[DEFTLEFTHAND]

I'm a smoker and if and when I do get terminal cancer I'll be taking my own life purely to save myself the suffering from the the final ravishing throngs of the disease. This is purely for my own convenience as I'd be a private patient anyway, I never have and never will cost this state a cent..

[Battered Mars Bar]

Thanks, I appreciate that

[LH Pathe]

Originally Posted by DEFTLEFTHAND

I'm a smoker and if and when I do get terminal cancer I'll be taking my own life purely to save myself the suffering from the the final ravishing throngs of the disease. This is purely for my own convenience as I'd be a private patient anyway, I never have and never will cost this state a cent..

no don't think cancer... It's all in the mind, resistance training you can do from your couch.

Don't just smoke the cigarette. embrace it

[mattjack]

Originally Posted by Battered Mars Bar

Absolutely, the ginger comments in this thread not that I bothered to read them sound racist hence why I didn't read them, disgusting to say the least. But giving medical treatment to fat people and smokers is ridiculous, I've no time for their disgusting selfish habits and they don't deserve any medical treatment for their self indulgent ignorant habits, imo.

Maybe if you read them you might realise that its good humoured banter regularly tossed around by the night time inhabitants of AH.
'
Just to add to your point of not treating 'fat people' and smokers because they disgust you with 'their selfish habits' , how would you go about about treating somebody with skin cancer contacted from lying in the sun, does their laying suggest they are stupid given the amount of information available on the prevalence of skin cancer ?

or are you just trying say 'you don't like smokers and fat people' ?

[looksee]

There is a lot of rubbish being talked here. I have both a medical card and VHI (and its my own business what I choose to spend my money on).

I have been admitted to Emergency on VHI and on the MC on a number of occasions and the treatment is precisely the same regardless of whether you are public or private. The only difference if you are admitted is a slight difference in the number of beds in a room.

You do not necessarily get to see a consultant, depending on need (you can ask to see one but if you need one s/he will see you anyway).

It is probably true that with VHI you can get to see a consultant more easily (at a cost of at least €120 on top of your VHI payments). That is down to the hold the consultants have on the system, which I do not agree with.

The business about people being treated if they have some medical issues, such as obesity or smoking, well that has always gone on and is not nearly as dramatic as it sounds.

If you are seriously obese or have lungs destroyed by smoking it can be very dangerous to operate, as well as pointless. Equally if you had serious breathing issues caused by other than smoking it might be just as dangerous to operate and the risk would have to be balanced against the benefit.

[mattjack]

My family have VHI and medical cards 'for a particular health issue' the treatment is same but its time scale that's the difference.
There is quite difference between an emergency admission and a scheduled admission.

[Show Time]

Originally Posted by Logical Fallacy

Article on the Guardian site about a survey of doctors, with the highlight being that 54% of them felt that smokers and obese people should be denied certain treatments until they improve their health situation.

The main concern seemed to be that the effectiveness of certain procedures would be affected by their lifestyle.

Having thought about it I can't really think of anything wrong with the concept, once a condition is not life threatening or too serious then a patient should be required to show an improvement and acceptance of responsibility for their own well being.

What say you AH?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/20...-smokers-obese

What the f**k ever happened to first do no harm??

Has it been replaced with first do nothing until i am paid??

[Improbable]

For issues of limited physical resources, i.e. transplants, sure. I'd rather a heart go to someone who is healthier than I am, being both a smoker and being a fatty. They'll have a better prognosis than I would. But it can't be the only consideration. Have to take age and other stuff into account too. But if you have myself and someone exactly like me except for the fact that they don't smoke or that they aren't as overweight, and there's only 1 organ for transplant and we both need it, then give it to the other guy.

[Battered Mars Bar]

Originally Posted by mattjack

'
Just to add to your point of not treating 'fat people' and smokers because they disgust you with 'their selfish habits' , how would you go about about treating somebody with skin cancer contacted from lying in the sun, does their laying suggest they are stupid given the amount of information available on the prevalence of skin cancer ?

or are you just trying say 'you don't like smokers and fat people' ?

I suppose I don't have the best username to be continuing with that view
It's just the smokers I don't like now

[Mr.Biscuits]

No.

[wonderfulname]

If I needed medical treatment where my quitting smoking would greatly enhance my recovery I would be worried were my doctor not at least hesitant if I flat out refused to quit.

Were I obese I would be worried if a surgeon was happy to immediately perform surgery even though a couple of months losing weight would greatly enhance the chances of success.

I would be absolutely appalled to hear of an alcoholic receiving a liver transplant without showing adequately that they are recovering.

As far as I am aware, in these cases the patient is indeed expected to improve their wellbeing before receiving treatment, and I really don't see what's wrong with that. People crying eugenics are being a bit dim if I must be honest, none of these are inherent characteristics, all that is required of a patient is to change their behaviour.

[Logical Fallacy]

Originally Posted by Mr. Incognito

Dear lord. AH is really full of Trolls tonight.

You treat the person that is in the greatest need. It's called Triage and is one of the basic tenants of Medicine. Google it. TRIAGE. The fact is it DOESN'T matter in emergency situations.

Now if there is a finite amount of medical resources- e.g transplants then it should go to the person that will give the greatest opportunity for that to be a success to pay respect to the person that donated.

Medicine generally though is something that should not be rationed, or rationalised or doled out according to morals or religion, or weight, or health, or colour, or monetary consideration, or addiction. Period.

That's what they hippocratic oath means.

Be careful................. Once you start deciding that one group is "better" and "more deserving" its a small step from segregation to class to slavery. Don't believe me? Read your history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_e..._United_States

Basically what you are saying here is that you agree with the doctors under certain circumstances that they have highlighted in the article ( I assume you read the article).

[KittyeeTrix]

Originally Posted by Battered Mars Bar

Absolutely, the ginger comments in this thread not that I bothered to read them sound racist hence why I didn't read them, disgusting to say the least. But giving medical treatment to fat people and smokers is ridiculous, I've no time for their disgusting selfish habits and they don't deserve any medical treatment for their self indulgent ignorant habits, imo.

Originally Posted by Battered Mars Bar

Thanks, I appreciate that

if your werent so blatant you might actually get somewhere with your posts!!

[paddyandy]

I've known people who had little or no regard for their health and i saw one man kill himself on fry-ups almost disgusting to list out here .Everyday the pan was on with cookeen first and then everything else .I warned him twice but he did'nt care and told me so . Suicide of a sort ? Overdosed on grease from pigs .Coroner could'nt enter that .Did'nt hesitate to run down the doctors' either for a remedy .They cost the state ...

[omega666]

Originally Posted by Jimmyhologram

They don't, apparently. From Journal.ie:

"According to the Department of Health the cost of smoking-related illness is going to be €23 billion over the next 10 years at current rates. Yet based on last year’s yield, the tax take over the next decade will be just €14.7 billion."

Still, I presume this doesn't take into account the fact that smokers who die younger cost the state less in pensions, nor the fact that non-smokers tend to get ill and require health care also ...

The tax based on last year is not equal to what is going to be collected in 10 years as you can guarentee that the tax will increase.

Also what about all the other tax smokers pays through thier life along with those with private health insurance.