US surgeons drafted in as British medics exhausted.

#1
From Times Online
July 30, 2009
US surgeons drafted in as British medics exhausted by casualty surge
The Times)
The Ministry of Defence revealed that 57 soldiers had been wounded in action in the first two weeks of this month
Michael Evans, Defence Editor

The surge in British casualties in Afghanistan has left Army surgeons so exhausted that an American surgical team has had to be drafted in to help.

Extra British plastic surgeons have also had to be sent out to the field hospital along with additional X-ray technicians and specialist nurses.

The Ministry of Defence revealed that 57 soldiers had been wounded in action in the first two weeks of this month — the worst casualty figure since British troops deployed to Helmand province in 2006. The previous highest injured toll was in June — 46 — but that was for the whole month.

In the same two-week period, 15 soldiers were killed.

Of the 57 wounded in action, nine were categorised as “very seriously injured” with life-threatening wounds and seven were “seriously injured”.

The huge toll was recorded during Operation Panther’s Claw, launched on June 19 to sweep the Taleban out of central Helmand.
More
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article6733161.ece
 
#2
Well at least we have plenty of military hospitals.... oh wait....
 
#3
The_Coming_Man said:
Well at least we have plenty of military hospitals.... oh wait....

B'Liar assurred me I would get better treatment in an NHS hospital…

Oh wait…
 
#4
ferox_provincia said:
The_Coming_Man said:
Well at least we have plenty of military hospitals.... oh wait....

B'Liar assurred me I would get better treatment in an NHS hospital…

Oh wait…
They put me in a private one... mind you they discharged me next day after surgery to save money.. still at least the bleeding stopped after a couple of days. :roll:
 
#5
The_Coming_Man said:
ferox_provincia said:
The_Coming_Man said:
Well at least we have plenty of military hospitals.... oh wait....

B'Liar assurred me I would get better treatment in an NHS hospital…

Oh wait…
They put me in a private one... mind you they discharged me next day after surgery to save money.. still at least the bleeding stopped after a couple of days. :roll:
B'Liar and that munter of his wife should be exterminated.The pair are crooks of the highest order.
 
#6
"The surge in British casualties in Afghanistan has left Army surgeons so exhausted that an American surgical team has had to be drafted in to help."

Thats one way of spinning it - the other way is to point out that the UK and US are running a joint facility in Helmand as we're both operating there and we happen to be allies.

Reporting the truth unadulterated never sells papers - spinning to the point of lying does.
 
#7
The_Coming_Man said:
Well at least we have plenty of military hospitals.... oh wait....
Now loath as I am to defend Labour, this isn't their fault.

It is, in fact, the Doctors...

You see, to keep in top form, doctors have to constantly practise medicine, all day every day. They are also porfessionals who want to ply their trade.

Military hospitals cannot work in modern times, simply because up until lately (the last few years) we have not been in a conflict for it to be WORTH having a military hospital, there would be no point whatsoever.

If we had kept them, they would have been staffed by a bunch of very old or very inexperienced doctors and nurses who would not have coped with the sudden influx of casualties. The good doctors would have left any military establishment long ago looking for more interesting and other challenges.


Doing it off the NHS meant the best doctors were always on call. It made sense in theory, nobody could have expected the scale of casualties and the the indifference that the medical staff treated the returning soldiers with.


I'm now off for a shower, I feel dirty defending politicians, but fairs fair if you blame them for something that isn[t their fault, then that makes us no better than the media.
 
#8
jim30 said:
"The surge in British casualties in Afghanistan has left Army surgeons so exhausted that an American surgical team has had to be drafted in to help."

Thats one way of spinning it - the other way is to point out that the UK and US are running a joint facility in Helmand as we're both operating there and we happen to be allies.

Reporting the truth unadulterated never sells papers - spinning to the point of lying does.

I prefer the take that we used to have a medical infrastructure capable of supporting hot ops and the casualties derived therefrom…

Meanwhile back in Blighty, we now have the rather shameful situation were we are now the only Western power without any dedicated military hospitals.

Oh well, if it saves money and we're not fighting wars anymore that's alright then…

Oh wait…
 
#9
Yeoman_dai said:
The_Coming_Man said:
Well at least we have plenty of military hospitals.... oh wait....
Now loath as I am to defend Labour, this isn't their fault.

It is, in fact, the Doctors...

You see, to keep in top form, doctors have to constantly practise medicine, all day every day. They are also porfessionals who want to ply their trade.

Military hospitals cannot work in modern times, simply because up until lately (the last few years) we have not been in a conflict for it to be WORTH having a military hospital, there would be no point whatsoever.

If we had kept them, they would have been staffed by a bunch of very old or very inexperienced doctors and nurses who would not have coped with the sudden influx of casualties. The good doctors would have left any military establishment long ago looking for more interesting and other challenges.


Doing it off the NHS meant the best doctors were always on call. It made sense in theory, nobody could have expected the scale of casualties and the the indifference that the medical staff treated the returning soldiers with.


I'm now off for a shower, I feel dirty defending politicians, but fairs fair if you blame them for something that isn[t their fault, then that makes us no better than the media.
Well I seem to remember the CMH in The Shot treating civvies as well, UK seems to be the only major military power without dedicated military hospitals, strange when you consider how many casualties we are suffering.

As for not being in any conflicts, conflicts have been the rule not the exception besides hich, the army is in existence to fight major conflicts.. no military hospitals means it is ill equipped to do so.

It is about money, not lack of experience in military doctors who could still be rotated through civvy hospitals, just like civvies could be rotated through military hospitals, especially those in the TA.
 
#10
Yeoman_dai said:
Military hospitals cannot work in modern times, simply because up until lately (the last few years) we have not been in a conflict for it to be WORTH having a military hospital, there would be no point whatsoever.

If we had kept them, they would have been staffed by a bunch of very old or very inexperienced doctors and nurses who would not have coped with the sudden influx of casualties. The good doctors would have left any military establishment long ago looking for more interesting and other challenges.

Please explain how France has some rather excellent Military Hospitals that are very popular with Civvies who can go to them.
 
#11
Can't disagree that money isn't an issue, but even if conflict is more common than not, there are still large gaps between the different conflicts, in which the doctors will leave. It's very easy to blame the money angle, but it simply is not the entirety.
 
#12
Yeoman_dai said:
Can't disagree that money isn't an issue, but even if conflict is more common than not, there are still large gaps between the different conflicts, in which the doctors will leave. It's very easy to blame the money angle, but it simply is not the entirety.

The French Military Hospitals work by taking in general cases and are regarded as centers of excellence.

There is no reason we couldn't do the same.
 
#13
Fair point, all military hospitals we have ever run have been military only - maybe it is indeed time to take a page from the French book. Not for one second am I saying it's a GOOD thing to have no military hospitals, I'm just making a point that money is simply not the only problem, and is a rather to simplistic explanation.

The French model..I assume that means that the Military Hospital would be run along NHS lines due to law? Which, having several members of my family and friends in the NHS, is no good thing!
 
#14
Yeoman_dai said:
Fair point, all military hospitals we have ever run have been military only - maybe it is indeed time to take a page from the French book. Not for one second am I saying it's a GOOD thing to have no military hospitals, I'm just making a point that money is simply not the only problem, and is a rather to simplistic explanation.

The French model..I assume that means that the Military Hospital would be run along NHS lines due to law? Which, having several members of my family and friends in the NHS, is no good thing!
I was thinking more along BUPA lines.
 
#15
Makes you proud to be British!

That said, I was told by a surgeon that my father survived his appalling wounds, sustained in Anzio, because of the skill and determination of American military surgeons. The surgeon further informed me that '...your father should never have survived'.

Thanks Yanks - and thanks for being on 'our' side.
 
#16
jim30 said:
"The surge in British casualties in Afghanistan has left Army surgeons so exhausted that an American surgical team has had to be drafted in to help."

Thats one way of spinning it - the other way is to point out that the UK and US are running a joint facility in Helmand as we're both operating there and we happen to be allies.

Reporting the truth unadulterated never sells papers - spinning to the point of lying does.
Well said Jim. I despise the British Media with a passion.
 
F

fozzy

Guest
#17
ferox_provincia said:
Yeoman_dai said:
Can't disagree that money isn't an issue, but even if conflict is more common than not, there are still large gaps between the different conflicts, in which the doctors will leave. It's very easy to blame the money angle, but it simply is not the entirety.

The French Military Hospitals work by taking in general cases and are regarded as centers of excellence.

There is no reason we couldn't do the same.
The Military Hospitals we used to have, did!
 
#18
All the UK based Military Hospital took in NHS patients and trained staff. Because there were several Military Hospitals staff in training could rotate round the hospitals, both UK and overseas, to broaden their experience, we had a dedicated psychiatric hospital, a dedicated maternity hospital, a dedicated care of the elderly hospital as well as general hospitals. Junior doctors could rotate round to gain experience in the necessary disciplines and thus complete their house jobs.
NHS patients loved being treated by the military because of the general healthy and happy disposition of the staff, the ratio of nursing staff to patients, the cleanliness, facilities, excellent food and recreational facilities.
Once you reduce the number of Military Hospital you get to a point where there just isn't enough diversity to allow for a full house officer programme as there are more junior doctors than places. Similarly with service GPs, they need a hospital to be attached to to run their training.
People say that there is nothing wrong with the Services using NHS hospitals, that may be so, I really don't know about that but I do know that the other way round was always much more popular with the patients both Services and civilian.
Back on thread this is just another example of the Government trying to do everything on the cheap. Our Service Medical Services are under resourced and way under manned, they just aren't sufficient for a sustained and bloody war. The medics give of themselves time and time again and put in ridiculous amounts of hours quite often working themselves to exhaustion but what is the alternative? Let some of our lads die who needn't? No, of course not which places an enormous burden on the individual. There's no point asking for more money, equipment or staff because we know what the answer would be, after all we have all the helicopters we need, the trouble is we just can't find them.
 
#19
Markintime said:
……… NHS patients loved being treated by the military because of the general healthy and happy disposition of the staff, the ratio of nursing staff to patients, the cleanliness, facilities, excellent food and recreational facilities………
That was probably one reason for the closure of military hospitals. Excellence is elitism and politically is just not acceptable.
 
#20
Yeoman_dai said:
Fair point, all military hospitals we have ever run have been military only - maybe it is indeed time to take a page from the French book. Not for one second am I saying it's a GOOD thing to have no military hospitals, I'm just making a point that money is simply not the only problem, and is a rather to simplistic explanation.

The French model..I assume that means that the Military Hospital would be run along NHS lines due to law? Which, having several members of my family and friends in the NHS, is no good thing!
Bollocks. RAF Ely, where I was operated on at age 15, had both pad brats and Civie brats in the Children's ward.
 

Similar threads

Top