Social services cuts could be 'largest factor' in biggest annual rise in deaths for almost 50 years

'I suspect the largest factor here is cuts to social services - to meals on wheels, to visits to the elderly'

Government cuts to social services could be the “largest factor” in the biggest annual rise in deaths in England and Wales for nearly half a century, according to an adviser to Public Health England.

The new preliminary figures, from the Office for National Statistics, claim that mortality rates last year rose by 5.4 per cent compared with 2014 – equivalent to almost 27,000 extra deaths. The increase is the highest since 1968 and took the total number of deaths in 2015 to 528,340.

Death rates in England and Wales have been steadily falling since the 1970s but this trend has been reversed since 2011.
Advisers to Public Health England told the Health Service Journal (HSJ) that an investigation should be launched following the new statistics. They added that the figures show the elderly, especially women, were now bearing the brunt of a growing crisis in the National Health Service and cuts to social care.

Professor Danny Dorling, from Oxford University and an adviser to Public Health England on older age life expectancy, said: “When we look at 2015, we are not just looking at one bad year. We have seen excessive mortality - especially among women - since 2012.”

He added: “I suspect the largest factor here is cuts to social services - to meals on wheels, to visits to the elderly.
"We have seen these changes during a period when the health service is in crisis, while social care services have been cut back.

"The statistics clearly show that this is the biggest rise we have seen since the 1960s. But this may well turn out to be the greatest rise since the Second World War, taking into account the sustained nature of the rise, as well as other factors, such as the trend for immigration of older people in the 1960s."

It was revealed last year that a £1.1bn cut to adult social care was leaving the country’s most vulnerable people “in jeopardy”. The warning came amid reports that councils had slashed their adult social care budgets by 21 per cent over the last five years.



Dominic Harrison, an honorary professor at Central Lancashire University and Blackburn said to the HSJ that the changes were a “strong and flashing amber warning light [that] something is making the population more vulnerable to avoidable death”.

Mr Harrison added: ‘One of the things this data may be telling us is it is just not possible… to contain costs, improve quality, reduce inequality and improve outcomes within such a rapidly diminishing resource envelope… we need to understand exactly what is happening if we are to prevent it continuing.’

Caroline Abrahams, charity director at Age UK said a full investigation was needed urgently. She added: "These figures suggests something is going badly wrong…we owe it to older people to investigate why last year's statistics are so unusually high and to take firm action to address the causes, whatever they may be."

A Department of Health spokesman said: "This is provisional data and our experts monitor deaths closely. Excess winter deaths can be due to a number of causes and deaths can fluctuate from year to year. We will continue to monitor this data closely and be advised by experts on any action necessary."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/death-rate-in-england-and-wales-rising-at-fastest-pace-for-50-years-due-to-cuts-to-social-services-a6876486.html

Lord Foul wrote:uhmm...it might have just gone clean over your head...

I'm not playing your silly little games anymore didge...

I DONT HAVE to provide you with facts....

I DONT HAVE to DO sweet fk all....


the report says...quite clearly there MAY be a causational link
common sense says that such a link is likely
there is NO body in the country we can trust as independant

therfor the only conclusion that can be reached is that an INDEPENDANT inquiry, by an international body like WHO is required

IF it is found that the link is real then the perpetrators should be hung and used to decorate the halls of westminster

If the link is proved false then there should be further urgent inquiry as to the cause .......


simples....


you arguing otherwise suggests you KNOW all to well the link is likely true....

but are so far up the arse of the evil party you dont give a damn.....

so STFU making childish demands, which are not in any case going to be met
go give your self a tick in your book of scores if that what gets you off (not that anyone else gives a shit)
and then ask yourself ...why are you so scared of it being openly and properly investigated......

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:you all know all too well what te problem is...its GREED

greedy pigs in corporatioons that dont pay the correct and fair taxes (and are allwed to/encouraged by the tories)

and greedy pigs who should know better but dont give a rats arse as long as "they are all right jack"

what I CANT understand is why the greedy pigs who should know better (the working class ones) are so often in favour of spending evetry-one elses money ANYWHERE but in this country on OUR needy.

You have didge here, who it seems is quite content to allow a senior to slowly wither away uncared for, "becasue their family should care"

what does he suggest...that there be some sort of compulsary way to make em pay??

what when this same family is on wrking benefits...getting tax credits becasue their wages are too low???



What DO you want eh didge...the tory wet dream of the workhouse for anyone not of sufficiently "high birth"?

back to the days of the "poor house"

perhaps we can rebuild a few monasteries to take care of our elders?

or perhaps you and those like you can stop being such tight fisted cnuts and realise that SOCIETY has an obligation to look after its weakest and most vulnerable.

round here they have cut this that and the other...yet last year they found enough to give council heads of departments a 15% rise....Thats right 15%

and guess what................. feckin labour didnt vote AGAINST it...they bastards ABSTAINED...wtf???

It's about Osborne wanting the UK to be "open for business". It's one of the first things he said as chancellor.

So there's no way he or even the New Labour types will want to do anything about mutli nationals taking advantage of tax loop holes.

Fuzzy Zack wrote:Victor - you're quite right.  This is about further investigation to determine causation. Urgently.

But deep down I think we all know it's about funding.

Didge wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:uhmm...it might have just gone clean over your head...

I'm not playing your silly little games anymore didge...

I DONT HAVE to provide you with facts....

I DONT HAVE to DO sweet fk all....


the report says...quite clearly there MAY be a causational link
common sense says that such a link is likely
there is NO body in the country we can trust as independant

therfor the only conclusion that can be reached is that an INDEPENDANT inquiry, by an international body like WHO is required

IF it is found that the link is real then the perpetrators should be hung and used to decorate the halls of westminster

If the link is proved false then there should be further urgent inquiry as to the cause .......


simples....


you arguing otherwise suggests you KNOW all to well the link is likely true....

but are so far up the arse of the evil party you dont give a damn.....

so STFU making childish demands, which are not in any case going to be met
go give your self a tick in your book of scores if that what gets you off (not that anyone else gives a shit)
and then ask yourself ...why are you so scared of it being openly and properly investigated......

Its no game

You simply do not have the answers

well erm yes I do.....it should be independantly investigated.....

Which I knew you did not have them

seems you know fk all recently

Hence your hot air answers based on an opinion and not fact

exactly an opinion.....without an investigation thats all one can have idiot....and my opinion is that there are plenty of grounds for an investigation....which is ALL the grounds there EVER is for ANYTHING being investigated (since the "purpose" of an investigation is to turn "opinion" into verifiable facts)

You either accept that or you do not

I simply have proven easily you could not back your points

Fuzzy Zack wrote:social care funding will have devastating impact on NHS

December 10, 2015
- See more at: http://careandsupportalliance.com/lack-of-social-care-funding-will-have-devastating-impact-on-nhs/#sthash.P597FT5U.dpuf

Didge wrote:There is no need for investigation

Based on what facts?

Lord Foul wrote:

Didge wrote:


Its no game

You simply do not have the answers

well erm yes I do.....it should be independantly investigated.....

Which I knew you did not have them

seems you know fk all recently

Hence your hot air answers based on an opinion and not fact

exactly an opinion.....without an investigation thats all one can have idiot....and my opinion is that there are plenty of grounds for an investigation....which is ALL the grounds there EVER is for ANYTHING being investigated (since the "purpose" of an investigation is to turn "opinion" into verifiable facts)

You either accept that or you do not

I simply have proven easily you could not back your points

I have quite fully backed my point that there needs be an investigation....

Lord Foul wrote:

Didge wrote:There is no need for investigation

Based on what facts?

prat...investigations are initiated to prove/disprove opinion and PROVIDE facts.....

you dont want an investigation beacuse you are scared that the results will provide facts you dont want to see....

Didge wrote:There is no need for investigation

Based on what facts?

Lord Foul wrote:

Didge wrote:There is no need for investigation

Based on what facts?

prat...investigations are initiated to prove/disprove opinion and PROVIDE facts.....

you dont want an investigation beacuse you are scared that the results will provide facts you dont want to see....

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Didge wrote:There is no need for investigation

Based on what facts?

Based on people dying.

But you're right. There's no need for an investigation. Just increase the funding.

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Didge wrote:There is no need for investigation

Based on what facts?

Based on people dying.

But you're right. There's no need for an investigation. Just increase the funding.

Didge wrote:

Fuzzy Zack wrote:social care funding will have devastating impact on NHS

December 10, 2015
- See more at: http://careandsupportalliance.com/lack-of-social-care-funding-will-have-devastating-impact-on-nhs/#sthash.P597FT5U.dpuf

Again speculation and hearsay

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Didge wrote:


Again speculation and hearsay

Front line facts.

Didge wrote:

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Based on people dying.

But you're right. There's no need for an investigation. Just increase the funding.

Show the levels on deaths and if there is any correlation due to a lack of funding?

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Didge wrote:


Show the levels on deaths and if there is any correlation due to a lack of funding?

So now you want an investigation? Make your mind up.

Fuzzy Zack wrote:Adult social care funding: 2014 state of the nation report

Local Government Association
Association of Directors of Adult Social Services

October 2014

1. Local government has faced unprecedented cuts over the last four years that have impacted dramatically on adult social care and its capacity to deliver. The impact is ultimately felt by people who use social care services.
2. Contrary to what the Government has said repeatedly since the 2010 Spending Review, its injection of an additional £7.2 billion for adult social care over the last four years has not solved the adult social care funding question.
3. Adult social care spending has therefore been kept under control through a combination of budget savings of 26 per cent (the equivalent of £3.53 billion over the last four years), the NHS transfer and at least £900 million of savings from other council services. The service is now under extreme pressure and facing  nancial crisis.
4. Local authorities have responded by prioritising the adult social care budget, maintaining spending of more than £900 million on preventative services, and pursuing the ef ciency agenda with vigour and innovation.
5. The short-term looks increasingly dif cult. The scope for further savings is now reduced and at the same time real concerns remain about the affordability of the Care Act. Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards will add further costs and exacerbate existing pressures. Directors of adult services believe that legal challenges, and the pressures facing providers and the NHS, will all increase over the next two years.
6. The medium-term outlook for health and social care is extremely challenging. Health is under real pressure with many Trusts operating a de cit and senior health and charity  gures warning of
a £30 billion funding gap in the health budget by the end of the decade (28
per cent of the budget). The estimated funding gap for adult social care over the same period is £4.3 billion (29 per cent of the budget).
7. Local government has worked closely with health partners to develop Better Care Fund (BCF) plans and take integration further forward. However, the BCF will
not provide an immediate solution. The next government must therefore use the Spending Review to put adult social care on a sustainable  nancial footing.
8. The Spending Review must also pave the way for a medium-term approach to the BCF that includes a bigger fund with an accompanying transformation fund to ease the impact of change.
9. Longer-term, more resource needs to be brought into the health and social care system. Exactly how that should happen needs to be the subject of an honest public debate, starting now, that examines the trade-offs for public services.
10. Local areas must lead the changes with health and wellbeing boards joining up health and social care commissioning. The LGA has called for funding for commissioning to be fully integrated
as a step towards a single point of commissioning based on achieving the outcomes that matter most to individuals.

http://www.local.gov.uk/documents/10180/5854661/Adult+social+care+funding+2014+state+of+the+nation+report/e32866fa-d512-4e77-9961-8861d2d93238

Lord Foul wrote:are "excess deaths increasing"...yes

has the funding for elderly care been cut yes

are the two in the same time frame yes

is there a link


possibly

how can we prove /disprove the link


BY AN INVESTIGATION........

Fuzzy Zack wrote:Bit like Nosferatu, you do know how to suck the life out of a thread Didge.

Lord Foul wrote:are "excess deaths increasing"...yes

has the funding for elderly care been cut yes

are the two in the same time frame yes

is there a link


possibly

how can we prove /disprove the link


BY AN INVESTIGATION........

Lord Foul wrote:If you say otherwise then either you can show something to the contrary that likly needs investigating

OR the reality is you dont give a toss becasue the people affected are nothing to do with you and you would rather hang on to 20 pence in your pocket or give it to some johny foreigner than see a vulnerable old person kept safe warm and comfortable here......

which kinda makes you a shit head like hunt and osbourne...

Didge wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:are "excess deaths increasing"...yes

has the funding for elderly care been cut yes

are the two in the same time frame yes

is there a link


possibly

how can we prove /disprove the link


BY AN INVESTIGATION........

lol more bullshit

show why...this is the inference from the O/P

that there is lilkely a link....



Again put up or shut up sunshine

Lord Foul wrote:

Didge wrote:


lol more bullshit

show why...this is the inference from the O/P

that there is lilkely a link....



Again put up or shut up sunshine

so fuck you....YOU of all people on her DO NOT tell ME to "shut up"

now I know you would run scared of an investigation....and why.....

Didge wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:If you say otherwise then either you can show something to the contrary that likly needs investigating

OR the reality is you dont give a toss becasue the people affected are nothing to do with you and you would rather hang on to 20 pence in your pocket or give it to some johny foreigner than see a vulnerable old person kept safe warm and comfortable here......

which kinda makes you a shit head like hunt and osbourne...

Look its very simple, even for a simpleton like you

You should be able to show some disparity and back this with evidence

Have you done any of this?

No

Just more of your inane waffle and bullshit

Lord Foul wrote:

Didge wrote:


Look its very simple, even for a simpleton like you

You should be able to show some disparity and back this with evidence

Have you done any of this?

No

Just more of your inane waffle and bullshit

Idiot...the O/P makes the inference and shows a disparate increse in "excess deaths"
there has also been a serious decrease in funding ...within the same time frame

therfore the two MAY well be linked...
the way forward is to investigate and either prove or disprove the link....

denying it without reservation is the desperate act of the guilty as charged

Didge wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:

so fuck you....YOU of all people on her DO NOT tell ME to "shut up"

now I know you would run scared of an investigation....and why.....

ha ha ha 

Again put up or shut the fuck up you boring twat

Not scared of anything you are just giving me the biggest load of bullshit ever and I am exposing that

Again if you cannot back your point, then shut the fuck up you twat

Lord Foul wrote:

Didge wrote:


ha ha ha 

Again put up or shut the fuck up you boring twat

Not scared of anything you are just giving me the biggest load of bullshit ever and I am exposing that

Again if you cannot back your point, then shut the fuck up you twat

wind yer neck in and get your head out the ale bucket dummy.....you are off on one again and I'm NOT humouring it this time....

Raggamuffin wrote:Anyone can quote some figures and then mention some factor or other, and say that there "may" be a link. The time to make that link or not is after they've investigated it.

Lord Foul wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:Anyone can quote some figures and then mention some factor or other, and say that there "may" be a link. The time to make that link or not is after they've investigated it.

thats NOT how it works ragga...

ALWAYS a link is suggested and the confirmed or denied by the subsequent investigation

that applies to crime
scientific investigation

whatever

if a link wasnt suggested FIRST.....there would be nothing to investigate...

It is not usual for organisations to go around randomly investigating nothings (except perhaps the ONS...but pure statisticians are .....perculiar people)
Generally investigations are TRIGGERED by someone spotting what MAY be a link between things.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:

thats NOT how it works ragga...

ALWAYS a link is suggested and the confirmed or denied by the subsequent investigation

that applies to crime
scientific investigation

whatever

if a link wasnt suggested FIRST.....there would be nothing to investigate...

It is not usual for organisations to go around randomly investigating nothings (except perhaps the ONS...but pure statisticians are .....perculiar people)
Generally investigations are TRIGGERED by someone spotting what MAY be a link between things.

Look what happens when someone suggests there might be a link though. People get hysterical and start wishing death on Government officials. It might be OK if they had any evidence whatsoever, but they don't.

Lord Foul wrote:yeah well didge...you are a dyed in the wool brown nosed blue assed tory, so the fact that you think vulnerable people dieing is of no account and not worth investigating is not really surprising....

Lord Foul wrote:and my boy...untill you see fit to appologise to ragga for THIS post


http://www.newsfixboard.com/t14041-criminalising-boycotts-will-help-unethical-businesses-thrive#268305

you are going on ignore

you are bang out of line ....again.....

Raggamuffin wrote:I'll report that post as it contains a sexist slur.

Lord Foul wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Look what happens when someone suggests there might be a link though. People get hysterical and start wishing death on Government officials. It might be OK if they had any evidence whatsoever, but they don't.

The link has been suggested...

and I was quite reasonable...

I DID say there should be an investigation, and IF (and only if) the link was proven should they be hung from lamp posts

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:I'll report that post as it contains a sexist slur.

How is it sexist when defining you accurately?

Anyway, now you know what will happen when you throw abuse as you did

Get used to it