sure what people are worrying about! People need to get hold of the facts, rather than reading headlines. Still, why let the truth get in the way of a good story.[/p][/quote]As someone who knows.... this has NOT yet been negotiated FACT! Saisho
  • Score: 0

7:48pm Tue 15 Jan 13

Saisho says...

GentleGiant wrote:
Point-of-view wrote:
GentleGiant wrote:
They would have responded just as quick if the bloods had gone to Bedford - okay maybe an hour later, but hardly a long time to make a difference.

This is simply the testing centre discovering something wrong and alerting the doctor. Bedford would have done exactly the same.
The delay in sending the sample to Bedford instead of analysis at Southend would have been at least 6-7 hours (and I'm being kind to Bedford), The transportation of the samples to Bedford.. after a stop-off to be centrifuged, then processing the sample (finding the sample among the 100's or more that will go there each day, inputting info into the computer system, putting the sample on the analyser), waiting for the results..which can take an hour or so, then Bedford contacting Southend Pathology to tell them the result (because Bedford don't hold all Southend patients details), then Southend attempting to contact the patient or her GP.
Analysis at Southend hospital: sample taken in clinic, sent upstairs to the Lab, centrifuged, analysed, results ready to phone to GP/Patient....1.5 hours (ish!)
I take it Gentle Giant that you have "insider info"???
And yes, a delay like that CAN and WILL put patients lives at risk.
6 or 7 hours lol

It does not take that long to drive to Bedford, where I am sure more modern testing routines would be available. I would also say that Bedford, once up and running, would process the bloods as fast if not faster than anything locally, apart from travel time to the center. Therefore adding an hour or so to any processing.

The simple fact is hospital services have to be regionalised - our country cannot afford localised services of everything and nor can many others - whether that be burns units, child specialists, head specialists etc. Blood is no different.

Remember urgent bloods will still be done locally - if this was deemed to be urgent, it would still have been tested locally - so in that case would have made no difference if the majority of bloods were tested in Bedford.

I would suggest that a very high percentage of blood tests do not need to be back instantly.
I suggest Gentle Giant, that you get clearer on your facts before you spout on how people believe propaganda.
Actually Basildon and Southend Pathology labs have new state of the art equipment. Bedford have yet to tender for new equipment let alone install it. FACT.
[quote][p][bold]GentleGiant[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Point-of-view[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GentleGiant[/bold] wrote: They would have responded just as quick if the bloods had gone to Bedford - okay maybe an hour later, but hardly a long time to make a difference. This is simply the testing centre discovering something wrong and alerting the doctor. Bedford would have done exactly the same.[/p][/quote]The delay in sending the sample to Bedford instead of analysis at Southend would have been at least 6-7 hours (and I'm being kind to Bedford), The transportation of the samples to Bedford.. after a stop-off to be centrifuged, then processing the sample (finding the sample among the 100's or more that will go there each day, inputting info into the computer system, putting the sample on the analyser), waiting for the results..which can take an hour or so, then Bedford contacting Southend Pathology to tell them the result (because Bedford don't hold all Southend patients details), then Southend attempting to contact the patient or her GP. Analysis at Southend hospital: sample taken in clinic, sent upstairs to the Lab, centrifuged, analysed, results ready to phone to GP/Patient....1.5 hours (ish!) I take it Gentle Giant that you have "insider info"??? And yes, a delay like that CAN and WILL put patients lives at risk.[/p][/quote]6 or 7 hours lol It does not take that long to drive to Bedford, where I am sure more modern testing routines would be available. I would also say that Bedford, once up and running, would process the bloods as fast if not faster than anything locally, apart from travel time to the center. Therefore adding an hour or so to any processing. The simple fact is hospital services have to be regionalised - our country cannot afford localised services of everything and nor can many others - whether that be burns units, child specialists, head specialists etc. Blood is no different. Remember urgent bloods will still be done locally - if this was deemed to be urgent, it would still have been tested locally - so in that case would have made no difference if the majority of bloods were tested in Bedford. I would suggest that a very high percentage of blood tests do not need to be back instantly.[/p][/quote]I suggest Gentle Giant, that you get clearer on your facts before you spout on how people believe propaganda. Actually Basildon and Southend Pathology labs have new state of the art equipment. Bedford have yet to tender for new equipment let alone install it. FACT. Saisho
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree