You people that are saying that obesity is genetic are WRONG. Almost all obesity cases are self-inflicted; they are simply people that are too lazy to eat right and exercise.
And the guy asking the question is right. If/when public healthcare becomes the public's problem, I think the public should be able to dictate who can and can't go to McDonald's and who can or can't smoke and who can or can't drink.
If you people want free healthcare and still want the freedom to screw up your bodies, you're wrong.
You dont' get to have your cake and eat it too, literally.
2006-11-12 10:37:47
·
answer #1
·
answered by KT 3
·
2⤊
3⤋
I agree but i don't see how it could be enforced. Its not heartless to suggest this,if you saw a loved one die due to lack of funding you'd soon change your mind.People are always very keen to defend those whom are overweight but have less sympathy for drug addicts etc while they are both "self inflicted" conditions. However smokers which they are trying to cut out of the NHS have actually earned their place in the health care system with the tax they pay on the contra-ban same as alcoholics. These are chemical, physical addictions. Indeed also brought on by oneself. Whereas with food people need to learn self control and restraint. (illness aside) those who are greedy. Why were is there a huge increase in obesity now rather than 50 years ago? This is what you should ask yourself, reason, there wasn't such consumer choice or availability. Third world countries anyone? .
2006-11-12 12:59:00
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
I agree that if a person continues to eat themselves into an early grave, then the NHS should not have to pay extra fees for there treatment. It is crucial for a person to keep fit, but to continuously indulge into a lifestyle of unhealthy food which gradually destroys the body's itself and prevents the body from eliminating harmful diseases and bacteria from occurring is not a price to be paid by the NHS, unless they are willing to change there eating habits and lifestyle. The extra fees for treatments should only be paid if patients sign a contract to agree to changing there lifestyle and if not will have to deal with heavy penalties which are incorporated into the contract. That way the NHS will not loose out. In addition to this it is clear that those who over eat know what they are doing to themselves. They are aware that there blood stream has fat deposits blocking there natural blood flow and as a result they become obese and suffer for this reason i agree that the NHS should not have to pay extra fees for treatments regarding obesity conditions.
2006-11-12 10:27:33
·
answer #3
·
answered by vic 1
·
1⤊
0⤋
If that was to be the case:
smokers, drug addicts, persistent teen pregnancy's etc would all have to be excluded under the heading of 'self infliction'.
The problem is it would cost a lot of money to police.
Would you exclude those larger people who are genetically more prone to obesity? while i do understand where you are coming from, the fact that it costs the NHS and tax payers a lot of money, but so do a lot of other treatments. I can't see it ever happening. After all obese people get to vote too!
2006-11-12 10:01:31
·
answer #4
·
answered by Heather 5
·
3⤊
0⤋
Several people who are obese have become obese by taking mediacations to cure other ailments. Sometimes obesity is a symptom of a problem and not and end result. Ever hear of poly cystic ovarian syndrome? It just one of many conditions that people may have. It is just now being able to be treated. I can't tell you how many times I have had "well meaning" people be very hurtful because of my size. Not ever obese person is greedy. Is every skinny person a meth head?
2006-11-12 10:59:17
·
answer #5
·
answered by Julia B 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
yea i do agree BUT that would then go for people that smoke, over drink or do extreme sports. How would u determine whether people are putting themselves in danger or not? Surely being greedy and eating 2 much is the same as going rock climbing? Its just not possible. And also some fat people have problems that they cant help dont they? I dont know thats what i get told lol
2006-11-12 10:01:43
·
answer #6
·
answered by lost 2
·
2⤊
1⤋
you everybody is awesome!!! If an overweight human being is overweight because of a medical condition, they must be lower than a medical doctors care and able to instruct that they don't look overweight for this reason of overeating. Amy, It has not something to do with what people look like. that is the reason of their condition it really is of difficulty. Our society already makes people pay for his or her personal conduct and complications. Why over tax a smoker purely because they smoke. it really is strictly what the further taxes on cigarettes are all about. I call it purpose-Taxing. Smoking motives extra well-being complications, so tax the individuals who smoke that reason their personal well-being complications. mutually, inspire them to give up smoking, hence reducing the tax sales the authorities receives. Then make up for the loss with yet another tax. So, why not? what's solid for the goose, is solid for the gander. also, the over-tax on cigarettes effectively over-taxes in many cases adverse people. extra decrease income people smoke than larger income people. no human being could get loose well-being care! have you ever been to a VA medical institution presently? there is an argument adverse to socialized medicine.
2016-11-29 02:03:47
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
What about people that drink to excess, smokers, drug addicts, basically anyone that is absuing their own health. Singling out just obese people seems a bit discriminatory to me. Personally, I think we should all just pay for health care like the Americans do and scrap the NHS. HTH : )
2006-11-12 15:53:10
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I work with children with SLD (severe learning disabilities) and some are overweight through no fault of their own. Are you saying that these few individuals have no right to free health care?
I understand your point (e.g. If a chronic smoker through choice, why should "we taxpayers" fund your healthcare if you have high blood pressure, lung cancer, etc?)
However, we are all part of the human race and the underlying statement of free health care is that we the privileged agree to help those not privileged. We share our resources. We share our lives.
If you look at true health care costs, we would not pay the managers so much. We would also ban claims from the public who thinks the health care system owes them compensation when in fact, although mistakes are made, lives are saved. My mother had 3rd degree burns from radiotherapy treatment of her breast cancer but refused prompts to claim compensation despite weeks of weeping wounds, because she is alive today.
If people had claimed compensation in the days of bloodsucking with leeches, we would have no healthcare system today. Wake up, leeches of society!
p.s. I am not overweight and am in perfect health. Good health comes from balanced living, a positive attitude & positive thinking... Dis-ease is precisely that - when you are not at ease with your existence and out of balance with Life itself. People who are overweight need help, not discrimination. It is a problem with mind/body/spirit imbalance, a lack of unconditional Love, a loss of contact with all that is... a forgetting of who you really are.
2006-11-12 10:26:26
·
answer #9
·
answered by unconditional_love_incarnate 1
·
2⤊
0⤋
Do you ever drink alcohol? If so, I think you should be banned from NHS treatment if you ever have any a stroke or heart, liver or kidney problems. Do you ever catch the sun? If so, you should be exempt from treatment if you ever get skin cancer. I'm really assuming you don't smoke because after your comment that would be a real joke!!
WOW- UNCONDITIONAL-LOVE-INC.... WHAT A FANTASTIC RESPONSE BELOW- I LOVE YOU!
2006-11-12 10:21:22
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋