#EAPM - Are the Brits really aware of looming health-care issues?

Brexit is on the way, at least in theory, but what has been remarkable down the line is that, aside from all the pantomime-style hissing and booing, there seems to be little real acknowledge in the House of Commons of the upcoming consequences - especially the consequences of the UK crashing out of the EU with no deal, writes European Alliance for Personalised Medicine (EAPM) Executive Director Denis Horgan.

Lest we forget, the EU has consistently said that ’nothing is agreed until everything is agreed’ and, at the moment, the ‘backstop’ idea to keep the border open between Northern Ireland and its neighbour in the south is coming under fire from various directions. But, so far, nobody has come up with a better plan. Most haven’t come up with any plan at all.

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn this week told Prime Minister Theresa May that she’s in denial about the size of the vote against her initial plan for departure. This may well be the case but, there’s denial among politicians on just about every topic.

There seems to be a shrug and ‘we’ll sort to out’ mentality, certainly among leavers, but just how ‘we’ll sort it out’ remains a mystery.

The bottom line is that, if the UK leaves with no deal, there will be issues from Day One - and many more down the line.

Medicine shortages, a lack of warehouse space, chaos at customs points, more uncertainty among EU citizens in the UK and vice-versa, extra visa costs, skilled-staff shortages and student shortages, a loss of structural funds across regions, and possibly even grounded aircraft.

Far from being elements of a fabricated ‘Operation Fear’, these are clear and present dangers.

Right now, Parliament is playing tit-for-tat politics - which you would expect of politicians, of course - but surely a sense of responsibility needs to descend. The UK leaving with no deal benefits nobody, and the EU knows this.

But contrary to some who will tell you that Europe wants to spank Britain’s bottom for having the audacity to leave the Union, it is effectively saying: “You go your way, if you must. But we are sticking together as the 27 remaining member states.”

Add to this: “We’ve told you all along that you can’t cherry pick, have a special status or have an impact on club decisions after you’ve left the club,” and the message is clear: a no-deal Brexit really does mean that.

The sense of urgency may have been upped of late in a political in-fighting and manoeuvring sense, but the messages about the disasters that look to be waiting around the very next corner are either not getting through, or are being put aside while UK MPs strike a pose.

Implications in health care

Very recently we’ve been hearing from those in the health industry worried that Britain may crash out of the EU at the end of March with a no-deal Brexit.

The Europe-based pharmaceutical lobby group EFPIA last week called on both EU and UK policymakers to put politics aside and prioritise patients in planning for a such a scenario, stating that there are now “very real, tangible and immediate threats to patient safety”.

Meanwhile, Mike Thompson, who is head of the UK’s ABPI group, was quick to warn that “no deal would prove to be extremely challenging”. This despite medicine stockpiling and duplicating manufacturing processes across the industry.

To add to the clamour, the British Medical Association has gone so far as to call for a second referendum.

Prior to this, the European Parliament’s Brexit negotiator had raised the question: “Will doctors enjoy continued and guaranteed recognition of their qualifications in the UK?”

Certainly, the impact of Brexit could result in an adverse effect on access to healthcare. But it’s not only that. What about such matters as vital biomedical research across the EU as a whole, and Britain in particular?

The UK may well find itself isolated in healthcare and research, at least temporarily.

Innovation and prevention

Health-care innovation already needs incentives and investment, and cannot be allowed to suffer further. Innovation (and the incentives for it) are key to health and wealth in the EU. It is good for business, it’s good for investment and it’s good for citizens. This applies to Britain also, In or out of the Union.

It’s a fact that many member states find some high prices charged by pharmaceutical companies for certain medicines unaffordable for their health-care systems.

This produces the knock-on effect that many patients are denied novel drugs and/or treatments, especially in the area of rare diseases, and this inevitably leads to a lower quality of life and sometimes what could have been avoidable death.

Early dialogue between technology developers, regulatory, health technology assessment and, where relevant, pricing bodies will promote innovation and quicker access to medicines at affordable prices, to the benefit of patients.

Meanwhile, preventive measures are being lobbied for all of the time. The EU's health policy has been designed to focus on particular strategic objectives, which include fostering good health, preventing diseases and promoting healthy lifestyles.

This it does by addressing risk factors such as smoking, drinking, unhealthy diet and physical inactivity, as well as drug-related health damage and environmental risks, with special attention given to keeping people healthy into old age.

Education is key, as is ongoing training, and screening programmes. Will the UK be equipped to bring such bits and pieces to the healthcare jigsaw when it goes it alone? Especially given that the famous NHS is already under the cosh in the same way that health systems are in other member states.

More Brexit fallout

Based on the above points, the ‘leave’ vote become reality could prove to be something of a disaster for the health of almost 65 million citizens, despite empty ‘battle-bus’ promises of lots of cash being pumped into the NHS.

And it possibly goes further than that because the ‘supply lines’ of research and cross-border cooperation will surely suffer on a pan-European scale after Brexit starts to kick in.

And, of course, money talks. Not long before the referendum in the UK, NHS England chief executive Simon Stevens went on record to say that he took warnings of a possible post-Brexit recession "very seriously”.

At the time he said: "It's been true for 68 years of NHS history that when the British economy sneezes, the NHS catches a cold and this would be a terrible moment for that to happen at precisely the time the NHS is going to need extra investment.”

He also pointed out that the NHS had "benefited enormously" from employing doctors and nurses from the EU.He spoke of an impact in the event that 130,000 staff could leave due to uncertainty over work visas.

On top of this, in a post-Brexit world, if the UK steps back from any health-related improvements to legislation and standards in the EU, this simply cannot benefit patients.

There are many unknowables, even at this late stage. But the Brussels-based European Alliance for Personalised Medicine (EAPM) believes that the population of the UK would have been much-better served by the standardized and robust health regulations, best practices, collaboration and cooperation that occur in a united Europe, and that a British departure is therefore to the detriment of all.

Looking forward…

The European Parliamentary elections are coming up in May and health and healthcare issues are high up the list of citizens’ priorities, wherever they may be in Europe.

The key message here is that politicians of what ever hue in all member states need to unite over a variety of health-related matters - including introducing innovation into systems and pushing preventative measures - for the benefit of all current and future patients.

Further assisting those in the UK may soon been beyond Europe’s gift, but the fact remains that political squabbling in London or elsewhere has no place in healthcare.

Let us move forward with health care in the EU. With or without Britain.

Share this article: