To think excess skin removal should be available on the NHS?

[TheGoodEnoughWife]

I know being fat is seen as being self inflicted although I don't agree that it is and that people over eating should be taken as seriously as people under eating. But that isn't necessarily my point here..,

I am very overweight (about 6st overweight but am tall) and one of the things in the back of my mind is that if I lose weight my saggy skin will be awful. The reality is my 'strain' on the NHS being overweight has the potential to be great - surely encouragement to lose weight would cost the NHS less in the long run?
It would be helpful maybe to me and others who need to lose a lot of weight to know that treatment for excess skin would be available to them?

Now I may get flamed about self inflicted and so on but if I drive a car badly and crash I would be treated on the NHS, if I drink like a fish and cause myself illness I would be treated on the NHS, if I go about extreme sports and hurt myself I also would get treated on the NHS.
(I don't do any of those things!)

Any one see where I am coming from?

I have the same concern re excess skin as you although I do think you have undermined your point with the inaccuracy over drinking excessively. A number of treatments on the NHS contain exclusions for people who deliberately abuse their bodies.

For example severe alcoholics and drug addicts are refused access to organ transplant surgery on many cases because of their lifestyle choices.

I wholeheartedly agree that more help is needed to access treatments for those that focus who are overweight however I think that resources are too minimal for the type of surgery you are talking about.

YABU. I need to lose a good 5st but I need to do that for my health. The aesthetic is an aside. Surely you understand that the NHS is straining to provide essential drugs and operations to keep people alive? My DM couldn't get the cancer treatment she needed and died.

OP I lost 11 stone and let me tell you my body looks tremendous so much better and more attractive than before . So about a year ago it wasn't as good but over time it springs back a lot . Now I am glad I didn't have it done bc I think the surgery leaves you with awful scars, so give it a go and see how you look I think you will be pleasantly surprised

Excess skin is a cosmetic issue, as unsightly as it is. We currently have a situation where A&E and Paediatric units are closing around the country from chronic underfunding so there it's not likely that excess skin from weight loss will be a priority in the short or medium term. We'd be lucky if there is still an NHS in 10 years.

I am sorry for your loss Jennifer.

That is very good to know Heidi, I know I actually don't know what I would look like as haven't got done that far for a long time!

Just thinking about what would cost the NHS less really. However I suppose I feel there is so much a lack of support for over eaters - it really isn't understood as what is going on and why some people over eat and some don't.

I do get where you're coming from - I really do, I'm about 3 stone overweight and worry that weight loss will leave me with loose skin, but I wouldn't expect the current NHS to fork out for what is essentially an aesthetic procedure when people are dying due to lack of resources (i.e. money), maybe if and when our health service is in a better state.

Sorry I was abrupt. Feeling the loss today

If the person has actually been strong enough to lose weight on their own and keep it off for so long, then yes. I think excess skin should be removed

If it's done by a gastric band or the person yo-yo diets, so keeps losing and gaining weight, then no

but if I drive a car badly and crash I would be treated on the NHS, if I drink like a fish and cause myself illness I would be treated on the NHS, if I go about extreme sports and hurt myself I also would get treated on the NHS

If you drive like an idiot and crash, or do base jumping and it all goes bent ... they'll save your life. But you probably won't get scarring and/or damaged features restored to their former glory as a given. Ditto undoing the ravages of excessive drinking on a prematurely aged face.

I have no moral objections to skin removal on a national health service, but where/when resources are limited, I can see the reasoning behind making cosmetic procedures (albeit with potentially enormous psycological distress attached that could relieved) more expendable than life threatening/shortening/limiting ones.

Things where I live (EU) are a lot tighter than they once were in the health service. I watched my late MIL, blighted with both serious mental illness and geriatric issues, left to rot. She was in great physical pain and emotional distress. We could not access the help she needed. It wasn't there. Services had been cut to the bone, and half the marrow sucked out to boot..

While I have every sympathy with somebody left with the physical discomfort and emotional pain of excess skin, if there's not enough money to fund services and care for people as ill as late MIL was, I don't see how limited resources could be legitimately re-routed towards cosmetic procedures. And from what I've heard, mental health and geriatrics aren't exactly over resourced in the UK either.

I have lost 3st and have a lot of saggy tummy skin. I forget about it then see myself in the mirror and want to cry... there is no way I could afford to have it done privately.

Don't you need to be really, really overweight before excess skin is an issue? As in, loosing 10+ stone territory.

I know a few people that have had great weight loss and lost 4/5/6 stone and excess skin has never been a problem.

No, it was fine Jennifer. I get that there are major issues within the NHS but over all it would cost less money if people who are overweight could be encouraged to lose weight.

The issue about how NHS money is spent is a concern but I do feel it is being wasted all over the place - equally someone would say doing anything for someone who has eaten themselves obese is not okay!

No, it was fine Jennifer. I get that there are major issues within the NHS but over all it would cost less money if people who are overweight could be encouraged to lose weight.

The issue about how NHS money is spent is a concern but I do feel it is being wasted all over the place - equally someone would say doing anything for someone who has eaten themselves obese is not okay!

If you develop T2 diabetes, or cancer, or heart disease, or indeed anything else liked to obesity the NHS will treat you. Excess skin is seen as cosmetic so won't be funded by a service which has enormous pressure on it already.

I've got a lot of enamel loss on my teeth, so they're almost transparent, and my two upper front teeth are really quite yellow. There is no reason I can find for this.
I hate it, it makes me feel self-conscious and I never smile with my mouth open.
I'd love my NHS dentist to fix it for me as it would give me a lot more confidence, but they won't, quoting 'cosmetic reasons'.
It's really the same isn't it? As are large / saggy boobs and a whole host of other things.
I can see your point - you've worked to lose the weight - but, if one situation is treated by the NHS, they should all be. Sorry, OP.
Meanwhile, I'll keep my mouth tightly claimed shut when anyone near me is taking pictures.

I see your point. When I lost loads, the loose skin was not good and as you say, self-inflicted issues are treated all the time-smoking, drinking, extreme sports, driving a car! I think younger people losing weight spring back better than people in their 40s/50s. Maybe bariatric surgery should come with a tummy tuck!

I lost 8.5 stone and whilst I had some lose skin, it wasn't as bad as I thought it would be!

I forgot to say, I'll happily put on my flame-proof hat if anyone wants to disagree with me!

The NHS does a huge amount to encourage weight loss through health improvement interventions, dietetic services, weight loss clinics, referral programmes, clinical trials and so on. I'm not sure what else you want?

I have terrible excess skin after losing 6 stone and then having three dc. Weight has yoyoed between 10.5 stone and 17 stone.

We can pay for it to be removed if I want to, we have the money saved but I've been this way for 10 years so I'm not sure I want to do it.

Anyway, I think using the risk of excess skin as an excuse not to lose weight is daft. You might not have a problem with it at all. Or you might. But either way, life is a fuck lot better not being morbidly obese (as I was).

If you lose weight sensibly and slowly you are much less likely to have excess skin. And no, I don't think the NHS should pay to remove mine, it's ugly but it's not causing me any pain.

for you Jennifer

By losing weight and becoming healthier, surely in the long run the cost will balance out as the excess weight could cause long term health issues which are also costly to the nhs, such as diabetes.
Whilst they continue to dish out other cosmetic surgeries on the nhs, like boob jobs (not reconstructive), I don't see the issue.

If you lose weight reasonably slowly and include exercise, particularly weight based, you may not end up with excess skin. I lost 4 stone over 18 months and do boot camp and jogging and have no excess skin. A bit saggy on my belly if I lean over, but not hanging loose anywhere.

10 stone loss here and i have a bit of a belly overhang and skin puckering but thats it.

The NHS doesn't 'dish out' boob jobs - it really doesn't.

Realistically the argument would be that you should lose weight because of the health benefits and not for aesthetic purposes anyway. We aren't encouraged to have a healthy BMI to look nice. A line always has to be drawn somewhere and there are some essential things that cannot be funded as is.

One of the neonatal units near to me only has two of a certain type of cot. There are times they have had more very sick babies than cots, and they have to choose which babies go in the cots and which come out when, ideally, they would all be in the special cots. And it's not a comfort thing, the cots are linked to improved outcomes. There are a lot of things that ideally would be funded, but are not or cannot be.