Rationing of non-emergency surgery is already happening based on weight and smoking status. Royal College of Surgeons is opposing this as not useful for helping those who need to lose weight or stop smoking. Considering smoking is an addiction from which the government benefits in taxes and has promoted in the past, and weight gain is often due to things like medication, certain long term conditions, or the fact that those in poverty or with mental health problems can't manage to eat well, it's both a stupid and an insensitive way to try to save money imo.
Rationing in the NHS: Rationing of non... - Lung Conditions C...
Rationing in the NHS
It won't stop at that Iris,it will be all of your lifestyle and sexuality will be taken into consideration,after that with gene technology.you may not even be allowed to have children for fear of contaminating this Utopian but impoverished Society...............gloomy skis and a darker cat xx
Who's Iris??
i do beg your apology O2trees i have my names mixed up?old age affects us all in time though i was sure i had all my marbles.obviously not lol x
For that matter I say surgery-be-gone for drinkers, sugar eaters, and people exercising too much!!!
Yes shameful.
Oh.....I do like waking up with my one cup of coffee, and logging into this forum!!! And especially this morning, with all of the above lighthearted banter.... after a few days of that sneaky insufferable depression trying to creep into my system.
you have made me laugh and cheered me on, thank you all......love this site!
Laughter is the only way to cope in awful times Ktomoph
I have an obese friend who has needed a hip replacement for over a year. The surgeon said his fat wouldn't affect the operation because he's not carrying it around the hip area. But he was told to lose 2 stones in weight, which he did. Then they moved the goal posts and told him to lose more weight, which he did. Then they moved the goal posts again and he's given up. A year ago, he was happy to have the operation and go back to work. Now, he's about to lose his job and at 60 will not get another one, so he will be living on benefits for the rest of his working life (if he can get them). It makes me so angry for him.
Penny wise and pound foolish, this government.
It's not the surgery that will complicate things for obese patients...its the anaesthetic that would be more harmful xxx
But that incremental goal post moving doesnt seem to be about safety Angie. x
Was of post replying to ergendl 02 x
Yes I know - maybe I wasn't being clear Angie. I was saying that the goal post moving that Ergendl describes didn't seem to be about safety but more about just delaying the operation for whatever reason they had. They had told her friend that losing 2 stone would be ok for the op. But then when he did lose that amount they asked for another 2 stone drop, then yet another. I would have thought that if it was all about safety - with the anaesthetic or whatever - they would have given a bigger weight loss target in the first place. That's all I meant.
TwmSionCati' s comment underneath the article was interesting too.
Rationing is one thing - no service due to no staff is another. Here in mid Essex the lymphodaema clinic was on an 18 (yes 18) week 'pathway' (waiting list!) but due to no staff even that was scrapped and I still await any direct info THREE months after referral. (A nice lady at Provide has provided some info but only cos I mailed in.)
Nothing new here. Approx 20 years ago a work colleague needed knee surgery. Was told he had to lose weight first. Lost weight and had surgery, all was well.
Approx 10 years ago I had keyhole surgery for paraoesophagal hiatus hernia and was told the more weight I lost beforehand the better though wasn't a condition of the surgery. Managed to drop a stone before the op. Was told that the complications I suffered from the op were as a result of the internal fat obscuring oesophagus.