Should obese patients be denied certain treatments?

Marcos the black

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 3, 2009
Messages
18,458
I just heard them talking about this on Matt Cooper.
In the UK the NHS have caused outrage by refusing people with a BMI of 40 or more access to certain procedures:

NHS under fire after announcing obese patients will not get non-urgent surgery until they lose weight | The Independent

Unless they lose weight they will not get the treatment they need. The arguements for this are mainly that there is increased risk of carrying out procedures with patients that are severely overweight, due to strain on organs such as the heart etc... And that to some extent it is a waste of taxpayers money as the chances are the person being treated may not be around for long enough to enjoy the benefits of the treatments.
On the flip side those opposed argue that this is just a way of kicking the most (medically) needy to save money and is a way of reducing the waiting lists.
Similar screening of services have been introduced before to smokers, for pretty much the same reasons.

So is this something that should be introduced here?
(BTW, as a slightly overweight smoker I'm not in favour of this just in case it comes across that I am.... I'm just asking the question)
 


puffin

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 2, 2012
Messages
1,600
Into a bath of scalding hot water, he talked before he was shot.
 

Dearghoul

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 8, 2013
Messages
8,846
They are awfully jolly, though arn't they?

And they're followed around by people playing the tuba, I understand.
 
Last edited:

Dearghoul

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 8, 2013
Messages
8,846
Would Trump deny Healthcare to obese people?

Think he wont discriminate.

Don't you?
 

ellie08

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 2, 2008
Messages
12,325
Trump is obese - only in this case should this train of thought be considered.
 

Lonewolfe

Well-known member
Joined
May 4, 2011
Messages
17,053
I think it's very unfair though.

Many people look at fatties and think, "lazy, gluttonous piggy". And while there might be some truth in that, there is almost always a mental or emotional underlying issue.

Many people are addicted to food and cannot fully control their overeating.
 

alloverbartheshouting

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2010
Messages
7,682
I just heard them talking about this on Matt Cooper.
In the UK the NHS have caused outrage by refusing people with a BMI of 40 or more access to certain procedures:

NHS under fire after announcing obese patients will not get non-urgent surgery until they lose weight | The Independent

Unless they lose weight they will not get the treatment they need. The arguements for this are mainly that there is increased risk of carrying out procedures with patients that are severely overweight, due to strain on organs such as the heart etc... And that to some extent it is a waste of taxpayers money as the chances are the person being treated may not be around for long enough to enjoy the benefits of the treatments.
On the flip side those opposed argue that this is just a way of kicking the most (medically) needy to save money and is a way of reducing the waiting lists.
Similar screening of services have been introduced before to smokers, for pretty much the same reasons.

So is this something that should be introduced here?
(BTW, as a slightly overweight smoker I'm not in favour of this just in case it comes across that I am.... I'm just asking the question)
I thought this was already in play? As in. a surgeon will say that unless a patent is within a certain weight-range that the operation cannot be undertaken?
 

Dearghoul

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 8, 2013
Messages
8,846
Trump is obese - only in this case should this train of thought be considered.
I think what I was trying to get at is the disparity between the NHS discrimination and the nothingburger that is Trump public health policy. That was what I think I meant to say... mind.
 

Dame_Enda

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2011
Messages
53,666
Its not just overeating. We need to get to the root of the problem - the manufacturers. Our grandparents (those of us 40ish) were remarkably slim or at least the obese were exceedingly rare when they were young. If you allow takeaways near schools and then go out scapegoating the obese you are probably a hypocrite.
 

razorblade

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 30, 2016
Messages
8,081
Its not just overeating. We need to get to the root of the problem - the manufacturers. Our grandparents (those of us 40ish) were remarkably slim or at least the obese were exceedingly rare when they were young. If you allow takeaways near schools and then go out scapegoating the obese you are probably a hypocrite.
Simply exercising more should help, join a sports club or gym of some sort, eat in moderation with good nutritional balance, its not rocket science when you think of it.
 

Dearghoul

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 8, 2013
Messages
8,846
Its not just overeating. We need to get to the root of the problem - the manufacturers. Our grandparents (those of us 40ish) were remarkably slim or at least the obese were exceedingly rare when they were young. If you allow takeaways near schools and then go out scapegoating the obese you are probably a hypocrite.
Not really. In your advanced free market society, only the owner of the burger van is to blame and we are innocent bystanders.

Works for me. I dont have issues; however you must somehow put the imperative of the market and the needs of the populace together so that they don't hurt one another.

All ears Dames.
 

ger12

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 25, 2011
Messages
47,680
I just heard them talking about this on Matt Cooper.
In the UK the NHS have caused outrage by refusing people with a BMI of 40 or more access to certain procedures:

NHS under fire after announcing obese patients will not get non-urgent surgery until they lose weight | The Independent

Unless they lose weight they will not get the treatment they need. The arguements for this are mainly that there is increased risk of carrying out procedures with patients that are severely overweight, due to strain on organs such as the heart etc... And that to some extent it is a waste of taxpayers money as the chances are the person being treated may not be around for long enough to enjoy the benefits of the treatments.
On the flip side those opposed argue that this is just a way of kicking the most (medically) needy to save money and is a way of reducing the waiting lists.
Similar screening of services have been introduced before to smokers, for pretty much the same reasons.

So is this something that should be introduced here?
(BTW, as a slightly overweight smoker I'm not in favour of this just in case it comes across that I am.... I'm just asking the question)
It's non urgent procedures. So there's sense in that though how do you know that a non urgent case won't turn into an urgent one because of the wait?

I thought you'd given up the smokes Marcos.
 

toughbutfair

Well-known member
Joined
May 28, 2009
Messages
9,939
Fatties choose to be fat. I'd also abolish tax on cigarettes but deny all health services to obese and smokers with health problems. People should be free to choose to die young.
 

Morgellons

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 24, 2012
Messages
4,911
There's some really unhealthy looking people out there. I sometimes see obese people squeezed into a car puffing away on a fag on the way to the take away. I am amazed they seem so oblivious to how messed up their bodies are-it just doesn't seem to register with them. Is there something blocking their brains from seeing what condition they are in? And the really sad thing is they usually have a few oompa lumpa kids in the back seat, all equally oblivious to how unhealthy they are.
 

ger12

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 25, 2011
Messages
47,680
Its not just overeating. We need to get to the root of the problem - the manufacturers. Our grandparents (those of us 40ish) were remarkably slim or at least the obese were exceedingly rare when they were young. If you allow takeaways near schools and then go out scapegoating the obese you are probably a hypocrite.
It's far more than that. Portion sizes in all aspects have exploded. Advertising should be tacked too.
 

tigerben

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 21, 2010
Messages
4,576
Once you put in rules for one group they’ll come on for everyone. Where would you stop.
Would cancer patients that still drink and smoke treatment stop , would diabetic type 2 patients stop been treated because not following diet guidelines, drinkers , smokers , people that exercise or run that causes knee joints to wear out ! I mean where would the line be drawn if you target one group , it will alway only be added to . I do agree with personal responsibility but that’s something that’s flat lining the last couple of years, it seems you cannot blame or suggest that a person is at fault unless there is a court case for compensation.
 

Hillmanhunter1

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 9, 2009
Messages
2,374
The resources of all governments are finite and consequently every expenditure must be justified relative to other possible expenditures.

Where a person allows their weight to become a threat to their health (and please don't give me any bo!!oxology about food addiction, glands, water retention, big bones etc) then the easement of that threat is entirely within their own control - eat less/better and take some exercise.

We wouldn't consider giving a new liver to a wet alcoholic, nor new lungs to a smoker, so it seems reasonable to me that when it comes to weight that this can be taken into account in deciding whether it is a better use of scarce resources to spend public money on other patients.
 


New Threads

Top