£300 million is spent by the NHS on removing tatoos. More is spent on boob jobs and sex changes, etc. Why do new Labour waste money on the undeserving and deny help to the needy?
2007-08-20 01:44:37 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Government
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/kidneycancerRCC/?signed=b2ed082.8e54f8
The above is the link to sign a petition.
2007-08-20 02:44:57 · update #1
Mr Sceptic: I usually respect your answers, but whilst you may be pro-government I am certainly not and I am sick of their evil incompetence and attack on all that is good. It was said about the fire in Cornwall that lives may have been saved if this government weren't squeezing the fire Service's resources, our top Army General says we should leave now, violence is on the increase, the police are increasingly being used as political chess pieces, CBI state how school leavers lack skills with the 3 R's. The list goes on, and New Labour scum keep making things worse!!!
2007-08-20 04:30:15 · update #2
because its labour. i will never understand hwo so many people are idiots within the party. Its common sense to stop this and i will never understand why it continues. When will we ever get MP's with common sense?
2007-08-20 01:49:17 · answer #1 · answered by danny o 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Why do you have to take a good question, with a valid viewpoint, and then use it to pursue your own anti-Labour agenda?
There are real questions to be asked about our health care priorities, and all governments since 1948 have ducked them, not just the present.
I agree with you - tattoo removal on the NHS should be way down the list of priorities, if available at all. Similarly breast enhancement and sex change (although, never having needed any of these 3, I'm not sure what the psychological problems involved are.) Fertility treatment also seems to me a low priority compared with life-saving treatment.
But don't run away with the idea that money saved like this would solve everything. Many of these drug treatments for cancer are untried and unproven, and only brought to our attention by desperate relatives clutching at straws. Someone, somewhere, has to make decisions based on clinical outcome, and it's not always obvious to the layman which way such a decision should be made.
The idea of the 'undeserving sick' is a very dangerous one.
Does this mean denying treatment for lung diseases to smokers because they have brought their plight on themselves, denying A&E treatment to Sunday footballers, denying HIV drugs to homosexuals - all these have in the past been quoted as 'undeserving'.
What seems a simple argument, is actually remarkably complex; let's hope you get some answers which display some thought and not just knee-jerk reactions.
2007-08-20 11:14:42 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
The priorites of the NHS have shifted so much that I do not think it is possible to compare what it is now with what it was supposed to be when it was founded.
NICE, under pressure from the government, are now denying treatment not only to cancer patients, but also to those suffering from dementia, the blind etc.
To apply market economics to the NHS is to condemn many thousands to death, and this abhorent stance traces it's roots back to Thatcher, although the government of the day have picked up the torch and are sprinting with it.
2007-08-20 08:57:51 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
excellent point sir - unfortunately no matter which party gets in the same thing will happen - go to the no 10 website and see if there is a petition about this - if so sign it - i will do the same - if not then start one - i for one will sign it
all these bl**dy lobbyists are getting their own liberal way -
if we all petition
some one will have to listen.
( almost poetic)
2007-08-20 09:27:36 · answer #4 · answered by gillm 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
In the same way they give council housing to asylum seekers, former prisoners etc whilst homeless families are left rotting in homeless hostels and B&Bs.
regerugged - you're talking crap man, anyone in the UK can pay for medical treatment if they can afford it as we have a private system as well as the NHS.
2007-08-20 08:53:55 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Wow I shocked I thought UK had a great health care system. But I haven't been there since 1985 when My son was born, 3 months early and your great doctors did a marvelious job.
2007-08-20 08:52:26 · answer #6 · answered by Kirk Neel 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
They want the cancer drug to be 80% effective which is crazy if I have cancer i dont care if its 25% effective. I watch a report on that. Its Crazy
2007-08-20 08:50:57 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Nothing I hear anymore about Labour surprises me.
2007-08-20 11:06:42 · answer #8 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I hope millions of American liberals read this question and digest the meaning of socialized medicine.
2007-08-20 08:49:22 · answer #9 · answered by regerugged 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋