Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

UK’s NHS Refuses Healthcare to Obese and Smokers Unless Behavior Is Changed

Written by:

Published on: October 20, 2017

When unconstitutional Obamacare passed without one Republican vote, many Americans cheered while the vast majority lost their health care insurance, lost plans with which they were happy, and lost physicians they had seen for years.

Constitutional conservatives predicted Obamacare would implode, possibly leading to a government controlled single-payer health care system through devastation of the free market healthcare insurance industry.

It wasn’t that long ago that Bernie Sanders called for exactly that, backed up by Hillary Clinton.

The problem with single-payer government controlled health care systems is the bureaucrats who decide which individuals will receive care based on their determinations – what many of us dubbed “the death panels.”

However, politicians are quick to deny and/or denounce the “death panel” bureaucracy as conspiracy theory while pointing to the system in Great Britain, the National Health Service (NHS), as a shining example.  As Breitbart News reported, the National Health Service in Great Britain is a bit tarnished.

Britain’s socialised National Health Service (NHS) is planning to ban obese patients and smokers from having surgery unless they lose weight or kick the habit.

Under plans drawn up in Hertfordshire, the NHS say obese patients “will not get non-urgent surgery until they reduce their weight” or their circumstances are exceptional.

The new criteria insist smokers will only be referred for operations if they have quit smoking for at least eight weeks and will be forced to take breathalyzer tests before their referral.

The plans will also see cuts in IVF provision and provision of medicines, causing concern the wealthy will simply pay for treatments while those on lower incomes will simply have to go without, The Telegraph reports.

A spokesman for the Royal College of Surgeons told the paper an “urgent rethink” of policies was needed, which he said was “discriminatory” and went against the fundamental principles of the NHS.

The action by the NHS is exactly what many of us predicted with the advent of the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB) under Obamacare.

In fact, the IPAB rewrote criteria established by the American Medical Association (AMA) for certain diagnostic procedures, key in detecting health issues such as prostate cancer early.

When government controls the health care system, government determines who receives care and who does not, becoming discriminatory in nature – they make the rules on whatever criteria they see fit.

And, if a citizen wants health care, government requires the individual to jump through its hoops to receive it.

Yes, being obese and smoking is detrimental to one’s health, but health care treatment should not be denied because one is obese and/or smokes.

Many would point to the additional health care costs incurred by the obese and smokers.

But, one study indicated those additional costs are assumptions.

Breitbart continued:

Despite the widespread assumption that smokers cost the taxpayer money, studies have found they might actually save expenditure as they die younger and require less expensive care and treatment in their old age. Smokers also pay a huge amount of tax on their cigarettes.

A 2008 study in the PLOS Medicine Journal concluded: “At older ages, smokers incurred higher costs. Because of differences in life expectancy, however, lifetime health expenditure was highest among healthy-living people and lowest for smokers.”

Joyce Robins, from Patient Concern, said: “This is absolutely disgraceful – we all pay our taxes, and the NHS should be there when we need it; we did not agree to a two-tier system.”

Other critics used a ‘slippery-slope’ argument to claim the ban could see other groups being persecuted by the NHS later in time.

The Royal College of Surgeons also said controversial criteria, drawn up by clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) in Hertfordshire, might mean patients are refused a referral without seeing the specialist who should take such decisions.

The Great Britain NHS doesn’t seem like a shining example of a system at all.

One has to wonder why politicians are so adamant about promoting an unsustainable system, as the NHS, to a free society that had one of the best healthcare systems in the world.

While not everyone had health care insurance, everyone had access to health care regardless of the ability to pay.

This new criteria by NHS proves the point that health care insurance does not equate to health care nor does it guarantee health care services or payment for those services.

Opponents of the new NHS guidelines cites several ethical, moral and medical issues that could arise under the new standard.

Breitbart explains:

Ian Eardley, Senior Vice President, said: “Singling out patients in this way goes against the principles of the NHS. This goes against clinical guidance and leaves patients waiting long periods of time in pain and discomfort.

“It can even lead to worse outcomes following surgery in some cases. There is simply no justification for these policies, and we urge all clinical commissioning groups [CCGs] to urgently reverse these discriminatory measures.”

Three of the CCG groups, East and North Hertfordshire and Herts Valley, defended the criteria stating the hope is individuals would take more responsibility for their health and well-being, where they can, in order to free limited resources to use with priority treatments.

Breitbart reported the CCGs contend:

“This policy is designed to improve patient safety and outcomes, both during and immediately after non-urgent surgery.

“No financial savings are expected as a result of these measures. We do, however, hope to improve the long-term health of our residents through the targeted stop-smoking and weight-loss support on offer to patients.

“In exceptional circumstances, clinicians will allow surgery to go ahead even if the smoking and weight loss criteria are not met. Exceptions would be made when waiting for surgery would be more harmful for the patient.”

The NHS expects no financial savings from these “rules.”

The agency is attempting to direct the lives of individuals while violating their rights when it comes to activities that are a private matter through coercion and denial of quality of life health care services.

They expect no savings from these “rules”;  therefore, the only reason it is being done is “control.”

If the NHS will be withholding treatment to obese individuals and smokers, what other private activities will this institute propose rules.

Will the NHS target individuals who consume alcohol?

Will age and productivity come into play at some point?

With government control of health care services, whatever rules it makes, the people follow or suffer the consequences.

In this case, the people receive zero services.

It is one thing for a doctor to recommend weight loss or smoking cessation before a procedure or as part of the patient’s wellness management and quite another for the government to establish a rule saying, “lose weight and/or quit smoking or you get no health care services.”

In the first example, it is a private matter determined in the doctor-patient relationship while the latter is a mandate.

Remember, this is the shining example paraded before American citizens as a model for health care services here.

It is for actions such as these by the NHS that government should not be in control of health care services or health care insurance.

Moreover, it is the direction this republic is headed if a full repeal of Obamacare is not done and Republicans succeed in passing their atrocious Obamacare Lite or Obamacare 2.0 plan.

Not all portions of Obamacare are being repealed under the Republican plan meaning the bureaucratic IPAB remains intact opening the door for ridiculous rules for services.

 

Sign-up to get breaking alerts from Sons of Liberty Media

Don't forget to like SonsOfLibertyMedia.com on Facebook, Google+, & Twitter.
The opinions expressed in each article are the opinions of the author alone and do not necessarily reflect those of SonsOfLibertyMedia.com.

Comment via Facebook
Comment via Disqus

Send this to a friend