Change in Moorfields Policy on Contact Lens Solutions

[Barney]

I think there is a range of issues which require us in as effective a way as possible to scream, shout and generally stamp our collective feet to draw maximum attention, Slowly Slowly which I have advocated before just is not, in my humble opinion doing the job.
Mike Oliver

I'd agree. I hope I totally misunderstood the meaning but was disappointed to see a reprentative of this KC-Group recently saying on here: "We KC-ers already take up a lot of clinic time with our odd shaped eyes without adding in lots more tests." The problems of some people here suggest that more resources and research are needed and justifiable.

I think the case for contact lens solutions for those compelled to wear lenses due to eye disease is a strong one. There will be some people who find the £3+ a week cost of solutions hard to bear. The poorest, including those whose eyesight prevent them getting a good job, who are therefore entitled to free prescriptions will be hit the hardest. I'm often told stories by the optometrist I see of people who damage their eyes by trying to economise on the solutions they need: so encouraging that to happen wouldn't be good.

Tony Blair, he's our PM or someone very important I think, was reported as saying last week that improvements in the NHS will result not so much from government action as from patient pressure. Sounds about right to me.

[Sweet]

Barney this is a good argument it's just that there are a lot of things in the news right now such as alzehimers and cancer drugs which are classed as more needed but not available. We are not dying though the finances in solutions is very costly.

Sweet X x X

[Mike Oliver]

I have to say that I for one just don't accept that there is no money left in the NHS. By implication this means everybody with any complaint relating to allocation of NHS resources may as well give up and go home.

There are ambiguities and contradictions in what we are being told and they need to be clarified. If the ministerial response was written, it would be interesting to analyse the detail to see wht it did not say and what was avoided - sometimes more significant than the answer itself.
I realise there is only so much time and money available, but the system needs to cater adequately for those whose management/treatment is time and cost intensive. The social and economic cost of having people unable to work effectively (and therefore not contribute tax etc. as they otherwisw would) surely has to be factored into the equation somewhere.
For me this is a drum I will keep on banging in the vain hope it might have some effect. Trouble is most of those in authority who matter suffer, in my experience, from a form of selective deafness. Sorry, that sounds like the grumpy old man again!