Whisper it quietly, but there is a new pandemic stalking the world. It is one unknown to many, and one for which no government has a contingency plan.
Between 1990 and 2015, the date of the most recent relevant report[1], the number afflicted doubled from 3M to over 6M globally. The authors projected that number to rise to about 17M by 2040.
The disease is Parkinson’s.
As all Parkinsonians will know, there are about 150,000 of us in the UK, an incidence of about 1:500. However, there is an essential lack of understanding which masks the true scale of the problem. Briefly put, it is the effect of changing demographics.
Parkinson’s is a disease which predominantly affects the over 60’s, and thus the impact of it within that ‘cohort’ is much greater proportionally than across the population as a whole. It is what is happening to this cohort which needs to be understood. The ONS projects it to grow by over 30% over the next thirty years, and even this could be an underestimate in the event of something like a ban on smoking, or added efforts in preventative medicine.
What does this mean? Again from the report, people being born in 2015 could expect an incidence not of 1:500, but of 1:37. Given that ten years have elapsed since these calculations were run, that could well be down to 1:35 by now. The impact on the UK could be gravely damaging.
The sad truth is that Government does not seem to be planning for Parkinson’s in any way whatever, not even at 1:500. There has been no discussion of accessibility, for example. The press are today quoting the new head of the NHS as saying that they want all patients to use the NHS app. Has nobody told him that most Parkinsonians are incapable of using an i-Phone in this way?
It is hard to imagine a society in which 1 in 35 of us have Parkinson’s. Where are the carers going to come from? Where is the money for consultants’ appointments and diagnostic scans (each DAT scan costs the NHS £1,500) going to come from? Where are the consultants (it already takes a year to get to see one on the NHS) going to come from? The nursing care? The scanner operatives (a highly skilled task)? What about step free access to buildings and public transport?
The cost will be enormous, yet how are those few people left in employment going to able to support any significant amount by way of taxes?
Government needs to frame and answer a number of very tough questions on this issue, and they need to do it now. As General Patton said, a mediocre plan executed today is better than an excellent plan to be executed at some time in the indefinite future.
Their current attitude reminds me of a government information film which we were shown at school in the early 1970s giving advice as to what to do in the event of nuclear attack. So far as I remember it, this consisted of sticking brown paper to your windows and hiding under the kitchen table.
[1] Journal of Parkinson’s Disease, Dorsey et al (2015)
Heads are being stuck in the sand about a lot of things. When one factors in rising unemployment and young people not getting the first rung on the ladder your points are even more concerning. The percentage of people who can actually work should be going up to accommodate an aging population, not down
I wonder if anyone can produce the statitics for the number of Parkinsonians there were say during 1800’s or even the early 1900’s. I would be surprised if they were at all significant numbers and whilst not comparing this awful infliction with anything else in the case of increased Autism the figures are quite staggering with a 787% increase between 1998 and 2018 in the UK. https://acamh.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcpp.13505
In the US the figures are no better where 1 in 45 adults now have autism. https://www.autismspeaks.org/autism-statistics-asd
These appalling figures have to be attributed to something and although there is significant attempt from all corners to tell us it is definitely NOT due to vaccines nevertheless one cannot ignore that this increase is in line with the massive increase in number if vaccines that have been added to the childhood vaccine schedule in both countries. Vaccines are very profitable for the drug companies and the drug companies fund powerful government lobbyists. In addition, media relies on a significant portion of its revenue from the healthcare business. I believe the connections are worth scrutiny.