Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Thread gallery
11
Waboofoo · 15/10/2024 08:24

ThatsNotMyTeen · 15/10/2024 08:20

She would probably not have wanted your colleague to get treatment for that either

Show quote history

That would be heartless and unethical! She would have died without treatment.

HeddaGarbled · 15/10/2024 08:23

I think those floodgates are already wide open. This forum is flooded with posts about these jabs including lots about how to get around the controls by lying about BMIs etc. Much better to direct the jabs to those who need them rather than letting them all be used up by women with money and eating disorders.

elastamum · 15/10/2024 08:21

I am not convinced of the ethics or feasibility of this clinical study. There are so many other confounding factors in unemployment that are not directly related to obesity. I think that the ethics committee will struggle to approve.

ThatsNotMyTeen · 15/10/2024 08:20

Waboofoo · 15/10/2024 08:14

But your tax is paying to treat my obese colleagues who had heart attacks and were off work for 6 months on full pay (paid for by taxpayers). They wouldn’t have had heart attacks if they weren’t very obese

Your Logic makes no sense

Show quote history

She would probably not have wanted your colleague to get treatment for that either

OrwellianTimes · 15/10/2024 08:19

Waboofoo · 15/10/2024 08:14

But your tax is paying to treat my obese colleagues who had heart attacks and were off work for 6 months on full pay (paid for by taxpayers). They wouldn’t have had heart attacks if they weren’t very obese

Your Logic makes no sense

Show quote history

They MIGHT NOT have had heart attacks if they weren’t obese. You don’t know. Most the people I’ve know who’ve had heart attacks were skinny and a couple were triathletes.

Doggymummar · 15/10/2024 08:19

I had no idea people were out of work due to obesity. Great initiative, giving them back quality of life and getting back to work. I approve. It will save so much money ling term.n

Goody2ShoesAndTheFilthyBeast · 15/10/2024 08:18

Good.

What we want is people to be healthy enough to lead full and productive lives.

If they need help to get there, why not give it?
It's cheaper for the country in the long run.
And there's no medals awarded for doing it by yourself. If there's something you can have to make it easier for you then what is the point of struggling without it?

The point is the end result, not the process.

itwasnevermine · 15/10/2024 08:18

MillyMollyMandHey · 15/10/2024 08:12

Wish you could opt out of your taxes paying for things like this.

But the effects to the NHS from obesity are fine? Or the cost of benefits?

It's a great idea.

LemonTT · 15/10/2024 08:17

The NHS isn’t renowned for floodgates. It is a limited pilot that will take years to be rolled out to the people who need it. In the meantime the NHS needs to learn more about these drugs because they will come off patent in a few years and they aren’t expensive to make.

once more data and evaluation is available qualified people can decide on how they should be prescribed and the debate won’t be lead by the Daily Mails click bait headlines.

Cerialkiller · 15/10/2024 08:16

Wow. I'm staggered at how fast this trail haa been implemented. Usually these things take so long to respond to medical tech changes. I think it can only be a good thing. It will establish the effectiveness of the drug for a number of purposes. I one who thinks they could be an amazing benefit and more research is good. I forsee being able to get the drug in multiple forms (pills, implants etc) within a few years.

Waboofoo · 15/10/2024 08:14

MillyMollyMandHey · 15/10/2024 08:12

Wish you could opt out of your taxes paying for things like this.

But your tax is paying to treat my obese colleagues who had heart attacks and were off work for 6 months on full pay (paid for by taxpayers). They wouldn’t have had heart attacks if they weren’t very obese

Your Logic makes no sense

Spacecrispsnack · 15/10/2024 08:13

What @MillyMollyMandHey trials of things that might lead to vastly higher savings than things cost?

Wish there was a way of spending my taxes on improving the level of intellect of some people.

Weverunoutofteabags · 15/10/2024 08:13

Many people are out of work because of health issues caused by their weight. Any scheme which is designed to lessen the impact on the NHS and reduce the number of people claiming benefits by getting back into work is a good thing in my opinion.

MillyMollyMandHey · 15/10/2024 08:12

Wish you could opt out of your taxes paying for things like this.

ThisOldThang · 15/10/2024 08:12

What happens if somebody says they're happy being obese and living a life on UC+PIP?

Nobody can force them to inject.

Will benefits be withdrawn in an attempt to force them back into work? I'm guessing not.

Sausagenbacon · 15/10/2024 08:12

What's your aibu?

Catza · 15/10/2024 08:11

Floodgate of what?
It's a 5-year trial of 3000 patients and the results will inform the wider policy. None of us can say what the outcome is going to be which is the whole point of conducting a study.

LivelyMauveHedgehog · 15/10/2024 08:11

Can you clarify what you mean by opening a floodgate?

XDownwiththissortofthingX · 15/10/2024 08:10

A "floodgate" to what?

Waboofoo · 15/10/2024 08:09

Amazing news!

I’m loving this very sensible policy decision. It’s going to save the NHS so much money and generate higher productivity for the economy. I hoped this would happen but feared it wouldn’t be popular enough.

Swipe left for the next trending thread