WHEN the National Health Service was created, people did not live as long as they do now. That we all live longer is, indeed, largely down to that same health service.
Today, however, doubts arise about whether the NHS is fit for purpose – and about whether we are fit enough for old age. It is a grand achievement to reach 85 and over. It is not so grand that many who reach that age are suffering from multiple illnesses and that, in trying to treat them, the health service could be crippled by the time it reaches its own late eighties.
As the latest research – reported in our Grey Matters series today – reveals, the number of over-85s is set to increase 110 per cent by 2034. However, many reaching such seniority are set to have more health problems than those already there today, putting additional pressure on the NHS.
By 2040, more than half of over-85s will suffer from more than four morbidities – such as dementia, heart disease, diabetes, arthritis or high blood pressure – at once. However, the good news is that there are steps the under-60s can take to prevent or allay this.
According to the experts, cutting out unhealthy behaviour now can make old age more comfortable later. That means reducing obesity, quitting smoking, drinking responsibly, and increasing physical activity. None of this is asking too much. Obesity may be complicated, but it causes multiple further conditions on its own, from arthritis through heart disease to cancer. It must be confronted. The other prescriptions are well-known. It’s just down to a willingness to take the medicine.
At an institutional level, the Royal Pharmaceutical Society Scotland has been seeking a greater role for its members in managing patients’ prescriptions, and this should be investigated, as should Professor Carol Jagger’s call for an all-in-one geriatric service to replace multiple clinic attendance.
That said, we can’t leave it all down to the ageing health service. We must all play our own part. If we want the old lady that is the NHS to help us, we must do our bit to help the old lady.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here