Should we cut back on locum doctors?

From: Frank Pio Russo []
Sent: Friday, 16 December 2016 7:36 AM
To: ‘’
Subject: FW: Remuneration of locums is a bit problematic !

Remuneration of locums is a bit problematic !

 Hi there,

Look after reviewing the remuneration of locums, I have identified a problem there !

As the system stands, with all locums visits covered by Medicare – regardless of whether the patient is a pensioner or not – there is a serious problem ! In fact GP’s would really be ‘bleeding’, because only a foolish patient would want to go to a GP and pay a fee… not to mention using up his own vehicle and petrol, plus negotiating very difficult clinic’s carparks which tend to be usually full. Furthermore whilst waiting for a locum at home, one could be watching TV or doing anything he likes in the comfort of his own home.

Yes, I think the service should only be totally free, to pensioners and perhaps the very needy – with some sort of yearly cap to make sure it is not abused: e.g. perhaps a maximum of 26 calls per year… i.e. an average of one per fortnight!


Frank Pio Russo.

From: Frank Pio Russo []
Sent: December 7, 2016 7:41 PM
To: ‘’
Subject: Locum Doctors deserve to be looked after !

Locum Doctors deserve to be looked after !

Apparently there’s some talk about cutting back the Medicare rebate for locum doctors! This is a very bad move as there are a lot of extra costs that are incurred by these doctors. For a start they need to provide their own security, as they’re usually on at night on insane hours… and remember how the Malaysian Dr. Goh was lured out to a call and was killed by these drug addicts who were after his medical bag !

Also there are many other costs associated with the mobile nature of their calls… i.e.  the travelling time involved, as well as the petrol and tear and wear of their vehicles, and any special insurance considerations.

I’m sure that this is being driven by greedy and jealous GPs who see them as the opposition, when they themselves are too lazy to get off their “arses” and do some after-hours house-calls! They prefer their comfy 9 to 5 offices with all of their mod-cons.

In actual fact Medicare should swing the other way, and give these locums even more latitude: for one thing I don’t see why they can’t swab very sick patients, who are too sick to physically go to a GP’s office – when they really belong in an intensive care hospital ward – because of whooping cough and a bit of asthma! E.g. recently a locum ordered an antibiotic at the onset of a chesty dry cough… it later occurred to the patient that this was actually whooping cough… he contacted his GP and wanted to know firstly whether the antibiotic prescribed would do the job if it was whooping cough… and secondly whether  he could issue a second prescription for Erythromycin if the latter was required for whooping cough! The response back was that he would only issue it after first assessing him in his office and getting a positive swab result back – without even answering the first obvious question posed!

 The patient was too sick to comply, and was sort of left to choke and virtually die every few minutes with little consciousness! Yes like in the parable of the ‘talent coins’, the privilege of doing the swabs should be taken away from the “greedy and worthless” slaves, and given to the ones ready to produce and gain interest on the investment !!

In conclusion, it is the work of locums that should be expanded at the expense of the GPs rather than the other way round… this is obvious because most people try to go to work from 9 to 5, and prefer to see a doctor after hours – when it’s the locums that operate.

Frank Pio Russo.



The euthanasia question.

From: Frank Pio Russo []
Sent: November 26, 2016 4:54 PM
To: ‘’
Subject: The Euthanasia question is incredibly easy !!

The Euthanasia question is incredibly easy !!

Vulnerable people need to be protected from vultures!

And by that I don’t simply mean from greedy relatives, that are wanting to get their filthy paws on one’s inheritance! But even simply – do-gooders bleeding-hearts that might want to make any depressed individual, feel guilty simply for any resources that he might be using up… (when he may well have quite some savings in reserves) !!

The only time that euthanasia should be considered, is not simply when someone is terminal: there might be some miraculous cure just around the corner – how are we to know what the future has in store ?

But rather, when the cocktail of drugs one’s on has outlived its usefulness and is now actually damaging his system rather than prolonging his existence !!

Most genuine doctors and understanding relatives are actually already doing this… therefore all these attempts at new legislation, are carried out by sycophantic parasites that are no more than pathetic bastards (???)

ANONYMOUSLY contributed.