The next Chancellor of the Exchequer – politicalbetting.com

MarqueeMark said:

geoffw said:

DavidL said:

rottenborough said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Nigelb said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Good morning, everyone.

If Starmer sacks his lightning rod he creates a vacancy.

I wouldn't discount the possibility of her resigning.

I also wouldn't entirely discount the possibility of her remaining in post.

Yup.

UK government bonds rally after Starmer says Reeves will remain for ‘a long time’

https://x.com/FT/status/1940668547677487375

The bond markets may have saved her. Quite incredible times.

But what does she do now? After the retreats on WFP and benefits cuts how does she meet her self imposed targets in her forthcoming budget? The only way I can see that are more tax increases, probably at least £20bn worth. Its going to be very difficult to do that given her previous promises and assurances.

Keir and Rachel


There's no way out, they've painted themselves into a corner and she will resign before long.

I once had a student summer job, where one of the bright students was given the task of painting a floor with a bitumen-type stuff. He literally painted himself into a corner.

Everyone in the plant dropped round - for hours - to see if it had dried yet.

The next day they sent him to the stores, for a long weight... He was there hours.

Pagan2 said:

Cicero said:

Foxy said:

FPT

FrancisUrquhart said:

New neighbourhood health services, open 12 hours a day, six day days a week, will be launched across the country offering tests, post-operation care, nursing and mental health treatment

To "bring back the family doctor" system, thousands more GPs will be trained

There will also be a push for GPs to lean on artificial intelligence to take notes while other technology will be used to speed up answering calls to surgeries

Newly qualified dentists will need to practise in the NHS for a minimum period - the government has indicated they intend this to be three years

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cx247rn0252t

Lord Darzi proposed this 20 years ago. I can't remember, why didn't it happen?

Or indeed when May promised it in 2019. It's a good plan that is very difficult to implement.

I suppose we will see the detail later today, but all those new neighbourhood health centres and staff are going to need funding, and it's not obvious where either that capital or revenue are coming from. Or the trained staff for that matter. The NHS workforce plan seems to have all gone quiet since it's announcement.

I am not convinced by AI either. It confabulates too much to be reliable for medical notes.

The NHS has failed to digitize its records, despite huge sums being thrown at the project. Just possibly the solution may lie in digitization of records at a surgery level, rather than at a national level- start with GPs and primary care and then take it to regional hospital and clinical level. With the right security, it could deliver the kind of cost savings/efficiency gains that it would pay for itself quite quickly.
Giving primary healthcare trusts the ability to do this could allow this new policy enough power to deliver.
As the internet is not a single massive database, the idea that the NHS should have such an approach has been a huge mistake. This is a policy that has several merits, and I have not been saying that very often over the past year.

This being an area I have worked in. One of the issues with the nhs is a lack of standards. Ideally what should be possible is that you can use applications from different firms depending on your needs which can all work with the existing data, meaning that if someone produces a better app for your needs its just slot it in and no need to migrate all your data it just works with it without issue.

The NHS should certainly layout a DB schema for patient data and auditing access etc and make that schema publiclly available. They could even potentially make a little money by running a certification program so for a fee a company can have their software certified as NHS ready

Pagan2 said:

Cicero said:

Foxy said:

FPT

FrancisUrquhart said:

New neighbourhood health services, open 12 hours a day, six day days a week, will be launched across the country offering tests, post-operation care, nursing and mental health treatment

To "bring back the family doctor" system, thousands more GPs will be trained

There will also be a push for GPs to lean on artificial intelligence to take notes while other technology will be used to speed up answering calls to surgeries

Newly qualified dentists will need to practise in the NHS for a minimum period - the government has indicated they intend this to be three years

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cx247rn0252t

Lord Darzi proposed this 20 years ago. I can't remember, why didn't it happen?

Or indeed when May promised it in 2019. It's a good plan that is very difficult to implement.

I suppose we will see the detail later today, but all those new neighbourhood health centres and staff are going to need funding, and it's not obvious where either that capital or revenue are coming from. Or the trained staff for that matter. The NHS workforce plan seems to have all gone quiet since it's announcement.

I am not convinced by AI either. It confabulates too much to be reliable for medical notes.

The NHS has failed to digitize its records, despite huge sums being thrown at the project. Just possibly the solution may lie in digitization of records at a surgery level, rather than at a national level- start with GPs and primary care and then take it to regional hospital and clinical level. With the right security, it could deliver the kind of cost savings/efficiency gains that it would pay for itself quite quickly.
Giving primary healthcare trusts the ability to do this could allow this new policy enough power to deliver.
As the internet is not a single massive database, the idea that the NHS should have such an approach has been a huge mistake. This is a policy that has several merits, and I have not been saying that very often over the past year.

This being an area I have worked in. One of the issues with the nhs is a lack of standards. Ideally what should be possible is that you can use applications from different firms depending on your needs which can all work with the existing data, meaning that if someone produces a better app for your needs its just slot it in and no need to migrate all your data it just works with it without issue.

The NHS should certainly layout a DB schema for patient data and auditing access etc and make that schema publiclly available. They could even potentially make a little money by running a certification program so for a fee a company can have their software certified as NHS ready

Foss said:

Pagan2 said:

Cicero said:

Foxy said:

FPT

FrancisUrquhart said:

New neighbourhood health services, open 12 hours a day, six day days a week, will be launched across the country offering tests, post-operation care, nursing and mental health treatment

To "bring back the family doctor" system, thousands more GPs will be trained

There will also be a push for GPs to lean on artificial intelligence to take notes while other technology will be used to speed up answering calls to surgeries

Newly qualified dentists will need to practise in the NHS for a minimum period - the government has indicated they intend this to be three years

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cx247rn0252t

Lord Darzi proposed this 20 years ago. I can't remember, why didn't it happen?

Or indeed when May promised it in 2019. It's a good plan that is very difficult to implement.

I suppose we will see the detail later today, but all those new neighbourhood health centres and staff are going to need funding, and it's not obvious where either that capital or revenue are coming from. Or the trained staff for that matter. The NHS workforce plan seems to have all gone quiet since it's announcement.

I am not convinced by AI either. It confabulates too much to be reliable for medical notes.

The NHS has failed to digitize its records, despite huge sums being thrown at the project. Just possibly the solution may lie in digitization of records at a surgery level, rather than at a national level- start with GPs and primary care and then take it to regional hospital and clinical level. With the right security, it could deliver the kind of cost savings/efficiency gains that it would pay for itself quite quickly.
Giving primary healthcare trusts the ability to do this could allow this new policy enough power to deliver.
As the internet is not a single massive database, the idea that the NHS should have such an approach has been a huge mistake. This is a policy that has several merits, and I have not been saying that very often over the past year.

This being an area I have worked in. One of the issues with the nhs is a lack of standards. Ideally what should be possible is that you can use applications from different firms depending on your needs which can all work with the existing data, meaning that if someone produces a better app for your needs its just slot it in and no need to migrate all your data it just works with it without issue.

The NHS should certainly layout a DB schema for patient data and auditing access etc and make that schema publiclly available. They could even potentially make a little money by running a certification program so for a fee a company can have their software certified as NHS ready

The last thing they should do is define a DB schema as schemas tend to app architecture specific. If they're going to define anything it's a standardised remote interface reusing as much traditional stable technology as possible.

JohnLilburne said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Gallowgate said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Foxy said:

FPT

FrancisUrquhart said:

New neighbourhood health services, open 12 hours a day, six day days a week, will be launched across the country offering tests, post-operation care, nursing and mental health treatment

To "bring back the family doctor" system, thousands more GPs will be trained

There will also be a push for GPs to lean on artificial intelligence to take notes while other technology will be used to speed up answering calls to surgeries

Newly qualified dentists will need to practise in the NHS for a minimum period - the government has indicated they intend this to be three years

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cx247rn0252t

Lord Darzi proposed this 20 years ago. I can't remember, why didn't it happen?

Or indeed when May promised it in 2019. It's a good plan that is very difficult to implement.

I suppose we will see the detail later today, but all those new neighbourhood health centres and staff are going to need funding, and it's not obvious where either that capital or revenue are coming from. Or the trained staff for that matter. The NHS workforce plan seems to have all gone quiet since it's announcement.

I am not convinced by AI either. It confabulates too much to be reliable for medical notes.

From what I have read so far on the proposed change it seems to make sense. The big change feels like the switch from marketised competitive medicine to community medicine. If its in your community then there isn't the need for the vast cost and complexity of what we have now.

I'm only sat on the outside I know, but I look at the structure of the English NHS and think we can remove so much cost by getting rid of competitive internal structures. My old community had a health centre with two GP practices inside it competing for patients. Each then has separate connections with and contracts for care when its patients need referring or transferring. Each had its own management systems and structures and staff. In a new community based structure why would you need the cost and complexity of that?

There has to be some consumer choice for GPs though because if they are shit (and remember they are often private organisations) then what can a resident do? Move house?

Most practices have more than 1 GP. If you live in a big urban area then perhaps you can go to a different practice - not an option for many.

We're NHS Scotland not England so it's a completely different organisation. Our GP surgery is in a practice which has surgeries in multiple villages. They will often give you an appointment with a random GP in a different village. Which only works if you have a car as there is no public transport between the villages.

My problem with the false choice narrative is that many of the choices are crap, and most people want local services.

I don't understand the fascination with local services, surely specialist treatment should be managed nationally. I would quite happily go somewhere else for specialist assessment and treatment eg a national MRI scanning centre in Birmingham.

I once thought I would need knee surgery. (I didn't, it just seems that it took a lot longer to heal than the "up to six months" my GP warned about, plus some gym work to develop my muscles)

After surgery I would be somewhat incapacitated. I lived on my own in SW London and didn't really know anyone locally. It would have been much better for me to have the surgery near friends or family so I could stay with them after the surgery, rather than my "local" hospital in Kingston, but it seems the NHS couldn't do that.

Why not manage services nationally for the young and relatively fit who can travel, and keep local services for the elderly and infirm?

HYUFD said:

Yes Cooper is probably the most heavyweight frontbencher if Reeves goes. May mean Ed Balls is backseat driving on economic policy if she becomes Chancellor though

geoffw said:

DavidL said:

rottenborough said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Nigelb said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Good morning, everyone.

If Starmer sacks his lightning rod he creates a vacancy.

I wouldn't discount the possibility of her resigning.

I also wouldn't entirely discount the possibility of her remaining in post.

Yup.

UK government bonds rally after Starmer says Reeves will remain for ‘a long time’

https://x.com/FT/status/1940668547677487375

The bond markets may have saved her. Quite incredible times.

But what does she do now? After the retreats on WFP and benefits cuts how does she meet her self imposed targets in her forthcoming budget? The only way I can see that are more tax increases, probably at least £20bn worth. Its going to be very difficult to do that given her previous promises and assurances.

Keir and Rachel


There's no way out, they've painted themselves into a corner and she will resign before long.

DecrepiterJohnL said:

wooliedyed said:

HYUFD said:

Yes Cooper is probably the most heavyweight frontbencher if Reeves goes. May mean Ed Balls is backseat driving on economic policy if she becomes Chancellor though

Although one might surmise that after serving as Chief Secretary to the Treasury under Brown the fact shes been put pretty much everywhere - Shadiw Foreign, Home, DWP etc etc except back in the Treasury it suggests she didnt set the world alight with her economics

Our whole system is based on ministers not being specialists. Mrs Thatcher was not actually driving the tank in that famous picture. Chancellors do not need to have more than the most basic grasp of economics. They do need to have a policy.

Pagan2 said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Pagan2 said:

Cicero said:

Foxy said:

FPT

FrancisUrquhart said:

New neighbourhood health services, open 12 hours a day, six day days a week, will be launched across the country offering tests, post-operation care, nursing and mental health treatment

To "bring back the family doctor" system, thousands more GPs will be trained

There will also be a push for GPs to lean on artificial intelligence to take notes while other technology will be used to speed up answering calls to surgeries

Newly qualified dentists will need to practise in the NHS for a minimum period - the government has indicated they intend this to be three years

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cx247rn0252t

Lord Darzi proposed this 20 years ago. I can't remember, why didn't it happen?

Or indeed when May promised it in 2019. It's a good plan that is very difficult to implement.

I suppose we will see the detail later today, but all those new neighbourhood health centres and staff are going to need funding, and it's not obvious where either that capital or revenue are coming from. Or the trained staff for that matter. The NHS workforce plan seems to have all gone quiet since it's announcement.

I am not convinced by AI either. It confabulates too much to be reliable for medical notes.

The NHS has failed to digitize its records, despite huge sums being thrown at the project. Just possibly the solution may lie in digitization of records at a surgery level, rather than at a national level- start with GPs and primary care and then take it to regional hospital and clinical level. With the right security, it could deliver the kind of cost savings/efficiency gains that it would pay for itself quite quickly.
Giving primary healthcare trusts the ability to do this could allow this new policy enough power to deliver.
As the internet is not a single massive database, the idea that the NHS should have such an approach has been a huge mistake. This is a policy that has several merits, and I have not been saying that very often over the past year.

This being an area I have worked in. One of the issues with the nhs is a lack of standards. Ideally what should be possible is that you can use applications from different firms depending on your needs which can all work with the existing data, meaning that if someone produces a better app for your needs its just slot it in and no need to migrate all your data it just works with it without issue.

The NHS should certainly layout a DB schema for patient data and auditing access etc and make that schema publiclly available. They could even potentially make a little money by running a certification program so for a fee a company can have their software certified as NHS ready

Yes. iirc museums some time ago agreed a standard schema for data interchange.

There is a data exchange format for medical stuff called HL7 but frankly its a mess

stodge said:

On patient records, NHS England decided not to digitise all its records for the obvious reason they didn't need to.

The truth is most people never visit a GP or have any contact with the NHS. What happens is a patient's records are digitised and made available when required. I was told by the person who led the digitisation project about 10% of those registered with a GP have their records uploaded - they would be those with chronic or ongoing conditions and the hypochondriacs. Another 10% would come in on an emergency basis once in a blue moon and their records would alo be uploaded but everyone else - no, it wasn't the time, effort or money to digitise the records and the storage of the old paper records was cheaper and easier than digitisation and disposal.

Normally, if you make an appointment and your records aren't on the system, they get uploaded and that can be done in an emergency within an hour if need be. That's the arrangement NHS England has with the off-site storage company who have to retrieve the paper file (the old Lloyd George envelope) and scan it in as part of their contract.

Foss said:

Pagan2 said:

Foss said:

Pagan2 said:

Cicero said:

Foxy said:

FPT

FrancisUrquhart said:

New neighbourhood health services, open 12 hours a day, six day days a week, will be launched across the country offering tests, post-operation care, nursing and mental health treatment

To "bring back the family doctor" system, thousands more GPs will be trained

There will also be a push for GPs to lean on artificial intelligence to take notes while other technology will be used to speed up answering calls to surgeries

Newly qualified dentists will need to practise in the NHS for a minimum period - the government has indicated they intend this to be three years

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cx247rn0252t

Lord Darzi proposed this 20 years ago. I can't remember, why didn't it happen?

Or indeed when May promised it in 2019. It's a good plan that is very difficult to implement.

I suppose we will see the detail later today, but all those new neighbourhood health centres and staff are going to need funding, and it's not obvious where either that capital or revenue are coming from. Or the trained staff for that matter. The NHS workforce plan seems to have all gone quiet since it's announcement.

I am not convinced by AI either. It confabulates too much to be reliable for medical notes.

The NHS has failed to digitize its records, despite huge sums being thrown at the project. Just possibly the solution may lie in digitization of records at a surgery level, rather than at a national level- start with GPs and primary care and then take it to regional hospital and clinical level. With the right security, it could deliver the kind of cost savings/efficiency gains that it would pay for itself quite quickly.
Giving primary healthcare trusts the ability to do this could allow this new policy enough power to deliver.
As the internet is not a single massive database, the idea that the NHS should have such an approach has been a huge mistake. This is a policy that has several merits, and I have not been saying that very often over the past year.

This being an area I have worked in. One of the issues with the nhs is a lack of standards. Ideally what should be possible is that you can use applications from different firms depending on your needs which can all work with the existing data, meaning that if someone produces a better app for your needs its just slot it in and no need to migrate all your data it just works with it without issue.

The NHS should certainly layout a DB schema for patient data and auditing access etc and make that schema publiclly available. They could even potentially make a little money by running a certification program so for a fee a company can have their software certified as NHS ready

The last thing they should do is define a DB schema as schemas tend to app architecture specific. If they're going to define anything it's a standardised remote interface reusing as much traditional stable technology as possible.

While that would be preferable certainly I lack faith in public sector software development to deliver it, whereas laying out a db schema I am more confident they would possibly be able to deliver

It'll either be shared through an abstracting api (the common interface) or you'll be sharing, what, raw sql?

Given that sql is more a suggestion - rather than a fully formal spec - that'd tie you to specific DB implementations owned by specific orgs over generational timespans.

eek said:

numbertwelve said:

HYUFD said:

Yes Cooper is probably the most heavyweight frontbencher if Reeves goes. May mean Ed Balls is backseat driving on economic policy if she becomes Chancellor though

Has Cooper ever shown any inclination of wanting to be Chancellor? It’s a role that tends to be reserved for those who have particular designs on it. Hunt was perhaps an exception as being essentially a senior figure parachuted in to help stabilise things, but otherwise most appointees have all been people heavily trailed as wanting the job in advance.

She has for some time been rather immersed in the Home Affairs brief and I’ve always felt that was where her interests lay.

Cooper went in that direction because her husband is Ed Balls and she was sensible enough not to be on competition with her husband for the exact same job

wooliedyed said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

wooliedyed said:

HYUFD said:

Yes Cooper is probably the most heavyweight frontbencher if Reeves goes. May mean Ed Balls is backseat driving on economic policy if she becomes Chancellor though

Although one might surmise that after serving as Chief Secretary to the Treasury under Brown the fact shes been put pretty much everywhere - Shadiw Foreign, Home, DWP etc etc except back in the Treasury it suggests she didnt set the world alight with her economics

Our whole system is based on ministers not being specialists. Mrs Thatcher was not actually driving the tank in that famous picture. Chancellors do not need to have more than the most basic grasp of economics. They do need to have a policy.

Yes, and her being kept away from the Treasury/shadow Treasury for 16 years and never talking about the economy says she doesn't have a policy. She's very unlikely ro get the gig imo

Pagan2 said:

Foss said:

Pagan2 said:

Foss said:

Pagan2 said:

Cicero said:

Foxy said:

FPT

FrancisUrquhart said:

New neighbourhood health services, open 12 hours a day, six day days a week, will be launched across the country offering tests, post-operation care, nursing and mental health treatment

To "bring back the family doctor" system, thousands more GPs will be trained

There will also be a push for GPs to lean on artificial intelligence to take notes while other technology will be used to speed up answering calls to surgeries

Newly qualified dentists will need to practise in the NHS for a minimum period - the government has indicated they intend this to be three years

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cx247rn0252t

Lord Darzi proposed this 20 years ago. I can't remember, why didn't it happen?

Or indeed when May promised it in 2019. It's a good plan that is very difficult to implement.

I suppose we will see the detail later today, but all those new neighbourhood health centres and staff are going to need funding, and it's not obvious where either that capital or revenue are coming from. Or the trained staff for that matter. The NHS workforce plan seems to have all gone quiet since it's announcement.

I am not convinced by AI either. It confabulates too much to be reliable for medical notes.

The NHS has failed to digitize its records, despite huge sums being thrown at the project. Just possibly the solution may lie in digitization of records at a surgery level, rather than at a national level- start with GPs and primary care and then take it to regional hospital and clinical level. With the right security, it could deliver the kind of cost savings/efficiency gains that it would pay for itself quite quickly.
Giving primary healthcare trusts the ability to do this could allow this new policy enough power to deliver.
As the internet is not a single massive database, the idea that the NHS should have such an approach has been a huge mistake. This is a policy that has several merits, and I have not been saying that very often over the past year.

This being an area I have worked in. One of the issues with the nhs is a lack of standards. Ideally what should be possible is that you can use applications from different firms depending on your needs which can all work with the existing data, meaning that if someone produces a better app for your needs its just slot it in and no need to migrate all your data it just works with it without issue.

The NHS should certainly layout a DB schema for patient data and auditing access etc and make that schema publiclly available. They could even potentially make a little money by running a certification program so for a fee a company can have their software certified as NHS ready

The last thing they should do is define a DB schema as schemas tend to app architecture specific. If they're going to define anything it's a standardised remote interface reusing as much traditional stable technology as possible.

While that would be preferable certainly I lack faith in public sector software development to deliver it, whereas laying out a db schema I am more confident they would possibly be able to deliver

It'll either be shared through an abstracting api (the common interface) or you'll be sharing, what, raw sql?

Given that sql is more a suggestion - rather than a fully formal spec - that'd tie you to specific DB implementations owned by specific orgs over generational timespans.

By schema I just mean defining

These are the tables that will exist
These are the columns each table will have along with datatypes and foreign keys

I am not talking about sql in the least

rottenborough said:

Labour seem to be close to losing their minds as the Tories did whilst governing.

Farage will be PM if they oust Starmer so soon after he won a mandate imho.

If he resigns six months/year before next GE saying time for a younger candidate then that's different.

rottenborough said:

Labour seem to be close to losing their minds as the Tories did whilst governing.

Farage will be PM if they oust Starmer so soon after he won a mandate imho.

If he resigns six months/year before next GE saying time for a younger candidate then that's different.

rottenborough said:

Labour seem to be close to losing their minds as the Tories did whilst governing.

Farage will be PM if they oust Starmer so soon after he won a mandate imho.

If he resigns six months/year before next GE saying time for a younger candidate then that's different.

rottenborough said:

Labour seem to be close to losing their minds as the Tories did whilst governing.

Farage will be PM if they oust Starmer so soon after he won a mandate imho.

If he resigns six months/year before next GE saying time for a younger candidate then that's different.

FeersumEnjineeya said:

A_View_From_Cumbria5 said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

wooliedyed said:

HYUFD said:

Yes Cooper is probably the most heavyweight frontbencher if Reeves goes. May mean Ed Balls is backseat driving on economic policy if she becomes Chancellor though

Although one might surmise that after serving as Chief Secretary to the Treasury under Brown the fact shes been put pretty much everywhere - Shadiw Foreign, Home, DWP etc etc except back in the Treasury it suggests she didnt set the world alight with her economics

Our whole system is based on ministers not being specialists. Mrs Thatcher was not actually driving the tank in that famous picture. Chancellors do not need to have more than the most basic grasp of economics. They do need to have a policy.

But they do need to be able to count. There is little evidence Reeves can count. There is absolute evidence that Keir Starmer is functionally disnumerate and I wouldn't be surprised is Reeves is much the same.

SKS has an A in maths at A-level, and Reeves has an A in both maths and further maths, so it is absurd to claim that they are unable to count or "disnumerate" (a word which you appear to have invented; I assume you mean innumerate). They may not be the world's greatest economists, but they are certainly not stupid or innumerate.

eek said:

wooliedyed said:

eek said:

numbertwelve said:

HYUFD said:

Yes Cooper is probably the most heavyweight frontbencher if Reeves goes. May mean Ed Balls is backseat driving on economic policy if she becomes Chancellor though

Has Cooper ever shown any inclination of wanting to be Chancellor? It’s a role that tends to be reserved for those who have particular designs on it. Hunt was perhaps an exception as being essentially a senior figure parachuted in to help stabilise things, but otherwise most appointees have all been people heavily trailed as wanting the job in advance.

She has for some time been rather immersed in the Home Affairs brief and I’ve always felt that was where her interests lay.

Cooper went in that direction because her husband is Ed Balls and she was sensible enough not to be on competition with her husband for the exact same job

She'd had a more senior role to him in the Treasury before he became Shadow CoE (hed been ecomonic secretary she was later chief secretary).she moved to Shadow home the same day Miliband made Balls Shadow CoE and then went onto chair the Home Affairs committee after the 2015 election

Ed however was economic advisor to Gordon from 97-99

MoonRabbit said:

MoonRabbit said:

williamglenn said:

I think Labour have bitten off more than they can chew with this:

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/35671855/wes-streeting-more-access-fab-jabs-economy/

BRITAIN will be “fat free” within a decade, paving the way for tax cuts worth billions of pounds, Wes Streeting declared yesterday.

People will be fat free or dead if the jabs have some inherent vice only revealed by Streetings mass beta test.

People have got overweight and under-fit by eating crap between meals - that only builds appetite not stops it - and zero exercise. And there’s some simple cheat that makes them fit and well?

Nope. God has told us over and over there are no simple “cheats” to wellness and resilience - if you want happiness it must be earned.

MattW said:

tlg86 said:

Sad news from football:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-14804871/Liverpool-Diogo-Jota-dies-car-accident-aged-28.html

With his 26 year old brother in the car in the early hours of the morning:

Liverpool star Diogo Jota has died at the age of 28 after his Lamborghini careered off a road in northern Spain - just two weeks after he married his childhood sweetheart.

The Portuguese forward was travelling in the supercar with his fellow footballer brother Andre, 26, who also died in the crash.

The Lamborghini's tyre is believed to have blown out while overtaking on the A-52 at Cernadilla near Zamora in northwestern Spain, close to the border with Portugal.

The supercar came off the road, rolled and then burst into flames in the early hours of this morning. The emergency services were called but the brothers could not be saved.

Has anyone driven the A-52 at Cernadilla. What is it like? AFAICS it is dual carriageway for a number of miles in both directions, but what are Spanish dual carriageways in that area like wrt maintenance etc?

I can't honestly see a reason for a Lambo tyre to explode, unless poorly maintained or caused by eg road debris.

Malmesbury said:

MattW said:

tlg86 said:

Sad news from football:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-14804871/Liverpool-Diogo-Jota-dies-car-accident-aged-28.html

With his 26 year old brother in the car in the early hours of the morning:

Liverpool star Diogo Jota has died at the age of 28 after his Lamborghini careered off a road in northern Spain - just two weeks after he married his childhood sweetheart.

The Portuguese forward was travelling in the supercar with his fellow footballer brother Andre, 26, who also died in the crash.

The Lamborghini's tyre is believed to have blown out while overtaking on the A-52 at Cernadilla near Zamora in northwestern Spain, close to the border with Portugal.

The supercar came off the road, rolled and then burst into flames in the early hours of this morning. The emergency services were called but the brothers could not be saved.

Has anyone driven the A-52 at Cernadilla. What is it like? AFAICS it is dual carriageway for a number of miles in both directions, but what are Spanish dual carriageways in that area like wrt maintenance etc?

I can't honestly see a reason for a Lambo tyre to explode, unless poorly maintained or caused by eg road debris.

The tires need frequent replacement.

Magnesium wheels?

rcs1000 said:

It is, of course, important to remember the word "competent" is used in the header in its relativistic sense.

kinabalu said:

One of my fave betting drills - because it so often pays - is to lay into irrational exuberance; eg where a perception something is about to happen takes off to a level which comfortably exceeds the actual probability of it happening. A recent example was Kemi Badenoch at 2.7 (!) to exit in 2025 in the aftermath of the May local election results. Crazy. But thank you. Are we seeing something similar with the notion that Rachel Reeves is toast as Chancellor? I think we are. Whilst I agree with TSE that Coop is appealing at 16/1 if RR does go, the market I'd really like to see is RR exit date.

numbertwelve said:

Scott_xP said:

@CitySamuel

Starmer’s immediate problem, which I do not see how he can solve, is how to stop gilts going further through the floor when his chancellor inevitably resigns.

I should add that I necessarily don’t think he will fire her but that she’ll go. There’s a political law of the jungle. Once you’ve passed a certain level of public humiliation and credibility collapse, the ability to do the job evaporates

https://x.com/CitySamuel/status/1940515794645127618

He surely can’t fire her at least before the budget. The optics of kicking her while she’s down would be far too grave, even for someone as ruthless as Starmer.

I do think it’s possible she leaves of her own volition, for the reasons I mentioned this morning.

HYUFD said:

wooliedyed said:

Scott_xP said:

‪@adambienkov.bsky.social‬

Kemi Badenoch is refusing to sack her party's leader in London despite her backing a far-right group calling for the mass deportation of millions of people living legally in the UK.

A Conservative spokesman described the group as "non partisan" and said party members were free to join it

https://bsky.app/profile/adambienkov.bsky.social/post/3lt2fp7uen22h

*far right klaxon*

Rupert Lowe's new group apparently now 'far right'

kinabalu said:

numbertwelve said:

Scott_xP said:

@CitySamuel

Starmer’s immediate problem, which I do not see how he can solve, is how to stop gilts going further through the floor when his chancellor inevitably resigns.

I should add that I necessarily don’t think he will fire her but that she’ll go. There’s a political law of the jungle. Once you’ve passed a certain level of public humiliation and credibility collapse, the ability to do the job evaporates

https://x.com/CitySamuel/status/1940515794645127618

He surely can’t fire her at least before the budget. The optics of kicking her while she’s down would be far too grave, even for someone as ruthless as Starmer.

I do think it’s possible she leaves of her own volition, for the reasons I mentioned this morning.

Resign/sack/stay (this year) are all possible so we have to do numbers. Here's mine:

Resign 20%
Sack 5%
Stay 75%

Malmesbury said:

a

Pagan2 said:

Foss said:

Pagan2 said:

Foss said:

Pagan2 said:

Cicero said:

Foxy said:

FPT

FrancisUrquhart said:

New neighbourhood health services, open 12 hours a day, six day days a week, will be launched across the country offering tests, post-operation care, nursing and mental health treatment

To "bring back the family doctor" system, thousands more GPs will be trained

There will also be a push for GPs to lean on artificial intelligence to take notes while other technology will be used to speed up answering calls to surgeries

Newly qualified dentists will need to practise in the NHS for a minimum period - the government has indicated they intend this to be three years

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cx247rn0252t

Lord Darzi proposed this 20 years ago. I can't remember, why didn't it happen?

Or indeed when May promised it in 2019. It's a good plan that is very difficult to implement.

I suppose we will see the detail later today, but all those new neighbourhood health centres and staff are going to need funding, and it's not obvious where either that capital or revenue are coming from. Or the trained staff for that matter. The NHS workforce plan seems to have all gone quiet since it's announcement.

I am not convinced by AI either. It confabulates too much to be reliable for medical notes.

The NHS has failed to digitize its records, despite huge sums being thrown at the project. Just possibly the solution may lie in digitization of records at a surgery level, rather than at a national level- start with GPs and primary care and then take it to regional hospital and clinical level. With the right security, it could deliver the kind of cost savings/efficiency gains that it would pay for itself quite quickly.
Giving primary healthcare trusts the ability to do this could allow this new policy enough power to deliver.
As the internet is not a single massive database, the idea that the NHS should have such an approach has been a huge mistake. This is a policy that has several merits, and I have not been saying that very often over the past year.

This being an area I have worked in. One of the issues with the nhs is a lack of standards. Ideally what should be possible is that you can use applications from different firms depending on your needs which can all work with the existing data, meaning that if someone produces a better app for your needs its just slot it in and no need to migrate all your data it just works with it without issue.

The NHS should certainly layout a DB schema for patient data and auditing access etc and make that schema publiclly available. They could even potentially make a little money by running a certification program so for a fee a company can have their software certified as NHS ready

The last thing they should do is define a DB schema as schemas tend to app architecture specific. If they're going to define anything it's a standardised remote interface reusing as much traditional stable technology as possible.

While that would be preferable certainly I lack faith in public sector software development to deliver it, whereas laying out a db schema I am more confident they would possibly be able to deliver

It'll either be shared through an abstracting api (the common interface) or you'll be sharing, what, raw sql?

Given that sql is more a suggestion - rather than a fully formal spec - that'd tie you to specific DB implementations owned by specific orgs over generational timespans.

By schema I just mean defining

These are the tables that will exist
These are the columns each table will have along with datatypes and foreign keys

I am not talking about sql in the least

NoSQL DB might be better…

In any event, trying to hard specify the data structure for the whole NHS gets you back to Mega Projects. Which always fail. And often die from requirements growing like KPMG bills.

Malmesbury said:

Northern_Al said:

IanB2 said:

Malmesbury said:

Cicero said:

Foxy said:

FPT

FrancisUrquhart said:

New neighbourhood health services, open 12 hours a day, six day days a week, will be launched across the country offering tests, post-operation care, nursing and mental health treatment

To "bring back the family doctor" system, thousands more GPs will be trained

There will also be a push for GPs to lean on artificial intelligence to take notes while other technology will be used to speed up answering calls to surgeries

Newly qualified dentists will need to practise in the NHS for a minimum period - the government has indicated they intend this to be three years

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cx247rn0252t

Lord Darzi proposed this 20 years ago. I can't remember, why didn't it happen?

Or indeed when May promised it in 2019. It's a good plan that is very difficult to implement.

I suppose we will see the detail later today, but all those new neighbourhood health centres and staff are going to need funding, and it's not obvious where either that capital or revenue are coming from. Or the trained staff for that matter. The NHS workforce plan seems to have all gone quiet since it's announcement.

I am not convinced by AI either. It confabulates too much to be reliable for medical notes.

The NHS has failed to digitize its records, despite huge sums being thrown at the project. Just possibly the solution may lie in digitization of records at a surgery level, rather than at a national level- start with GPs and primary care and then take it to regional hospital and clinical level. With the right security, it could deliver the kind of cost savings/efficiency gains that it would pay for itself quite quickly.
Giving primary healthcare trusts the ability to do this could allow this new policy enough power to deliver.
As the internet is not a single massive database, the idea that the NHS should have such an approach has been a huge mistake. This is a policy that has several merits, and I have not been saying that very often over the past year.

The NHS has (partially) digitised a lot of areas. The problem is incompatible systems and mix of digital with paper.

Most GPs are digitised, IIRC

The sane approach is a gradual building of bridges between systems, rolling updates heading towards a new (and as you say) decentralised system.

I would say that you could get a fairly integrated system in about 20 years.

Yep. Both at Bart’s and my GPs, test results are all quickly uploaded online, and you can inspect your own medical records with a couple of clicks from the email notifying me of an update to my records. It’s actually quite impressive. And the NHs login gets me into both.

If there’s a flaw, it’s that I don’t think the systems are linked, so Barts can’t see my GP test results and vice versa.

Similarly, I had an eye screening test yesterday at 10am. Despite being told that I'd get the results within a couple of weeks, a letter detailing the results was uploaded by 1pm. Impressive.

A big issue is joining stuff up.

My Aunt just got out of hospital. Needs lots of care and follow up. I get various people calling me (down on the paperwork as a contact) to ask if I know what everyone else is doing.

Imagine an app. Shows the discharge plan. Shows the required visits, by various outfits. Shows the required equipment. Medications etc etc. shows status of all of the above. Who visited, when, status, notes, actions….

Full of links to all the different parties involved - messaging in the app?

Make it available to the patient as well. So they can see.

numbertwelve said:

kinabalu said:

One of my fave betting drills - because it so often pays - is to lay into irrational exuberance; eg where a perception something is about to happen takes off to a level which comfortably exceeds the actual probability of it happening. A recent example was Kemi Badenoch at 2.7 (!) to exit in 2025 in the aftermath of the May local election results. Crazy. But thank you. Are we seeing something similar with the notion that Rachel Reeves is toast as Chancellor? I think we are. Whilst I agree with TSE that Coop is appealing at 16/1 if RR does go, the market I'd really like to see is RR exit date.

The fundamentals probably still point to her clinging on, but I don’t think it’s an insignificant chance, particularly given the briefing and reporting.

Firstly, it does appear she has been very bruised by the events of the last week.

Secondly, and I am not going to speculate, but we do not know what is going on in her personal life and what sort of impact that is having on her, beyond of course the scenes in the Commons yesterday.

Thirdly there are hints that all is not well in the relationship between No10 and No11.

Fourthly Starmer is not known to be particularly loyal.

Fifthly is the “blood in the water” effect that once a politician becomes the story and is seen to be bruised, it becomes much harder for them to stay afloat.

Now balanced against this is a) the political capital Starmer will certainly not want to spend being seen to push her at this stage and b) the wobbly markets which will give her a personal mission to want to stay on. I do think it’s more likely than not that she gets to the budget and to 2026, but I wouldn’t say it’s inconceivable she goes in the next week, say.

rcs1000 said:

Malmesbury said:

a

Pagan2 said:

Foss said:

Pagan2 said:

Foss said:

Pagan2 said:

Cicero said:

Foxy said:

FPT

FrancisUrquhart said:

New neighbourhood health services, open 12 hours a day, six day days a week, will be launched across the country offering tests, post-operation care, nursing and mental health treatment

To "bring back the family doctor" system, thousands more GPs will be trained

There will also be a push for GPs to lean on artificial intelligence to take notes while other technology will be used to speed up answering calls to surgeries

Newly qualified dentists will need to practise in the NHS for a minimum period - the government has indicated they intend this to be three years

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cx247rn0252t

Lord Darzi proposed this 20 years ago. I can't remember, why didn't it happen?

Or indeed when May promised it in 2019. It's a good plan that is very difficult to implement.

I suppose we will see the detail later today, but all those new neighbourhood health centres and staff are going to need funding, and it's not obvious where either that capital or revenue are coming from. Or the trained staff for that matter. The NHS workforce plan seems to have all gone quiet since it's announcement.

I am not convinced by AI either. It confabulates too much to be reliable for medical notes.

The NHS has failed to digitize its records, despite huge sums being thrown at the project. Just possibly the solution may lie in digitization of records at a surgery level, rather than at a national level- start with GPs and primary care and then take it to regional hospital and clinical level. With the right security, it could deliver the kind of cost savings/efficiency gains that it would pay for itself quite quickly.
Giving primary healthcare trusts the ability to do this could allow this new policy enough power to deliver.
As the internet is not a single massive database, the idea that the NHS should have such an approach has been a huge mistake. This is a policy that has several merits, and I have not been saying that very often over the past year.

This being an area I have worked in. One of the issues with the nhs is a lack of standards. Ideally what should be possible is that you can use applications from different firms depending on your needs which can all work with the existing data, meaning that if someone produces a better app for your needs its just slot it in and no need to migrate all your data it just works with it without issue.

The NHS should certainly layout a DB schema for patient data and auditing access etc and make that schema publiclly available. They could even potentially make a little money by running a certification program so for a fee a company can have their software certified as NHS ready

The last thing they should do is define a DB schema as schemas tend to app architecture specific. If they're going to define anything it's a standardised remote interface reusing as much traditional stable technology as possible.

While that would be preferable certainly I lack faith in public sector software development to deliver it, whereas laying out a db schema I am more confident they would possibly be able to deliver

It'll either be shared through an abstracting api (the common interface) or you'll be sharing, what, raw sql?

Given that sql is more a suggestion - rather than a fully formal spec - that'd tie you to specific DB implementations owned by specific orgs over generational timespans.

By schema I just mean defining

These are the tables that will exist
These are the columns each table will have along with datatypes and foreign keys

I am not talking about sql in the least

NoSQL DB might be better…

In any event, trying to hard specify the data structure for the whole NHS gets you back to Mega Projects. Which always fail. And often die from requirements growing like KPMG bills.

Yes: one with surely be much better off defining a few simple standards: this is the JSON for a patient, a prescription, etc.

Table (relational) databases existed because computing power was expensive, and this was by far the most efficient way of storing data. These days, those constraints do not exist.

rcs1000 said:

Malmesbury said:

a

Pagan2 said:

Foss said:

Pagan2 said:

Foss said:

Pagan2 said:

Cicero said:

Foxy said:

FPT

FrancisUrquhart said:

New neighbourhood health services, open 12 hours a day, six day days a week, will be launched across the country offering tests, post-operation care, nursing and mental health treatment

To "bring back the family doctor" system, thousands more GPs will be trained

There will also be a push for GPs to lean on artificial intelligence to take notes while other technology will be used to speed up answering calls to surgeries

Newly qualified dentists will need to practise in the NHS for a minimum period - the government has indicated they intend this to be three years

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cx247rn0252t

Lord Darzi proposed this 20 years ago. I can't remember, why didn't it happen?

Or indeed when May promised it in 2019. It's a good plan that is very difficult to implement.

I suppose we will see the detail later today, but all those new neighbourhood health centres and staff are going to need funding, and it's not obvious where either that capital or revenue are coming from. Or the trained staff for that matter. The NHS workforce plan seems to have all gone quiet since it's announcement.

I am not convinced by AI either. It confabulates too much to be reliable for medical notes.

The NHS has failed to digitize its records, despite huge sums being thrown at the project. Just possibly the solution may lie in digitization of records at a surgery level, rather than at a national level- start with GPs and primary care and then take it to regional hospital and clinical level. With the right security, it could deliver the kind of cost savings/efficiency gains that it would pay for itself quite quickly.
Giving primary healthcare trusts the ability to do this could allow this new policy enough power to deliver.
As the internet is not a single massive database, the idea that the NHS should have such an approach has been a huge mistake. This is a policy that has several merits, and I have not been saying that very often over the past year.

This being an area I have worked in. One of the issues with the nhs is a lack of standards. Ideally what should be possible is that you can use applications from different firms depending on your needs which can all work with the existing data, meaning that if someone produces a better app for your needs its just slot it in and no need to migrate all your data it just works with it without issue.

The NHS should certainly layout a DB schema for patient data and auditing access etc and make that schema publiclly available. They could even potentially make a little money by running a certification program so for a fee a company can have their software certified as NHS ready

The last thing they should do is define a DB schema as schemas tend to app architecture specific. If they're going to define anything it's a standardised remote interface reusing as much traditional stable technology as possible.

While that would be preferable certainly I lack faith in public sector software development to deliver it, whereas laying out a db schema I am more confident they would possibly be able to deliver

It'll either be shared through an abstracting api (the common interface) or you'll be sharing, what, raw sql?

Given that sql is more a suggestion - rather than a fully formal spec - that'd tie you to specific DB implementations owned by specific orgs over generational timespans.

By schema I just mean defining

These are the tables that will exist
These are the columns each table will have along with datatypes and foreign keys

I am not talking about sql in the least

NoSQL DB might be better…

In any event, trying to hard specify the data structure for the whole NHS gets you back to Mega Projects. Which always fail. And often die from requirements growing like KPMG bills.

Yes: one with surely be much better off defining a few simple standards: this is the JSON for a patient, a prescription, etc.

Table (relational) databases existed because computing power was expensive, and this was by far the most efficient way of storing data. These days, those constraints do not exist.

Pagan2 said:

rcs1000 said:

Malmesbury said:

a

Pagan2 said:

Foss said:

Pagan2 said:

Foss said:

Pagan2 said:

Cicero said:

Foxy said:

FPT

FrancisUrquhart said:

New neighbourhood health services, open 12 hours a day, six day days a week, will be launched across the country offering tests, post-operation care, nursing and mental health treatment

To "bring back the family doctor" system, thousands more GPs will be trained

There will also be a push for GPs to lean on artificial intelligence to take notes while other technology will be used to speed up answering calls to surgeries

Newly qualified dentists will need to practise in the NHS for a minimum period - the government has indicated they intend this to be three years

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cx247rn0252t

Lord Darzi proposed this 20 years ago. I can't remember, why didn't it happen?

Or indeed when May promised it in 2019. It's a good plan that is very difficult to implement.

I suppose we will see the detail later today, but all those new neighbourhood health centres and staff are going to need funding, and it's not obvious where either that capital or revenue are coming from. Or the trained staff for that matter. The NHS workforce plan seems to have all gone quiet since it's announcement.

I am not convinced by AI either. It confabulates too much to be reliable for medical notes.

The NHS has failed to digitize its records, despite huge sums being thrown at the project. Just possibly the solution may lie in digitization of records at a surgery level, rather than at a national level- start with GPs and primary care and then take it to regional hospital and clinical level. With the right security, it could deliver the kind of cost savings/efficiency gains that it would pay for itself quite quickly.
Giving primary healthcare trusts the ability to do this could allow this new policy enough power to deliver.
As the internet is not a single massive database, the idea that the NHS should have such an approach has been a huge mistake. This is a policy that has several merits, and I have not been saying that very often over the past year.

This being an area I have worked in. One of the issues with the nhs is a lack of standards. Ideally what should be possible is that you can use applications from different firms depending on your needs which can all work with the existing data, meaning that if someone produces a better app for your needs its just slot it in and no need to migrate all your data it just works with it without issue.

The NHS should certainly layout a DB schema for patient data and auditing access etc and make that schema publiclly available. They could even potentially make a little money by running a certification program so for a fee a company can have their software certified as NHS ready

The last thing they should do is define a DB schema as schemas tend to app architecture specific. If they're going to define anything it's a standardised remote interface reusing as much traditional stable technology as possible.

While that would be preferable certainly I lack faith in public sector software development to deliver it, whereas laying out a db schema I am more confident they would possibly be able to deliver

It'll either be shared through an abstracting api (the common interface) or you'll be sharing, what, raw sql?

Given that sql is more a suggestion - rather than a fully formal spec - that'd tie you to specific DB implementations owned by specific orgs over generational timespans.

By schema I just mean defining

These are the tables that will exist
These are the columns each table will have along with datatypes and foreign keys

I am not talking about sql in the least

NoSQL DB might be better…

In any event, trying to hard specify the data structure for the whole NHS gets you back to Mega Projects. Which always fail. And often die from requirements growing like KPMG bills.

Yes: one with surely be much better off defining a few simple standards: this is the JSON for a patient, a prescription, etc.

Table (relational) databases existed because computing power was expensive, and this was by far the most efficient way of storing data. These days, those constraints do not exist.

There are other differences between relational and document dbs that merely computer power, you pick the right tool for the right job and I believe for nhs data the choice is relational all the way

Most of the data for a start is highly strutured and ACID is definitely a benefit for nhs applications

viewcode said:

rcs1000 said:

Malmesbury said:

a

Pagan2 said:

Foss said:

Pagan2 said:

Foss said:

Pagan2 said:

Cicero said:

Foxy said:

FPT

FrancisUrquhart said:

New neighbourhood health services, open 12 hours a day, six day days a week, will be launched across the country offering tests, post-operation care, nursing and mental health treatment

To "bring back the family doctor" system, thousands more GPs will be trained

There will also be a push for GPs to lean on artificial intelligence to take notes while other technology will be used to speed up answering calls to surgeries

Newly qualified dentists will need to practise in the NHS for a minimum period - the government has indicated they intend this to be three years

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cx247rn0252t

Lord Darzi proposed this 20 years ago. I can't remember, why didn't it happen?

Or indeed when May promised it in 2019. It's a good plan that is very difficult to implement.

I suppose we will see the detail later today, but all those new neighbourhood health centres and staff are going to need funding, and it's not obvious where either that capital or revenue are coming from. Or the trained staff for that matter. The NHS workforce plan seems to have all gone quiet since it's announcement.

I am not convinced by AI either. It confabulates too much to be reliable for medical notes.

The NHS has failed to digitize its records, despite huge sums being thrown at the project. Just possibly the solution may lie in digitization of records at a surgery level, rather than at a national level- start with GPs and primary care and then take it to regional hospital and clinical level. With the right security, it could deliver the kind of cost savings/efficiency gains that it would pay for itself quite quickly.
Giving primary healthcare trusts the ability to do this could allow this new policy enough power to deliver.
As the internet is not a single massive database, the idea that the NHS should have such an approach has been a huge mistake. This is a policy that has several merits, and I have not been saying that very often over the past year.

This being an area I have worked in. One of the issues with the nhs is a lack of standards. Ideally what should be possible is that you can use applications from different firms depending on your needs which can all work with the existing data, meaning that if someone produces a better app for your needs its just slot it in and no need to migrate all your data it just works with it without issue.

The NHS should certainly layout a DB schema for patient data and auditing access etc and make that schema publiclly available. They could even potentially make a little money by running a certification program so for a fee a company can have their software certified as NHS ready

The last thing they should do is define a DB schema as schemas tend to app architecture specific. If they're going to define anything it's a standardised remote interface reusing as much traditional stable technology as possible.

While that would be preferable certainly I lack faith in public sector software development to deliver it, whereas laying out a db schema I am more confident they would possibly be able to deliver

It'll either be shared through an abstracting api (the common interface) or you'll be sharing, what, raw sql?

Given that sql is more a suggestion - rather than a fully formal spec - that'd tie you to specific DB implementations owned by specific orgs over generational timespans.

By schema I just mean defining

These are the tables that will exist
These are the columns each table will have along with datatypes and foreign keys

I am not talking about sql in the least

NoSQL DB might be better…

In any event, trying to hard specify the data structure for the whole NHS gets you back to Mega Projects. Which always fail. And often die from requirements growing like KPMG bills.

Yes: one with surely be much better off defining a few simple standards: this is the JSON for a patient, a prescription, etc.

Table (relational) databases existed because computing power was expensive, and this was by far the most efficient way of storing data. These days, those constraints do not exist.

Um, I'm easily ten years out of date for Big Data stuff, but back in the day you'd use a "schema-last" approach. You upload all of it into a data lake as is and impose the schema at the time of the query. That way you can cope with a vlarge number of records with a vlarge combination of structures. Given the magnitude of the problem that's probably the only way you can do it.

I assume there's somebody on PB who is laughing at my retroness, but is there another way of doing it given that the amount of data can be measured in the shit-tonnes?

numbertwelve said:

kinabalu said:

One of my fave betting drills - because it so often pays - is to lay into irrational exuberance; eg where a perception something is about to happen takes off to a level which comfortably exceeds the actual probability of it happening. A recent example was Kemi Badenoch at 2.7 (!) to exit in 2025 in the aftermath of the May local election results. Crazy. But thank you. Are we seeing something similar with the notion that Rachel Reeves is toast as Chancellor? I think we are. Whilst I agree with TSE that Coop is appealing at 16/1 if RR does go, the market I'd really like to see is RR exit date.

The fundamentals probably still point to her clinging on, but I don’t think it’s an insignificant chance, particularly given the briefing and reporting.

Firstly, it does appear she has been very bruised by the events of the last week.

Secondly, and I am not going to speculate, but we do not know what is going on in her personal life and what sort of impact that is having on her, beyond of course the scenes in the Commons yesterday.

Thirdly there are hints that all is not well in the relationship between No10 and No11.

Fourthly Starmer is not known to be particularly loyal.

Fifthly is the “blood in the water” effect that once a politician becomes the story and is seen to be bruised, it becomes much harder for them to stay afloat.

Now balanced against this is a) the political capital Starmer will certainly not want to spend being seen to push her at this stage and b) the wobbly markets which will give her a personal mission to want to stay on. I do think it’s more likely than not that she gets to the budget and to 2026, but I wouldn’t say it’s inconceivable she goes in the next week, say.

MattW said:

HYUFD said:

MattW said:

tlg86 said:

Sad news from football:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-14804871/Liverpool-Diogo-Jota-dies-car-accident-aged-28.html

With his 26 year old brother in the car in the early hours of the morning:

Liverpool star Diogo Jota has died at the age of 28 after his Lamborghini careered off a road in northern Spain - just two weeks after he married his childhood sweetheart.

The Portuguese forward was travelling in the supercar with his fellow footballer brother Andre, 26, who also died in the crash.

The Lamborghini's tyre is believed to have blown out while overtaking on the A-52 at Cernadilla near Zamora in northwestern Spain, close to the border with Portugal.

The supercar came off the road, rolled and then burst into flames in the early hours of this morning. The emergency services were called but the brothers could not be saved.

Has anyone driven the A-52 at Cernadilla. What is it like? AFAICS it is dual carriageway for a number of miles in both directions, but what are Spanish dual carriageways in that area like wrt maintenance etc?

I can't honestly see a reason for a Lambo tyre to explode, unless poorly maintained or caused by eg road debris.

Tyres are more likely to explode at high speeds as a supercar can regularly reach unfortunately

Yes, but why would anyone be driving at high speed *for a Lambo* on a public road, even if doing a penis size demonstration in the early hours?

I can see 110 or 130mph for a young footballer showing off to his brother, but the tyres are specified for the car maximums not the public road limitations - which would be more like 180-190mph.

Even my huge pedestrian 150hp diesel estate tops out at a ludicrous ~135mph.

And I don't see a Liverpool footballer needing to skimp on maintenance.

We need to know the cause of the tyre blowout, which was then the cause of the crash.

MattW said:

HYUFD said:

MattW said:

tlg86 said:

Sad news from football:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-14804871/Liverpool-Diogo-Jota-dies-car-accident-aged-28.html

With his 26 year old brother in the car in the early hours of the morning:

Liverpool star Diogo Jota has died at the age of 28 after his Lamborghini careered off a road in northern Spain - just two weeks after he married his childhood sweetheart.

The Portuguese forward was travelling in the supercar with his fellow footballer brother Andre, 26, who also died in the crash.

The Lamborghini's tyre is believed to have blown out while overtaking on the A-52 at Cernadilla near Zamora in northwestern Spain, close to the border with Portugal.

The supercar came off the road, rolled and then burst into flames in the early hours of this morning. The emergency services were called but the brothers could not be saved.

Has anyone driven the A-52 at Cernadilla. What is it like? AFAICS it is dual carriageway for a number of miles in both directions, but what are Spanish dual carriageways in that area like wrt maintenance etc?

I can't honestly see a reason for a Lambo tyre to explode, unless poorly maintained or caused by eg road debris.

Tyres are more likely to explode at high speeds as a supercar can regularly reach unfortunately

Yes, but why would anyone be driving at high speed *for a Lambo* on a public road, even if doing a penis size demonstration in the early hours?

I can see 110 or 130mph for a young footballer showing off to his brother, but the tyres are specified for the car maximums not the public road limitations - which would be more like 180-190mph.

Even my huge pedestrian 150hp diesel estate tops out at a ludicrous ~135mph.

And I don't see a Liverpool footballer needing to skimp on maintenance.

We need to know the cause of the tyre blowout, which was then the cause of the crash.

viewcode said:

rcs1000 said:

Malmesbury said:

a

Pagan2 said:

Foss said:

Pagan2 said:

Foss said:

Pagan2 said:

Cicero said:

Foxy said:

FPT

FrancisUrquhart said:

New neighbourhood health services, open 12 hours a day, six day days a week, will be launched across the country offering tests, post-operation care, nursing and mental health treatment

To "bring back the family doctor" system, thousands more GPs will be trained

There will also be a push for GPs to lean on artificial intelligence to take notes while other technology will be used to speed up answering calls to surgeries

Newly qualified dentists will need to practise in the NHS for a minimum period - the government has indicated they intend this to be three years

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cx247rn0252t

Lord Darzi proposed this 20 years ago. I can't remember, why didn't it happen?

Or indeed when May promised it in 2019. It's a good plan that is very difficult to implement.

I suppose we will see the detail later today, but all those new neighbourhood health centres and staff are going to need funding, and it's not obvious where either that capital or revenue are coming from. Or the trained staff for that matter. The NHS workforce plan seems to have all gone quiet since it's announcement.

I am not convinced by AI either. It confabulates too much to be reliable for medical notes.

The NHS has failed to digitize its records, despite huge sums being thrown at the project. Just possibly the solution may lie in digitization of records at a surgery level, rather than at a national level- start with GPs and primary care and then take it to regional hospital and clinical level. With the right security, it could deliver the kind of cost savings/efficiency gains that it would pay for itself quite quickly.
Giving primary healthcare trusts the ability to do this could allow this new policy enough power to deliver.
As the internet is not a single massive database, the idea that the NHS should have such an approach has been a huge mistake. This is a policy that has several merits, and I have not been saying that very often over the past year.

This being an area I have worked in. One of the issues with the nhs is a lack of standards. Ideally what should be possible is that you can use applications from different firms depending on your needs which can all work with the existing data, meaning that if someone produces a better app for your needs its just slot it in and no need to migrate all your data it just works with it without issue.

The NHS should certainly layout a DB schema for patient data and auditing access etc and make that schema publiclly available. They could even potentially make a little money by running a certification program so for a fee a company can have their software certified as NHS ready

The last thing they should do is define a DB schema as schemas tend to app architecture specific. If they're going to define anything it's a standardised remote interface reusing as much traditional stable technology as possible.

While that would be preferable certainly I lack faith in public sector software development to deliver it, whereas laying out a db schema I am more confident they would possibly be able to deliver

It'll either be shared through an abstracting api (the common interface) or you'll be sharing, what, raw sql?

Given that sql is more a suggestion - rather than a fully formal spec - that'd tie you to specific DB implementations owned by specific orgs over generational timespans.

By schema I just mean defining

These are the tables that will exist
These are the columns each table will have along with datatypes and foreign keys

I am not talking about sql in the least

NoSQL DB might be better…

In any event, trying to hard specify the data structure for the whole NHS gets you back to Mega Projects. Which always fail. And often die from requirements growing like KPMG bills.

Yes: one with surely be much better off defining a few simple standards: this is the JSON for a patient, a prescription, etc.

Table (relational) databases existed because computing power was expensive, and this was by far the most efficient way of storing data. These days, those constraints do not exist.

Um, I'm easily ten years out of date for Big Data stuff, but back in the day you'd use a "schema-last" approach. You upload all of it into a data lake as is and impose the schema at the time of the query. That way you can cope with a vlarge number of records with a vlarge combination of structures. Given the magnitude of the problem that's probably the only way you can do it.

I assume there's somebody on PB who is laughing at my retroness, but is there another way of doing it given that the amount of data can be measured in the shit-tonnes?

Malmesbury said:

viewcode said:

rcs1000 said:

Malmesbury said:

a

Pagan2 said:

Foss said:

Pagan2 said:

Foss said:

Pagan2 said:

Cicero said:

Foxy said:

FPT

FrancisUrquhart said:

New neighbourhood health services, open 12 hours a day, six day days a week, will be launched across the country offering tests, post-operation care, nursing and mental health treatment

To "bring back the family doctor" system, thousands more GPs will be trained

There will also be a push for GPs to lean on artificial intelligence to take notes while other technology will be used to speed up answering calls to surgeries

Newly qualified dentists will need to practise in the NHS for a minimum period - the government has indicated they intend this to be three years

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cx247rn0252t

Lord Darzi proposed this 20 years ago. I can't remember, why didn't it happen?

Or indeed when May promised it in 2019. It's a good plan that is very difficult to implement.

I suppose we will see the detail later today, but all those new neighbourhood health centres and staff are going to need funding, and it's not obvious where either that capital or revenue are coming from. Or the trained staff for that matter. The NHS workforce plan seems to have all gone quiet since it's announcement.

I am not convinced by AI either. It confabulates too much to be reliable for medical notes.

The NHS has failed to digitize its records, despite huge sums being thrown at the project. Just possibly the solution may lie in digitization of records at a surgery level, rather than at a national level- start with GPs and primary care and then take it to regional hospital and clinical level. With the right security, it could deliver the kind of cost savings/efficiency gains that it would pay for itself quite quickly.
Giving primary healthcare trusts the ability to do this could allow this new policy enough power to deliver.
As the internet is not a single massive database, the idea that the NHS should have such an approach has been a huge mistake. This is a policy that has several merits, and I have not been saying that very often over the past year.

This being an area I have worked in. One of the issues with the nhs is a lack of standards. Ideally what should be possible is that you can use applications from different firms depending on your needs which can all work with the existing data, meaning that if someone produces a better app for your needs its just slot it in and no need to migrate all your data it just works with it without issue.

The NHS should certainly layout a DB schema for patient data and auditing access etc and make that schema publiclly available. They could even potentially make a little money by running a certification program so for a fee a company can have their software certified as NHS ready

The last thing they should do is define a DB schema as schemas tend to app architecture specific. If they're going to define anything it's a standardised remote interface reusing as much traditional stable technology as possible.

While that would be preferable certainly I lack faith in public sector software development to deliver it, whereas laying out a db schema I am more confident they would possibly be able to deliver

It'll either be shared through an abstracting api (the common interface) or you'll be sharing, what, raw sql?

Given that sql is more a suggestion - rather than a fully formal spec - that'd tie you to specific DB implementations owned by specific orgs over generational timespans.

By schema I just mean defining

These are the tables that will exist
These are the columns each table will have along with datatypes and foreign keys

I am not talking about sql in the least

NoSQL DB might be better…

In any event, trying to hard specify the data structure for the whole NHS gets you back to Mega Projects. Which always fail. And often die from requirements growing like KPMG bills.

Yes: one with surely be much better off defining a few simple standards: this is the JSON for a patient, a prescription, etc.

Table (relational) databases existed because computing power was expensive, and this was by far the most efficient way of storing data. These days, those constraints do not exist.

Um, I'm easily ten years out of date for Big Data stuff, but back in the day you'd use a "schema-last" approach. You upload all of it into a data lake as is and impose the schema at the time of the query. That way you can cope with a vlarge number of records with a vlarge combination of structures. Given the magnitude of the problem that's probably the only way you can do it.

I assume there's somebody on PB who is laughing at my retroness, but is there another way of doing it given that the amount of data can be measured in the shit-tonnes?

Yup. Which tends to go with a NoSql approach. Some funky tools out there to generate schemas from data. Fit to ever higher percentages, offer the exceptions up for review, rinse/repeat…

Nigelb said:

Scott_xP said:

@FirstSquawk

DEPUTY COMMANDER OF RUSSIAN NAVY KILLED IN RUSSIA'S KURSK REGION, GOVERNOR SAYS

Along with a number of senior officers.
https://x.com/igorsushko/status/1940673354865967113

Pagan2 said:

rcs1000 said:

Malmesbury said:

a

Pagan2 said:

Foss said:

Pagan2 said:

Foss said:

Pagan2 said:

Cicero said:

Foxy said:

FPT

FrancisUrquhart said:

New neighbourhood health services, open 12 hours a day, six day days a week, will be launched across the country offering tests, post-operation care, nursing and mental health treatment

To "bring back the family doctor" system, thousands more GPs will be trained

There will also be a push for GPs to lean on artificial intelligence to take notes while other technology will be used to speed up answering calls to surgeries

Newly qualified dentists will need to practise in the NHS for a minimum period - the government has indicated they intend this to be three years

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cx247rn0252t

Lord Darzi proposed this 20 years ago. I can't remember, why didn't it happen?

Or indeed when May promised it in 2019. It's a good plan that is very difficult to implement.

I suppose we will see the detail later today, but all those new neighbourhood health centres and staff are going to need funding, and it's not obvious where either that capital or revenue are coming from. Or the trained staff for that matter. The NHS workforce plan seems to have all gone quiet since it's announcement.

I am not convinced by AI either. It confabulates too much to be reliable for medical notes.

The NHS has failed to digitize its records, despite huge sums being thrown at the project. Just possibly the solution may lie in digitization of records at a surgery level, rather than at a national level- start with GPs and primary care and then take it to regional hospital and clinical level. With the right security, it could deliver the kind of cost savings/efficiency gains that it would pay for itself quite quickly.
Giving primary healthcare trusts the ability to do this could allow this new policy enough power to deliver.
As the internet is not a single massive database, the idea that the NHS should have such an approach has been a huge mistake. This is a policy that has several merits, and I have not been saying that very often over the past year.

This being an area I have worked in. One of the issues with the nhs is a lack of standards. Ideally what should be possible is that you can use applications from different firms depending on your needs which can all work with the existing data, meaning that if someone produces a better app for your needs its just slot it in and no need to migrate all your data it just works with it without issue.

The NHS should certainly layout a DB schema for patient data and auditing access etc and make that schema publiclly available. They could even potentially make a little money by running a certification program so for a fee a company can have their software certified as NHS ready

The last thing they should do is define a DB schema as schemas tend to app architecture specific. If they're going to define anything it's a standardised remote interface reusing as much traditional stable technology as possible.

While that would be preferable certainly I lack faith in public sector software development to deliver it, whereas laying out a db schema I am more confident they would possibly be able to deliver

It'll either be shared through an abstracting api (the common interface) or you'll be sharing, what, raw sql?

Given that sql is more a suggestion - rather than a fully formal spec - that'd tie you to specific DB implementations owned by specific orgs over generational timespans.

By schema I just mean defining

These are the tables that will exist
These are the columns each table will have along with datatypes and foreign keys

I am not talking about sql in the least

NoSQL DB might be better…

In any event, trying to hard specify the data structure for the whole NHS gets you back to Mega Projects. Which always fail. And often die from requirements growing like KPMG bills.

Yes: one with surely be much better off defining a few simple standards: this is the JSON for a patient, a prescription, etc.

Table (relational) databases existed because computing power was expensive, and this was by far the most efficient way of storing data. These days, those constraints do not exist.

There are other differences between relational and document dbs that merely computer power, you pick the right tool for the right job and I believe for nhs data the choice is relational all the way

Most of the data for a start is highly strutured and ACID is definitely a benefit for nhs applications