Labour target cancer sufferers in new ad

lostinrates

Some of you know I'm doing a sponsored walk in memory of a friend who died from cancer last year. within three weeks of her diagnosis. The thing with time frames is they are, in truth, not meaningless, but very different,. Cancer is such a terrifying word we hear it and tailspin. For people like my friend, three days had they treated her withing five minutes they still could have done nothing. Far better to establish a good effective and appropriate treatment protocol for everyone we can. I am at as mortified by the unavailability of superior alzheimer drugs that are commercially available, and feel that the issue is not waiting times for cancer, but a real reevalutaion of what is funded through a NHS and how to relieve pressure for truly essential services through it.

ninky_2

Kohoutek wrote: »

I think it has improved under Labour, not surprising given that spending has tripled. However, most of the extra money has gone on higher wages. I would imagine if the Conservatives had won the 1997 election they would not have spent as much, so the NHS is probably better as a result of Labour.

By the way, what's that got to do with sending targeted political advertisements to cancer sufferers?

i am constantly bombarded with marketting aimed at me from the private sector. i'd far rather receive information from political parties than the various other private interests that some how get their hands on my information.

when you get pregnant you also receive a load of targetted information from private companies via maternity services.

i don't have a problem with being informed of the policies of political parties even if that is 'targetted' information.

are you sure the tories don't send out targetted information?

Kohoutek

ninky wrote: »

are you sure the tories don't send out targetted information?

I never said they didn't. I'm sure all political parties do, including the Conservatives.

However, I'm shocked even a credulous Labour supporter like you can't see that there is something wrong in sending a leaflet targeted to people likely to have received treatment for cancer suggesting that they have a lower chance of survival under a Conservative government.

ninky_2

Kohoutek wrote: »

I never said they didn't. I'm sure all political parties do, including the Conservatives.

However, I'm shocked even a credulous Labour supporter like you can't see that there is something wrong in sending a leaflet targeted to people likely to have received treatment for cancer suggesting that they have a lower chance of survival under a Conservative government.

well be shocked then. i don't have a problem with it.

Graham_Devon

ninky wrote: »

i don't have a problem with being informed of the policies of political parties even if that is 'targetted' information.

are you sure the tories don't send out targetted information?

Argh ninky!

This isn't about policies, why can you not see this? Is it because labour = good in your mind, regardless.

This is about scare tactics, nothing to do with policies.

You are ignoring completely how this was used to scare, to gain votes. I think you know this, you just don't want to hear it, discuss it, or listen to anything to do with it....instead, you want to say the nice labour party are good people who have just sent out a nice leaflet to people offering them their policies on healthcare. That's utter rot.

It's this very thing that puts me off voting labour. We have 3 rock solid labour supporters on here, who will NOT listen to anything. Only spin everything. That's off putting to the majority. All you seem intent on doing is slamming the tories for anything, while trying to spin everything labour wise, and ending up looking incredibly silly.

I honestly don't see anyone as deluded as these 3 labour supporters on here from any of the other parties...even the green party as less activist and blind.

Really2

ninky wrote: »

well be shocked then. i don't have a problem with it.

I am shocked you could then post this seconds before on another thread.

ninky wrote: »

i would have no problem with not being anonymous in certain contexts but as i post on other subjects and might want to post things of a personal nature than that is why i don't want to post my real name.

i don't necessarily want all the people i film knowing the immigration issues of my husband. or collegues knowing i had a miscarriage. just a couple of examples.

But you think it is OK for the government to send you political propaganda based on your medical history?

ninky_2

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Argh ninky!

This isn't about policies, why can you not see this? Is it because labour = good in your mind, regardless.

This is about scare tactics, nothing to do with policies.

You are ignoring completely how this was used to scare, to gain votes. I think you know this, you just don't want to hear it, discuss it, or listen to anything to do with it....instead, you want to say the nice labour party are good people who have just sent out a nice leaflet to people offering them their policies on healthcare. That's utter rot.

not true. i completely oppose the wars in iraq and afghanistan. and i think they could do a lot better on environmental issues.

the difference is i have sent donations to stop the war and been on marches. i also support environmental campaigns.

too many criticise the govenments war stance and then do sweet fa themselves about it.

my support for labour is not uncritical. however, it don't see how a conservative government would take this country in any sort of direction i would like to see.

this weekend we foolishly fancied a trip to the seaside and ended up in walton on the naze. if any place reminded my of why i don't want the tories in power that was it. out of interest i looked up the website of the local mp and found it is suspended for the general election. why? my local mp has not suspended his website for the election.

Graham_Devon

Really2 wrote: »

I am shocked you could then post this seconds before on another thread.


But you think it is OK for the government OK to send you political propaganda based on your medical history?

So long as it's labour. if the tories had done this I think you know how ninky would change their stance

ALIBOBSY

ninky wrote: »

this is the most ridiculous comment i have seen from you. of course government policy influences the ability of the nhs to treat people and in fact enables its very existence. i expect a poll of frontline nhs staff will find that the majority will not be voting conservative. i wonder why?

Well I have to say I haven't noticed any improvement in our local NHS, and speaking to friends/people I know working in the NHS the message seems to be the targets and paperwork has gone up but the basics have been lost. The phrase most repeated? "too many chiefs not enough indians"- in fact others I know who are in local govern and public sector all say the same.

My FIL who has voted Labour for the best part of 60 years and worked as a paramedic and then through ill health has dealt with the NHS from both sides for many many years feels utterly betrayed by the current government.
He says the local services he gets have got worse and worse over the last 5 years, to the point where his local GP finally agreed to give him his catheters on prescription so he can change it himself instead of going through the longwinded process to get someone out to change it and him then ending up with a bladder infection. He won't be voting labour, but to be honest hasn't decided if he will vote at all (think many will be like this and not vote for anyone).

Now I couldn't say what the NHS would be like under any other government, all we can say is it would likely have cost less and the staff would have had to deal with less "red tape/unhelpful targets/state interference".
I have never voted tory before, but will this time just to get my lazy, smug useless labour MP out on his butt. In fact if I had a time machine I would go back to 97 and tell my younger self never to vote labour let alone 3 times.

ali x

whathavewedone

Me too Alibosy, me too. There were plenty of us fooled in 1997, it's why it's going to be so hard to shift them this election even though they are hated.

Ninky's not the only labourite defending Labour over this. There are others on other forums saying that these women have no right to moan, they're so lucky that they have these "guarantees".

It's a new low as far as I'm concerned but it seems many people are so used to the lies, smearing and spin that they're just shrugging their shoulders about it.

This is a party that deserves to be consigned to the dustbin of history. I would love the Libdems to come second. Ah well, in my dreams...