Change your behaviour or you won't get medical help!

[lightblue]

I agree with it to be honest. The skateboarding argument is moot, as the benefits from regular exercise outweigh the potential risks.

People who eat themselves into obesity or smoke 50 cigs a day should not expect to be welcomed with open arms in NHS hospitals. Admittedly the smokers probably pay for the medical costs they incur the nation by the rather large taxes on cigarettes.

I'd go further than this though. I'd start charging people more for their healthcare if they did not make an effort to improve their lifestyle, be it by increasing the amount of exercise they do, or changing their diet.

But then I am a non-smoker with a BMI of 23 and a bodyfat percentage of 10% who exercises for about 30 hours a week (although i do probably drink more than the recommended units per week), so I could feel that when I start paying taxes i will be paying for people that could do more to keep healthy.

[Sandman]

This could be surprisingly popular, judging by the reaction to it so far.

[mrmitchell]

Refusing necessary medical care is wrong and immoral, no matter whut the circumstances.

[Shi Huangdi]

So Bodds, what if medical experts demanded people stop drinking in large amounts if they want to get treated?

[Solly]

Yes Shi, what if?

[TheStinger]

Its a gimmick, In practice clinical decisions are already made on basis of lifestlye and health, obesse people are les likley to get operations because of the risks.

There is a real probelm eith the whole concept. For example a patient is told they ahve terminal lung cancer but is alos told tehy will have 5 years reasonable life with treatment. They decide there gonna have a lugh for their last 5 years and become heavy drinker/smoker and eater is treatment refused.

let doctors decided on the clinical priorities not the politicians

[MikeH]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat I don't know about medical oaths internationally, but generally denial of treatment is a breach of medical ethics. The question should be limited for responsibility for costs.

Yes, this is all about cutting costs though, or redirecting the same money to different patients. Doctors here have to make judgements all the time as to whether they can afford to treat someone for something, I'm sure it's the same there.

I was only playing devil's advocate earlier with the skateboarding thing but people seem to have slightly missed the point.

The point was that the skateboarder had continually injured himself again and again until the doctor warned him that he had to stop because it was doing too much damage. It had to be like that otherwise as you've all pointed out it's not a valid comparison with someone who's done themselves long term damage with diet etc.

[Az]

I don't think that they should be refused medical treatment, just pay a higher percentage of medical tax.

[alva]

I'm agreeing with Bodds.

Also, the sheer number of obese related health problems pales in comparison to skateboarding accidents. The former definitely costs society and the people more money.

And how does it relate to all sporting accidents?
-
If your skateboarding every day, chances are you will end in hospital sooner or later, knowing that that person shouldn't be treated either.
It's not up to the state what you can and what you can't do with your body and make policies accordinly
-
And BTW this is all with prsent knowledge...in 10 year we might discover that chocolate is very good aginst cancer and that sport in fact not as good as we think it is. ( a 10 min daily jog won't do you good anyhow.)

[Ben Kenobi]

Vascular degeneration from chronic IV drug abuse is untreatable.

Thanks MtG.

I'm not a doctor, so I had no idea whether it could be treated.

What their families are like, or what either may or may not "contribute to society" doesn't enter into it.

Sorry for jumping to the gun.

Most who argue quality of life try to impute subjective criteria such as contribution to society into the equation of who should be treated. Your example is like, (i'm a small man,) for me to rescue the drowning 4'11'' woman rather than a 6'5'' man.

I don't think that they should be refused medical treatment, just pay a higher percentage of medical tax.

Azazel:

People who are poorer are generally less healthy, often due to the type of work they do. By having them pay more tax, you are hitting them with a double whammy.

[Japher]

This is one reason why socialized medicine is a bad idea.

[TheStinger]

Originally posted by Japher
This is one reason why socialized medicine is a bad idea.

Yeah its much better that vast swathes of the popualtion can't get healthcare

[Solly]

Because they choose not to. People should at least have a choice.

[Az]

People who are poorer are generally less healthy, often due to the type of work they do. By having them pay more tax, you are hitting them with a double whammy.

I am talking about keeping a healthy diet, and taking care of themselves. That's not a bad thing to ask. I am trying to prolong their lives, and improve it's quality, for crying out loud!

[Sikander]

Originally posted by TheStinger

Yeah its much better that vast swathes of the popualtion can't get healthcare

Yes, just as your mommy knows best system being discussed here. I prefer you break it, you pay for it. Plus we don't have to wait 6 weeks for a pregnancy test to come back as a friend of mine in England did recently.