extracted from ST forum
Be more realistic in assessing NKF reserves
UPON reading the National Kidney Foundation (NKF) report by interim
chairman Gerard Ee, it appears that the sums do not add up.
It was stated that the present reserves of $206 million would last
only 4.5 years in the worst-case scenario. There seems to be some
calculation error.
The sum of $206 million, deposited in a bank account earning annual
interest of 3.8 per cent, would garner $7,828,000. This plus the
government subsidy of $4 million would give NKF an annual income of
$11,828,000, without contributions from donations.
Presently NKF has 1,800 dialysis patients that it subsidises on
average $70 per treatment. That subsidy would amount to $19,656,000
a year as each patient undergoes three sessions per week. That
would leave a shortfall of $7,828,000 per year that has to come
from NKF reserves. Dividing the reserves of $206 million by the
shortfall of $7.8 million, it would take about 26 years for the
reserves to run out.
It appears that the counsel for The Straits Times in its defence of
the lawsuit filed by NKF was nearer to the truth when he said that
the reserves would last 30 years.
The new NKF management has an obligation to present to the public,
and especially to renal patients, a more realistic assessment of
the situation. By singing the same T.T. Durai worst-case-scenario
song with a new choir, it is unlikely to gain public
confidence.
Although donations have dropped significantly from more than $2
million to $1.7 million a month, it is still a sizeable
amount.
The $20.4 million in annual donations is more than enough to cover
the $19,656,000 needed as subsidies for dialysis treatment for
1,800 patients without touching the reserves of $206 million, whose
interest could cover inflation or expansion programmes.
I am a renal patient and have received dialysis treatment in
Canada, China and Singapore.
In Canada, dialysis treatment is free for residents and citizens.
The dialysis centres are remarkably clean, very spacious and well
equipped. The medical staff are well trained and extremely
friendly. Hot tea, coffee or water and biscuits are served to
patients every hour, free of charge. All questions are answered in
great detail and with patience.
In Guangzhou, China, the cost of dialysis for foreigners is a flat
full fee of 400 yuan (S$83) per treatment. The Chinese dialysis
centres are huge and surprisingly clean. They are well equipped
with up-to-date imported dialysis machines, the same as those used
in Singapore, if not better. Most of their medical staff are
friendly and helpful.
In Singapore, the cost of dialysis for citizens at private centres
ranges from $100 to $150 after subsidy. The centres are clean but
patients have to provide their own blankets.
The medical staff are busy and have seemingly tight schedules and
little time for explanations. Questions are often frowned upon and
answers given are short and ambiguous. The typical answer is that,
in Singapore, things are done differently. One cannot help but
wonder why things are done differently when the dialysis machines
and protocols are similar.
I have one simple request. Tell us how long the NKF reserves will
last if a realistic and practical approach is adopted in managing
it.
As renal patients, we accept the fact that our lives are shorter.
Our lives need not be shortened further by unrealistic scenarios
that would never happen. Please do away with the ambiguous language
and ridiculous worst-case scenarios if public confidence is to be
restored.
Cheong Wing Lee
