Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Discussion Area => Topic started by: Bionic on 25 January 2013, 07:36:18
-
This is going to cause a stir but is an account of what was an interesting hour or so in the parish hall. Because it was a Parish Hall no alcohol played a part in the temperament of any of the participants. Many of the group are 'churchified', I personally am not. No offence is therefore meant or implied and as we are all entitled to free speech here we go......
During one of the meetings of the discussion group I regularly attend the question posed was "Should those who are morbidly obese receive free NHS or Private (nhs funded) bariatric surgery when the reason for their obesity was their own choice"?
The discussion was lively and some really interesting comments were made. The vast majority of the concensus of opinion was that anyone who is so morbidly obese should have to pay the total costs of their surgery and after care surgery themselves. There should not be any grant or state assistance. One question was "Why should each operation to fit gastric bands etc cost in excess of £10k, followed by aftercare and further shin tightening surgery at even greater expense be paid by the taxpayer when it was the recipient of the surgery who had by their own choice overeaten to the point where they had become so overweight? There were many replies but interestingly not one of them was upheld by the majority of our group.
One suggestion to save the NHS a vast amount of money and have the same end result was that instead of an expensive gastric band operation, with all of its possible risks to the life of the recipient during surgery, costing many thousands of pounds when the far simpler act of having their teeth wired together to stop them eating solids would be as effective. They would feel no more hungry than with the gastric band and they would still have to learn to adapt their diet, exercise and meal sizes to suit and so retain a healthier weight.
The end result was that the gastric band surgery should not be offered on the NHS and if done privately should be at the total expense of the applicant. It was acknowledged that there would be a very tiny number whose health problems had caused the onset of their obesity but that the majority had caused their own dilemma by their personal choice of their lifestyle.
The NHS would then be able to put those valuable resources to a far better use such as cancer research and care which would benefit the whole of the public and not just the morbidly obese minority who chose to be as they are. After all the NHS has had to spend another massive fortune on buying new heavy duty equipment and vehicles to deal with that selfish section of their patients.
Please reply, not in anger, but with a reason that can be accepted why they should have free treatment. Please, please, not the one where the NHS is free care for everyone, think about how a minority is severely depleting the scarce funds of the NHS by their own selfish choice of lifestyle acts.
The next discussion is one of 'benefit abuse' and its impact on neighbourhoods.
-
I presume smokers will not be allowed to receive new treatments developed through re-channeled cancer research funding you mention? How about heavy drinkers? People who participate in high risk recreational activities... Sky diving, climbing, car/bike track days or racing? Drink drivers or drunk pedestrians involved in accidents? If you go down the "its your own fault route" it becomes very difficult to draw a line.
-
On the face of it, any reasoned argument by a group of like minded individuals would reach a similar majority conclusion as the one reached by your group, but the argument is far too simplistic. Were this to be adopted in reality, it would be the thin end of the wedge. Which group would be next?, the Unemployed? Single mothers on Benefits? the Old, with medical or care needs? the long term sick or Disabled?, all 'drains' on the NHS & Economy. Why not save money & resources by closing down the NHS altogether?, let everyone be responsible & pay for their own health and wellbeing and let the Devil take the hindmost! Removing the benefits system altogether would save another shed load of cash and result in lower taxes and make everyone who is healthy and in work feel great, until youor one of your loved ones inadvertantly becomes 'one of them' by which time 'Society' or Government has decided (by Majority agreement of course) that 'they' don't have a right to life unless healthy and productive, and anyway they're blocking the gutters and stinking up the place and lets face it, they're not 'our' responsibility are they? It's their own fault!
-
I presume smokers will not be allowed to receive new treatments developed through re-channeled cancer research funding you mention? How about heavy drinkers? People who participate in high risk recreational activities... Sky diving, climbing, car/bike track days or racing? Drink drivers or drunk pedestrians involved in accidents? If you go down the "its your own fault route" it becomes very difficult to draw a line.
Indeed. We all have our demons.
How can you say to your brother, ‘Brother, let me take out the speck that is in your eye,’ when you yourself do not see the log that is in your own eye? Luke 6:42
No, I'm not particularly "churchified" either, but he has a point.
-
I presume smokers will not be allowed to receive new treatments developed through re-channeled cancer research funding you mention? How about heavy drinkers? People who participate in high risk recreational activities... Sky diving, climbing, car/bike track days or racing? Drink drivers or drunk pedestrians involved in accidents? If you go down the "its your own fault route" it becomes very difficult to draw a line.
Exactly right! :y :y :y :y :y
-
On the face of it, any reasoned argument by a group of like minded individuals would reach a similar majority conclusion as the one reached by your group, but the argument is far too simplistic. Were this to be adopted in reality, it would be the thin end of the wedge. Which group would be next?, the Unemployed? Single mothers on Benefits? the Old, with medical or care needs? the long term sick or Disabled?, all 'drains' on the NHS & Economy. Why not save money & resources by closing down the NHS altogether?, let everyone be responsible & pay for their own health and wellbeing and let the Devil take the hindmost! Removing the benefits system altogether would save another shed load of cash and result in lower taxes and make everyone who is healthy and in work feel great, until youor one of your loved ones inadvertantly becomes 'one of them' by which time 'Society' or Government has decided (by Majority agreement of course) that 'they' don't have a right to life unless healthy and productive, and anyway they're blocking the gutters and stinking up the place and lets face it, they're not 'our' responsibility are they? It's their own fault!
All agreed! :y :y :y :y
Holier than tho people make me want to be sick! >:( >:( >:(
We are all sinners and Luke 6:42 was exactly right :y :y :y
-
I presume smokers will not be allowed to receive new treatments developed through re-channeled cancer research funding you mention? How about heavy drinkers? People who participate in high risk recreational activities... Sky diving, climbing, car/bike track days or racing? Drink drivers or drunk pedestrians involved in accidents? If you go down the "its your own fault route" it becomes very difficult to draw a line.
Exactly right! :y :y :y :y :y
+1
Not sure of the point of this thread :-\
-
Bionic has a new job taking the minutes at his local WI meetings.
-
Bionic has a new job taking the minutes at his local WI meetings.
;D
-
Bionic has a new job taking the minutes at his local WI meetings.
;D
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D :y
-
You've got a point. If they spent their money one the surgery instead of pies all day long they'd be able to afford the surgery themselves ten times over. :y
I think your argument is a little simplistic though, but most people without consideration seem to think the state and the NHS in particular is a bottomless pit of money and service provision which they can call on endlessly. Something needs to be done. The current method of 'education' doesn't seem to be working.
With rights (to NHS treatment), come responsibilities (to live a salubrious lifestyle).
-
Actually forget all that. If we don't give them treatment, but drain their blubber and use it as fuel, we'd kill two birds with one stone. We'd save money and solve our national energy needs at the same time! Bonus! :y
-
As somebody on the list for this surgery I am goign to pretend I have not just read this....
What about smokers, drinkers and not to mentions all those pricks that near kill them selves each year do to other "other eating disorders" (finger down the throat etc). why do they get sympathy from all corners, saying society tells them they are fat and need to starve and loose wheight..
I'm off befor i get barred................ :-X
-
On the face of it, any reasoned argument by a group of like minded individuals would reach a similar majority conclusion as the one reached by your group, but the argument is far too simplistic. Were this to be adopted in reality, it would be the thin end of the wedge. Which group would be next?, the Unemployed? Single mothers on Benefits? the Old, with medical or care needs? the long term sick or Disabled?, all 'drains' on the NHS & Economy. Why not save money & resources by closing down the NHS altogether?, let everyone be responsible & pay for their own health and wellbeing and let the Devil take the hindmost! Removing the benefits system altogether would save another shed load of cash and result in lower taxes and make everyone who is healthy and in work feel great, until youor one of your loved ones inadvertantly becomes 'one of them' by which time 'Society' or Government has decided (by Majority agreement of course) that 'they' don't have a right to life unless healthy and productive, and anyway they're blocking the gutters and stinking up the place and lets face it, they're not 'our' responsibility are they? It's their own fault!
Nicely put Phil..... :y
-
What you have only considered is the cost of surgery. Factor in the various costs of obesity related illness that the NHS has to pay for and the long term benefit is in offering bariatric surgery.
As an example; obese patients are often admitted to hospital because of cellulitis/pressuresores/breathlessness/infections/respiratory failure. The cost of hiring a bariatric bed is about £300 per day. Bariatric hoists then cost about £75/day. Plus often 2 bed spaces are required for one bariatric patient due to how large the bed and hoist is. Stay is often longer for the larger patients as well.the drug costs for diabetes/hypertension etc all add up. Bariatric ambulances cost more as well.
In the long term if you can save these costs with surgery then it seems sensible to offer the operation.
Apronectomy or the surgery for tightening loose skin is not offered on the NHS as it is a cosmetic procedure and patients have to pay for it themselves.