UK Moves to Deny Surgery to Smokers

[maineman]

Lets see, you resort to foul language and personal attacks when ever someone disagrees with you. You INSIST people only respond in a manner you have set up and when they do not you get pissed off and again resort to name calling and foul language. You think if you call some one an idiot with 20 words thats better than someone just saying " your an idiot" and then you pretend you didn't do it.

You think your opinion is the only one that matters. Anyone foolish enough to disagree with you and not become " enlightened" by you is treated to your anger.

Let me address your points:

I use foul language a lot. l I was a sailor, not an angry sailor. I enjoy it when people can go toe to toe and answer questions. When those same people ask me questions, I try to respond and answer them. My follow-up questions are always wet with one of three very predictable variants: 1. another question, 2. a snappy "(lib/dems) are the root of all evil" line lifted straight from Rush, or 3. a cut and pasted article.

I do not think that I am "better" than anyone on this board...but, in a few selected topic areas, I do believe I am smarter than some people on this board. As a matter of fact, I think that fact is revealingly self-evident in the course of a "conversation" I will readily admit that I grow tired of trying to move past square one with some folks on here - but I am never angry. And if you ARE "foolish" enough to disagree with me, you'd better be able to discuss the point and try to change MY mind using more than the three methods mentioned above.

 

[red states rule]

Let me address your points:

I use foul language a lot. l I was a sailor, not an angry sailor. I enjoy it when people can go toe to toe and answer questions. When those same people ask me questions, I try to respond and answer them. My follow-up questions are always wet with one of three very predictable variants: 1. another question, 2. a snappy "(lib/dems) are the root of all evil" line lifted straight from Rush, or 3. a cut and pasted article.

I do not think that I am "better" than anyone on this board...but, in a few selected topic areas, I do believe I am smarter than some people on this board. As a matter of fact, I think that fact is revealingly self-evident in the course of a "conversation" I will readily admit that I grow tired of trying to move past square one with some folks on here - but I am never angry. And if you ARE "foolish" enough to disagree with me, you'd better be able to discuss the point and try to change MY mind using more than the three methods mentioned above.

You are a poster child for the modern day arrogrant angry liberal

 

[maineman]

"2. a snappy "(lib/dems) are the root of all evil" line lifted straight from Rush"

You are a poster child for the modern day arrogrant angry liberal

I'm not making this stuff up! You could set your watch by it!

 

[red states rule]

"2. a snappy "(lib/dems) are the root of all evil" line lifted straight from Rush"



I'm not making this stuff up! You could set your watch by it!

Sorry if the facts bother you

Go cry to your shrink - or to your fellow libs at your next meeting

 

[Toro]

In this day and age, with all that we know, why does anyone smoke anyways?

 

[maineman]

Sorry if the facts bother you

Go cry to your shrink - or to your fellow libs at your next meeting

again..... "You are a poster child for the modern day arrogrant angry liberal"
is not a fact.... more of that inadaquate understanding of the language. I am curious: Is english your second language? Are you more proficent in some other tongue?

 

[Toro]

In a battle of ideologies between those who seek to destroy our country through pure capitalism and the democratic socialists I will chose the democratic socialists because even when they are wrong their motives are good while those who seek pure capitalism hate our society and intend to destroy it and to make it in their image.

You're being silly.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Another reason why government run health care will not work



Smokers told to quit or surgery will be refused
By DAN NEWLING - More by this author »

Last updated at 16:02pm on 4th June 2007


Smokers are to be denied operations on the Health Service unless they give up cigarettes for at least four weeks beforehand.

Doctors will police the rule by ordering patients to take a blood test to prove they have not been smoking.


The ruling, authorised by Health Secretary Patricia Hewitt, comes after medical research conclusively showed smokers take longer to recover from surgery.

It is thought that 500,000 smokers a year will be affected.

However patients' groups argue that the move is about the NHS saving money rather than improving patient care.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=459574&in_page_id=1770

Six of one, half a dozen of another. Regardless, however, cigarette smoking has a profound influence on wound healing. The nicotine damages the lumens of the arteries and veins, right down to the capillary level, where tissue perfusion takes place. Any disruption to his microvascular blood-flow will prevent the flow of oxygen and nutrients needed for proper wound healing to occur.

I don't know how many of you have ever seen a sternotomy from an coronary artery bypass go bad, but it's not a pretty sight, especially when wound sepsis sets in. The wound is open, as sutures or staples failed and the wound dehissed. The wound is dressed two to three times daily, with dressing wet to dry dressings to remove debris from the wound bed and allow it to heal from the inside out. Even under the best of circumstances, this can add days and weeks to a hospital stay, provided the wound doesn't get infected. Abdominal wounds are even worse.

From my perspective, as an RN, people need to take responsibility for their health...unless they want the health-insurance industry to bleed the system and patients dry as more and more people compete for fewer and fewer resources. If patients don't want to take responsibility for their health and follow their physicians instructions, why should the rest of us pay for their folly in the form of higher insurance premiums and fewer services?

 

[Bullypulpit]

Horseshit. If how long it takes to heal is the bar, then how about denying surgery to HIV/AIDS positive patients PERIOD? And don't give me that "smokers can choose -- they can't crap."

I'm with T-bor on this one. A fat, slovenly human pug is far more likely to die from clogged veins, a heart attack or having a chicken sandwich stuck in their throat than a smoker is from smoking.

I'm waiting for them to blame global warming on smoking. They've managed to blame just about any and everything else on it.

Given the number of folks I've seem sucking their last breaths from a ventilator due to emphysema, lung cancer or other metastatic cancers, coronary artery disease and heart disease secondary to smoking, I've gotta say...You're wrong.

As for AIDS patients, if they're compliant with their medication regimen and their viral load is under control they have fewer post-op complications than smokers. And don't spout that crap about AIDS being a 'gay' disease. It's not. Just ask any woman who was infected because her husband was stepping out on her with a hooker who had a taste for injectable drugs.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Being a lib, your solution to nearly every problem is the same - government

I have seen you meltdown when you have been unable to counter facts, overcome logic, and deny the truth about your party and the total failure of liberalism

Yet, you continue to defend and support the party and its policies

Well. if you actually produced facts to counter, used logic to overcome or accepted the truth of your own party's failures, there might be room for discussion. But since you do none of these, why bother? Dismissed.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Six of one, half a dozen of another. Regardless, however, cigarette smoking has a profound influence on wound healing. The nicotine damages the lumens of the arteries and veins, right down to the capillary level, where tissue perfusion takes place. Any disruption to his microvascular blood-flow will prevent the flow of oxygen and nutrients needed for proper wound healing to occur.

I don't know how many of you have ever seen a sternotomy from an coronary artery bypass go bad, but it's not a pretty sight, especially when wound sepsis sets in. The wound is open, as sutures or staples failed and the wound dehissed. The wound is dressed two to three times daily, with dressing wet to dry dressings to remove debris from the wound bed and allow it to heal from the inside out. Even under the best of circumstances, this can add days and weeks to a hospital stay, provided the wound doesn't get infected. Abdominal wounds are even worse.

From my perspective, as an RN, people need to take responsibility for their health...unless they want the health-insurance industry to bleed the system and patients dry as more and more people compete for fewer and fewer resources. If patients don't want to take responsibility for their health and follow their physicians instructions, why should the rest of us pay for their folly in the form of higher insurance premiums and fewer services?

Who gets to decide which "life styles" are unacceptable and do not deserve medical care? As long as we are on it, I must assume from this post you are totally opposed to medical care for Gays? Talk about a life style that disregards safe medical practices.... Aids is a terminal condition, why not just save the time and money and kill anyone with it?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Given the number of folks I've seem sucking their last breaths from a ventilator due to emphysema, lung cancer or other metastatic cancers, coronary artery disease and heart disease secondary to smoking, I've gotta say...You're wrong.

As for AIDS patients, if they're compliant with their medication regimen and their viral load is under control they have fewer post-op complications than smokers. And don't spout that crap about AIDS being a 'gay' disease. It's not. Just ask any woman who was infected because her husband was stepping out on her with a hooker who had a taste for injectable drugs.

It doesn't matter how, why or in what manner someone got AIDS, it is terminal. Using your logic, we shouldn't waste time and money on anyone that is just going to die anyway. Same with a lot of other diseases. WHO EXACTLY gets to decide what and whom gets treatment?

 

[red states rule]

Six of one, half a dozen of another. Regardless, however, cigarette smoking has a profound influence on wound healing. The nicotine damages the lumens of the arteries and veins, right down to the capillary level, where tissue perfusion takes place. Any disruption to his microvascular blood-flow will prevent the flow of oxygen and nutrients needed for proper wound healing to occur.

I don't know how many of you have ever seen a sternotomy from an coronary artery bypass go bad, but it's not a pretty sight, especially when wound sepsis sets in. The wound is open, as sutures or staples failed and the wound dehissed. The wound is dressed two to three times daily, with dressing wet to dry dressings to remove debris from the wound bed and allow it to heal from the inside out. Even under the best of circumstances, this can add days and weeks to a hospital stay, provided the wound doesn't get infected. Abdominal wounds are even worse.

From my perspective, as an RN, people need to take responsibility for their health...unless they want the health-insurance industry to bleed the system and patients dry as more and more people compete for fewer and fewer resources. If patients don't want to take responsibility for their health and follow their physicians instructions, why should the rest of us pay for their folly in the form of higher insurance premiums and fewer services?

It is yet another example of why Hillarycare will never work - yet libs keep telling us how the government can provide a better health care system then the one we have now

 

[Bullypulpit]

Who gets to decide which "life styles" are unacceptable and do not deserve medical care? As long as we are on it, I must assume from this post you are totally opposed to medical care for Gays? Talk about a life style that disregards safe medical practices.... Aids is a terminal condition, why not just save the time and money and kill anyone with it?

No...Just unfavorably disposed to those who won't take responsibility for their healthcare decisions. HIV infection can be controlled with medication and education. With symptoms and viral loads controlled by medication, and infected persons and their partners taking responsibility for safe sex, AIDS is a chronic syndrome rather than the death sentence it once was. Safe sex, however, is the responsibility of both parties, but that expectation presupposes a rational society.

And don't think I didn't notice your implication that HIV is a 'Gay Plague". The homosexual population was simply the first one struck in this country. Sexual promiscuity IS NOT exclusive to the homosexual community...

 

[maineman]

Aids is a terminal condition, why not just save the time and money and kill anyone with it?

actually, that is not really true and it is becoming less and less so with each passing day. AIDS is now no more terminal than lymphoma.


Ya know.... Magic Johnson looks pretty damned good to me. If he's got a "terminal" illness, it would seem to me that if one is destined to get a "terminal" illness, one would be so lucky to get that sort of slow acting terminal illness... it seems to me, that, for Magic anyway, AIDS is no more "terminal" than life itself.

 

[Bullypulpit]

It is yet another example of why Hillarycare will never work - yet libs keep telling us how the government can provide a better health care system then the one we have now

46.6 million people lacked health insurance in 2005, according to Census Bureau data released in August of 2006. Projecting that forward to today would imply that some 50 million now lack any kind of health insurance. (<a href=http://www.cbpp.org/8-29-06health.htm>Center on Budget and Policy Priorities</a>) And even those with coverage are being squeezed ever tighter to afford health care. Single payer is the way to go, provided patients take responsibility for their own health and are compliant with their treatment regimes.

AS one who works intimately with the health care system, I can tell that the maze of insurance and government rules regarding payment for services is almost indecipherable to the average person and the payments for services themselves often don't cover the costs of those services.

 

[red states rule]

46.6 million people lacked health insurance in 2005, according to Census Bureau data released in August of 2006. Projecting that forward to today would imply that some 50 million now lack any kind of health insurance. (<a href=http://www.cbpp.org/8-29-06health.htm>Center on Budget and Policy Priorities</a>) And even those with coverage are being squeezed ever tighter to afford health care. Single payer is the way to go, provided patients take responsibility for their own health and are compliant with their treatment regimes.

AS one who works intimately with the health care system, I can tell that the maze of insurance and government rules regarding payment for services is almost indecipherable to the average person and the payments for services themselves often don't cover the costs of those services.

BP - how many of the 47 milion are illegals? How many of the 46 million willingly go without healh ins? (Young people who feel they do not need it) How many of the 46 million are wealthy and can afford their own health care? And how many changed jobs, went one day without healh ins and now have it with their new employer? HINT - all those people are included in your number of 46 million

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Lets not be disengenous. There ARE a lot of people without health care Insuarance in this Country. That does not some how equate to that Government shoulf provide it NOR does it make the question asked here any less important. Who gets to decide what care people should and should not get? What other Life styles should be cut off from medical care? Fat people? Diabetics that are not in compliance? Terminal patients? Alziemers? the list WILL just grow and grow if this is your justification.

As for the issue of health Care, it is NOT now, nor has it EVER BEEN the responsibility of the Federal Government to provide it. What happened to that " Constitutional rights and powers" thing?

 

[red states rule]

Lets not be disengenous. There ARE a lot of people without health care Insuarance in this Country. That does not some how equate to that Government shoulf provide it NOR does it make the question asked here any less important. Who gets to decide what care people should and should not get? What other Life styles should be cut off from medical care? Fat people? Diabetics that are not in compliance? Terminal patients? Alziemers? the list WILL just grow and grow if this is your justification.

As for the issue of health Care, it is NOT now, nor has it EVER BEEN the responsibility of the Federal Government to provide it. What happened to that " Constitutional rights and powers" thing?

Will the left want the government to provide car insurance to those who do not have it?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

46.6 million people lacked health insurance in 2005, according to Census Bureau data released in August of 2006. Projecting that forward to today would imply that some 50 million now lack any kind of health insurance. (<a href=http://www.cbpp.org/8-29-06health.htm>Center on Budget and Policy Priorities</a>) And even those with coverage are being squeezed ever tighter to afford health care. Single payer is the way to go, provided patients take responsibility for their own health and are compliant with their treatment regimes.

AS one who works intimately with the health care system, I can tell that the maze of insurance and government rules regarding payment for services is almost indecipherable to the average person and the payments for services themselves often don't cover the costs of those services.

And in another thread you talk about the Constitution, be so kind as to show us hearless bastards where in the Constitution A) the Federal Government is responsible for private health care B) this gives them the right to choose which " Life styles" are acceptable and should be covered or cut off from medical care.