Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
BMJ 2006;333:1219-1220 (9 December), doi:10.1136/bmj.39052.659456.FA
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
The 19 responses to the article by Barrett et al express concerns about the independence of the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE), its remit, and its role in relation to primary care trusts.1
People are divided on whether NICE should decide which services to cut to fund new technologies (opportunity costs). But without an implementing body it is unclear how to react to NICE's recommendations. NICE's remit is not the equitable distribution of a limited healthcare budget, but its guidance should provide healthcare professionals and political bodies with a means to make informed decisions and communicate these to the public. The public in turn needs to accept that health care is a finite resource, and that the decision is between rationing and paying higher taxes.
The role of primary care trusts as strong local commissioners is emphasised by several correspondentspostcode prescribing, rather than being a lottery, is
Birte Twisselmann, assistant editor, web
1 BMJ