answer in full please.Should the uk goverment restrict life saving/changing health care to people that smoke or are over weight?
No because without smokers and obese people the NHS would probably collapse.
If you look at the taxes smokers alone pay, take away the cost of treating ALL smoking related diseases on the NHS every year, they still have an 拢8.5 BILLION surplus. They are pumping more money into the country than most others.
We live in a society where we should not discriminate. If a smoker chooses to smoke and gets ill they should be treated. If not then someone who takes part in a dangerous sport should not be treated in hospital if they get injured becuase they made the choice to do this and should face the consequences. It is the same logic applied in both senses.
Also before anyone rants, I am not a smoker but I do not think that we should have a discriminative NATIONAL health serviceShould the uk goverment restrict life saving/changing health care to people that smoke or are over weight?
Its the smokers who pay for the NHS. so it would be a little unfair to bite the hand that feeds youShould the uk goverment restrict life saving/changing health care to people that smoke or are over weight?
Absolutely not. Health care costs are assumed by everyone, so therefore access should also be universal.
Illness is a fact of life and requires treatment. Period. To me it would be non-sensical and discriminatory to try to determine the cause of one's cancer before deciding whether to treat it or not.Should the uk goverment restrict life saving/changing health care to people that smoke or are over weight?
only if they stop taxing smokers or overweight people
if we pay our taxes we are entitled to treatment
why should we pay for a service that judges people so harshly , if anybody suggested that we dont treat particular races who pay tax their would be an outcry
i am sick of britain and its weak minded people who have not got the gutts to stand up to anythings this ridculous goverment does
many of us have ancesters that fought for the NHS
RANT OVERShould the uk goverment restrict life saving/changing health care to people that smoke or are over weight?
I don't think so, because I see that as being the thin end of the wedge.
Smokers and obese people make certain choices that affect their condition, it's true. And they may not be choices that financially benefit the government. But when the government can cut your access based on behaviour it deems unacceptable, what's next? Restriction of people who drink more than five units of alcohol a week, or people who don't work out an hour a day? Or black people, for example, who are more prone to hypertension than non-black people (a medical fact) if they use more salt on their veggies than the government thinks is OK? How do we draw the line on censure of personal behaviour choice?
Besides, I doubt I'd see a reduction in my taxes even if they did so. It would just be less money for health care, and more money for the legions of useless civil servants and MP perks.
