Cervical screening changes set to start in Jersey
Patients in Jersey will receive a more personalised cervical screening service from July, health bosses have said.The Government of Jersey said it would be following recommendations from the UK National Screening Committee due to more accurate human papillomavirus (HPV) testing being available.The screening detects HPV - the type of infection which is the main cause of cervical cancer.The changes meant patients deemed to be at a low risk of cervical cancer would be tested less frequently, the government added.
From July, women or people with a cervix who are aged 25 to 49 and test negative, or have previously tested negative for HPV and therefore at low risk of cervical cancer, will be invited to screenings at five-year intervals rather than three, the government said.Those whose samples indicated the presence of HPV, or had a recent history of HPV, would continue to be invited to more frequent screenings, it added.Dr Fiona Nelson, clinical lead for cervical screening, said the new HPV test picked up problems earlier than older screening methods.Dr Nelson added: "The HPV test is an objective test which means the sample is not dependent on a person looking at cells and making a judgment and this means there are fewer missed cases."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Fury as doctors say they are ‘excited' by the prospect of more strikes - after already receiving biggest pay rise in public sector and cancelling 1.5million appointments since 2022
Leading doctors have sparked fury by admitting they are 'excited' by the prospect of further strikes despite the risk of patient harm. The British Medical Association is threatening a mass walkout by resident doctors and consultants unless the Government caves in to its pay demands. Failing to do so will undermine efforts to cut waiting lists and Labour's ten-year plan for the NHS, which is due to be published next week, the union added. Resident doctors - previously known as 'junior' doctors - are currently balloting members to secure a mandate for six months of strikes. They have crippled the NHS by taking industrial action 11 times since 2022, forcing health bosses to cancel an estimated 1.5million appointments. Speaking at the BMA annual conference in Liverpool, Dr Ross Nieuwoudt, co-chair of the BMA's resident doctors committee, said: 'In Liverpool, everyone I talk to has already returned their ballot. In places in the peninsula, it maybe a little bit less. 'But in general, and what we're hearing overall, the vast majority, is that people are excited to go again. 'People are still underpaid, and recognising that. People are having other concerns as well, such as the under- and unemployment issues facing them with the training bottlenecks. 'So there's a huge amount of issues, and ultimately, doctors are still very upset and looking for change.' When questioned on his use of the word 'excited', he added: 'Sorry - excited as in energised. Not excited as in looking forward to it. 'They want to push for change. Their cries have fallen on deaf ears.' Resident doctors have already received above inflation pay rises for the past three years, worth an extra 28.9 per cent in total. This includes an inflation-busting rise this year of 5.4 per cent, which is the most generous in the public sector. Dr Nieuwoudt last month admitted their inflation-busting pay rise is 'generous' just days after urging union members to back the strikes in pursuit of an additional 30 per cent. If members support the strikes, it will give them a mandate for walkouts from this July to January next year. Patients Association has said it is 'deeply concerned' about the prospect of further walkouts, warning it causes 'significant distress, pain and worsening health for patients.' Dennis Reed, director of Silver Voices, which campaigns for elderly Britons, said: 'Patients facing long waits for care will not share resident doctors' 'excitement' about the prospect of further disruptive strikes and are instead likely to be filled with despair. 'Such gloating language does not indicate resident doctors are wanting to reach a reasonable settlement. It sounds more like student politics, where they are wanting to strike for striking's sake. 'We would like the BMA and government to settle this dispute so patients can get the care they need when they need it.' Meanwhile, consultants will be asked if they would support strikes in an indicative ballot, due to open next month. Professor Phil Banfield, chair of the BMA Council, said the Government 'need doctors' and would have to 'pay doctors properly'. 'They need doctors. The ten-year plan is not going to be delivered just by artificial intelligence and apps. I sat through a briefing about the ten-year plan last week, and it's, at the moment, it's lacking detail. I'm bemused at the moment as to how it's going to deliver. 'They won't get through their waiting lists unless they pay doctors properly and fairly, and you value them for the expertise they need.' Dr Helen Neary, co-chair of the BMA's consultants committee, said: 'In terms of implementing a ten-year plan, and any of the changes that are needed for that, that cannot be achieved without consultants being part of that conversation and being integral to those changes in services and how care is delivered to patients. 'Without recognising that a consultant is essential in terms of moving those things forwards, I think it's going to be very challenging to get all of the changes that the government would want to be enacted. 'The way that government can make sure that that continues is to meet with us and to develop with us and negotiate a path to pay restoration.' She added it would also be 'challenging' for the government to meet its pledge to cut waiting times for elective care if consultants strike. Consultants and resident doctors say their pay has fallen in real terms despite recent pay rises. The BMA has ramped up security at its annual conference after Jewish doctors complained they felt 'intimidated and unsafe'. Members highlighted that 43 motions submitted for debate during the three-day meeting - one in ten of the total - related to Israel, Palestine or Zionism.
Telegraph
2 hours ago
- Telegraph
This is parliamentary hubris at its worst
Having given up on its half-baked attempts to 'drive up living standards', the Starmer administration now appears to be embarking on a killing spree. Those advancing the decriminalisation of late-term abortion and legalisation of state-assisted suicide seem to believe we are witnessing 'Parliament at its best'. I'd argue this is British politics at its hubristic worst. Consider the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) legislation. Such a serious change in our civilisation should not have been brought in via a Private Members' Bill, allowed to scrape through the Commons amid heated accusations of distortions of the truth, blatant procedural failures, and MPs who were rushed through debates without adequate time to consider its contents. A change of such magnitude, unmentioned at the general election, should have been introduced by a properly prepared Green Paper, then a White Paper, or possibly even a Royal Commission. It should not have been a few hours of debate and a rigged committee stage, passed with sly help from a Government unwilling to publicly advocate the change, but willing to skew the process in its favour. The result is a law risking a massive amount of harm. Those who think the NHS can be trusted with the power to kill its patients deliberately (as opposed to in the natural course of its business) have clearly not attempted to see a GP nor been near a hospital lately. They also haven't read the 150-page impact assessment, which looks like a 'Green Book' exercise conducted by tone-deaf junior civil servants. It claims costs would be low, even going so far as to suggest assisted dying could save the NHS money. Part of this exercise says that four months of medical care would no longer be provided on average to those patients opting for assisted dying. That, in 'year one' (actually half a year), between 273 and 1,078 people in England and Wales would request assistance to end their lives, rising to somewhere between 1,737 and 7,598 in the tenth (full) year. This number seems rather low, given that Canadian doctors, with a smaller population, helped more than 15,000 to die in 2023. The Bill's advocates claim that the scope of the legislation is much narrower than in Canada – but I suspect that based on the experience with abortion laws, that judicial interpretation and legislative amendments will probably widen it over time. However, many start the process of applying for 'voluntary assisted dying', and the number who actually reach the ultimate stage would be rather smaller. In the two months the approval process takes to complete, many would withdraw their application, some would die before approval, and others would become incapable of giving legal consent. All of which implies a good deal of wasted effort – and probably some emotional wear and tear – by doctors, administrators, pharmacists, and lawyers, which could impact on willingness to be involved, or lead to slapdash performance. The NHS is in such a state of collapse, despite a budget of £210 billion this year, that there are men, women and children who should be alive today who are dead because of its 'care'. Can it really be expected that assisted dying will be the one part of the system that functions without the errors that characterise the rest of the health system? I highly doubt it. Look at NHS performance in other fields and mistakes are practically guaranteed: the health service paid out a record £2.82 billion on settling medical negligence claims in 2023-24, an increase of over £180 million from the previous year. How long would it take for the first assisted dying lawsuits to start coming in? Then there are the practical limits to its implementation: close to half of doctors (47 per cent) recently surveyed by the BMA are not willing to breach the Hippocratic Oath's injunction which says: 'I will not give a drug that is deadly.' If we are going to allow people to end their lives, it should not be within the state-run healthcare system. But nor should it be in the care home sector. Can you imagine the worry for the frail and perhaps confused when Dr Death turns up for the weekly cull? Instead, we could mimic the abortion model: procedures carried out largely in outside clinics, partly privately funded. Or the hospice model of charities receiving some NHS funding. Or perhaps we follow the Dignitas scheme: a fee-paying service provided by non-profits, as required by Swiss law. To date, the legislative process has been driven by emotion, short-sightedness, and by politicians who are so powerless that the only lever they seem able to pull is the one which finishes us off early. It has been rushed through by amateur policymakers oblivious to how it will work in practice, who have ignored the complexities of assisted dying in favour of a debased utilitarianism. Let's not now make bad law worse.
The Independent
2 hours ago
- The Independent
Iris Robinson has shown ‘remarkable courage and tenacity' in cancer fight
Peter Robinson has praised the 'remarkable courage and tenacity' of his wife Iris as she battles cancer. The former DUP leader and first minister said an event to unveil his portrait at Stormont's Parliament Buildings had been delayed for some time due to the 'unpredictable ups and downs' of his wife's illness. Mr Robinson retired from politics in 2016. His wife Iris Robinson is also a former DUP MP and MLA, but has stayed out of public life since it emerged in 2010 that she had had an affair and gave developers' money to her teenage lover. Mr Robinson told a ceremony in the Great Hall at Stormont that it had been 'some considerable time since I retired'. He added: 'It is in no sense any tardiness on the part of the Speaker's Office, the commission or the Assembly staff that it has taken seven or eight years for this event to occur. 'Some of you will know that for the past few years my wife Iris has had cancer, she has been operated and battling through it. 'But it still provides unpredictable ups and downs.' Speaking to the media afterwards, Mr Robinson said his wife had gone through an operation and there had been complications. He said: 'I don't want to go into the health issues but she has a remarkable courage and tenacity. 'She is going through the ups and downs. One say she is in perfect form and the next day she is having to deal with issues. 'So it is with all who have gone through that difficult experience. 'Probably it brings me out with a lot more respect for those who are involved in our health services. 'We really do have some tremendous people working in our hospitals and elsewhere in our health service. 'They don't get the credit that they deserve. 'Maybe a bit more of the funding should go to them rather than those who are administrators of the process.'
