News0 min ago
Should These People Be Charged If They Dont Help Themselves?
35 Answers
http:// news.sk y.com/s tory/11 45189/d iabetes -will-c reate-p ublic-h ealth-d isaster
The NHS is quite likely to be bought to it's knees by this. 85% of diabetics are type 2 that can be aided or prevented by exercise and diet.
Is it about time we started to look seriously at this, even perhaps going as far as charging people who do not bother to loose weight and exercise, or even remove NHS treatment? Perhaps if these people had less to spend on Pies and Beer then they would do something about it
Or perhaps the 'pasty tax' was not such a bad idea, after all smokers are clobbered for doing something that is dangerous. If we put a levy on unhealthy foods it could be used to fund the treatment of those that consume them?
I dont see why those that do bother to take care of themselves should have to pay for the feckless.
The NHS is quite likely to be bought to it's knees by this. 85% of diabetics are type 2 that can be aided or prevented by exercise and diet.
Is it about time we started to look seriously at this, even perhaps going as far as charging people who do not bother to loose weight and exercise, or even remove NHS treatment? Perhaps if these people had less to spend on Pies and Beer then they would do something about it
Or perhaps the 'pasty tax' was not such a bad idea, after all smokers are clobbered for doing something that is dangerous. If we put a levy on unhealthy foods it could be used to fund the treatment of those that consume them?
I dont see why those that do bother to take care of themselves should have to pay for the feckless.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by youngmafbog. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.Sparkels/ HC. Yes of course genetics and ethnicity are factors but they are covered by my suggestion under 'dont do anything bout it'. Providing they exercise and do not eat piles of pies so not affected.
And just for the record, for the pedantic on here it is not just pies and yes I do like pie and I do like beer.
And just for the record, for the pedantic on here it is not just pies and yes I do like pie and I do like beer.
I'm a type 2 diabetic, I've always had a healthy lifestyle,
mine was diagnosed 3 yrs+ back, not long after a major op
(Aortic Valve Replacement, brought about by a bacterial infection which corrupted the valve). I control it by watching my diet, and walking my Dogs into the ground, on a daily basis. NO medicines involved and I have one check-up annually. I honestly don't think I would now be diabetic were it not for that Op. but that's just an opinion, I've no proof.
I meet a lot of diabetics who are 'suffering' because they won't help themselves, and say they don't have the time/willpower to do as I do, I go along to some clinics to speak to people (not preach) and it's shocks me how many think the NHS will bail them out, no matter what, with no effort on their part.
That is a disgusting over generalisation of persons who are unfortunate enough to suffer from any type of diabetes, as regards exercise some are elderly and disabled so much so that they are limited to how much exercise they can partake in.
Yes admitted there is a large rise in cases of type 2 diabetes, but that is largely down to today's methods of being able to detect it, and the fact that we are becoming more aware of it, years ago people didn't know they had it.
Regarding your suggestion that such persons should be charged to use the NHS, but why bother to stop there, why not the drunks who spill out onto our streets most weekends? why not drug addicts? why not those injured pursuing their keep fit activities? and why not those who have more than two kids?
In fact, why don't we just keep the NHS for the use of young fit people, who have no bad habits and don't like kids, think of how much money we would save?
Yes admitted there is a large rise in cases of type 2 diabetes, but that is largely down to today's methods of being able to detect it, and the fact that we are becoming more aware of it, years ago people didn't know they had it.
Regarding your suggestion that such persons should be charged to use the NHS, but why bother to stop there, why not the drunks who spill out onto our streets most weekends? why not drug addicts? why not those injured pursuing their keep fit activities? and why not those who have more than two kids?
In fact, why don't we just keep the NHS for the use of young fit people, who have no bad habits and don't like kids, think of how much money we would save?
As the robust post from AOG - with which i entirely agree - points out, trying to deny people NHS treatment because of their perceived unwillingness to help themselves is the thin edge of a very nasty wedge.
As a civilised society, it is beholden on us to take care of those less fortunate, for a variety of reasons, which may include perceived stuborness over personal health care - but, as advised, exactly where do we start?
Do you deny NHS dentistry to anyone who takes sugar in their tea?
The best way to avoid such chilling discernment of the 'deserving' is not to start at all - and treat members of our society as equals.
As a civilised society, it is beholden on us to take care of those less fortunate, for a variety of reasons, which may include perceived stuborness over personal health care - but, as advised, exactly where do we start?
Do you deny NHS dentistry to anyone who takes sugar in their tea?
The best way to avoid such chilling discernment of the 'deserving' is not to start at all - and treat members of our society as equals.
AOG
So are you saying there is no problem? Are all the type II diabetics elderly or infirm?
And as for charging it has been discussed about drunks etc, so why not discuss this?
Woolf, smokers already pay a huge tax. Druggies, yes I agree. Each of these things needs to be looked at and discussed - without emotion.
So are you saying there is no problem? Are all the type II diabetics elderly or infirm?
And as for charging it has been discussed about drunks etc, so why not discuss this?
Woolf, smokers already pay a huge tax. Druggies, yes I agree. Each of these things needs to be looked at and discussed - without emotion.
youngmafbog - "So are you saying there is no problem? Are all the type II diabetics elderly or infirm?
And as for charging it has been discussed about drunks etc, so why not discuss this?"
neither of these points were raised in AOG's post - the thrust of his (and my) disagreement, is the opinion that healt care can be dispensed under some arbitrary tick list system, with those deemed not to be 'worthy' being denied because of lifestyle choices.
That is not now the Health System works, nor was it ever intended to be so, and amen to that.
And as for charging it has been discussed about drunks etc, so why not discuss this?"
neither of these points were raised in AOG's post - the thrust of his (and my) disagreement, is the opinion that healt care can be dispensed under some arbitrary tick list system, with those deemed not to be 'worthy' being denied because of lifestyle choices.
That is not now the Health System works, nor was it ever intended to be so, and amen to that.
Base it on BMI (I know that doesn't always work...) but people classed as obese etc can have their weight related illnesses classed as self inflicted and should pay towards the treatment. Same should happen with drunks. Culture and ethnicity shouldn't have anything to do with it, you don't see overweight people in harsh environments where access to food is limited.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.