Ill people and NHS treatment
06 February 2009, 02:45 PM
#1
Scooby Senior
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: North Wales
Posts: 5,826
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ill people and NHS treatment
Following on from smoker and fatties, I think it reasonable that ill people be banned from treatment at NHS hospitals.
I mean, come one, they must have been up to something they could have avoided or done differently to not get sick.
I think a quick check at admissions would only allow people who were genuinely not sick to get treatment.
It's a real strain on the NHS and they could spend money better elsewhere.
What do you think?
Geezer
I mean, come one, they must have been up to something they could have avoided or done differently to not get sick.
I think a quick check at admissions would only allow people who were genuinely not sick to get treatment.
It's a real strain on the NHS and they could spend money better elsewhere.
What do you think?
Geezer
06 February 2009, 02:54 PM
#5
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Logged Out
Posts: 10,221
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well it is a well known fact that when my Mother has her 70th she is to have a party followed by a 10 minute head start until her sons come after her and shoot her.
We are doing our bit to prevent unnecessary future care costs, are you?
We are doing our bit to prevent unnecessary future care costs, are you?
Trending Topics
06 February 2009, 03:12 PM
#10
Scooby Senior
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: North Wales
Posts: 5,826
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
See? You're all getting in to the swing of it now!
With no patients, think of the high tech medical equipment they could buy! And waiting lists? Pah!
You know it makes sense.....
Geezer
With no patients, think of the high tech medical equipment they could buy! And waiting lists? Pah!
You know it makes sense.....
Geezer
06 February 2009, 03:12 PM
#11
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Logged Out
Posts: 10,221
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
06 February 2009, 03:19 PM
#13
Well, it *is* called the National HEALTH Service.......so should be for healthy people only 
If it was called the National ILLNESS Service then things might be different LOL
Shaun
If it was called the National ILLNESS Service then things might be different LOL
Shaun
06 February 2009, 03:24 PM
#15
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Logged Out
Posts: 10,221
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
06 February 2009, 06:14 PM
#17
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Disco, Disco!
Posts: 21,825
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Funny the number of small minded idiots who feel that not allowing people treatment from the NHS because they smoke or are overweight or drink is the right thing to do.
Re smoking and drinking; they pay for the NHS and some in taxes and duties so yes ban 'em and then stop the duty on **** and booze and watch your system come tumbling down so no one gets treatment. Cost of smoking to the NHS is some 1.7bn, revenue raised from the sale (duty) is 3.0bn around double that of the cost
Me i would rather stop the medical 'tourists' using and abusing the system
I agree, re banning pretty much everybody why treat anyone who hasn't led a less than pious life and lest exclude
Dangerous sports participants - they know the risks and chose to go ahead anyway. example - you get an motor bike (maybe so you can try to relive your yoof), have an accident and break you neck - you fault, you know the risks you go an and pay
People in accidents, cars, bikes, etc - if they caused the accident - its their fault after all.
Any trades that involve dangerous practices - your choice after all.
Parents of children who have accidents should foot the bill- they should take better care of this offspring!
Re smoking and drinking; they pay for the NHS and some in taxes and duties so yes ban 'em and then stop the duty on **** and booze and watch your system come tumbling down so no one gets treatment. Cost of smoking to the NHS is some 1.7bn, revenue raised from the sale (duty) is 3.0bn around double that of the cost
Me i would rather stop the medical 'tourists' using and abusing the system
I agree, re banning pretty much everybody why treat anyone who hasn't led a less than pious life and lest exclude
Dangerous sports participants - they know the risks and chose to go ahead anyway. example - you get an motor bike (maybe so you can try to relive your yoof), have an accident and break you neck - you fault, you know the risks you go an and pay
People in accidents, cars, bikes, etc - if they caused the accident - its their fault after all.
Any trades that involve dangerous practices - your choice after all.
Parents of children who have accidents should foot the bill- they should take better care of this offspring!
Last edited by The Zohan; 06 February 2009 at 06:36 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post