To think we shouldn't be funding this on the NHS?

[AgileJadeDog]

I recently had my first stay in hospital due to a respiratory issue and I kid you not, every other person in the bay smoked+had a smoking related disease.

I have no idea if this is typical in other specialties/hospitals but it really hit me how much gets spent on completely self inflicted stuff. AIBU to think we shouldn't be funding stuff like this?

Friend of mine needed a hip replacement she could barely walk she was not obese but they refused to operate because she was "borderline" and quite young to be needing the surgery they said if they did it now she would need it doing again when she was older so they wanted to kick the can down the road she couldn't walk so the weight piled on they said eat less move more she tried she really tried and she put on weight (slower but still gaining) she struggled until they eventually decided that they would do the surgery happy days right? Wrong the effects of twisted walking on her good hip meant that she now needed that one replaced too but she was now obese she was told to again eat less move more she is dead now she got another chronic illness and died but the last ten years or more were spent trying to move in extreme pain to lose wait she would most likely never have gained had they just replaced her fucking hip in the first place

The NHS doesn't need to deny people treatment it needs to provide appropriate treatment at the right time

I don't hate these people it's just to think that this has got to be where a good percentage of my pay check is going... it's grossly unfair. They should be covering it themselves.

The amount of additional tax they pay on every pack of cigarettes over their life time, as well as what they pay from their own pay packets. probably means they have covered some of it themselves. Same as you for your health issues.

To what extent do the NHS decide what and what isn't is self inflicted?
And how much digging/monitoring of every citizen are they going to do to decide who does and doesn't get help?

Type 2 diabetes can be self inflicted, bad backs can be self inflicted, high cholesterol is self inflicted, injuring yourself due to not wearing protective gear whilst gardening is self inflicted. We could go on, and on, and on.

Therefore YABU

Where do you draw the line? Lots of accidents, injuries and illnesses are caused by lifestyle, poor decision making and whatever else. It's also more complex, people with addictions often have underlying and untreated MH, physical or were born into societal disadvantage; unless the government address these (which they wont) then perhaps don't be so ignorant.

@AgileJadeDog - you do realise that, firstly, smokers pay tax too - tax on their earnings AND tax on the cigarettes they buy - so, just like you, they are funding the NHS - it is not implausible that smokers are net contributors to the NHS X- ie. smokers overall pay in more to the NHS than smoking diseases cost to treat. And secondly, only about 20% of your £80K tax goes to paying for healthcare - the rest goes on many other things - benefits, placing, the armed forces, education, transport etc etc etc.

The c£16K of your tax that goes to the NHS might cover your current hospital treatment, if you had to pay for it - but if you had another major illness or an accident, that could easily take you over the £16K in a year.

I understand why it looks appealing, especially with smoking.

In my country there is higher tax on alcohol and tobacco, which somehow balances the increased health costs. Isn't it in place in England?

In the same time, healthy BMI is partially luck, there are people with underlying not self-inflicted health conditions, which just lead to obesity as one of the effects.

Alcohol is bad, but so long it is socially acceptable, it doesn't make sense to punish someone who gets injured under the influence financially, you would just end with a lots of people who are barely coping now in even worse situation.

Where do you draw the line? Should we stop treating fat people too? People with diet induced type 2? What about generational trauma causing autoimmune conditions? Or mental illnesses caused by childhood trauma? What about alcohol is who drink to blot out extreme trauma? Heroin addicts? Let them all suffer to death?

Where would you draw the line op?

I was hospitalised at 8 from being scratched by our puppy (i got septicemia) that was probably my mums fault...I would have died if it was a case of having to pay for my treatment

Luckily you don't get to decide who is worthy of treatment and you don't have a clue what any other ward looks like.
Does the world look good from your moral high ground? And just for the record I'm not a smoker and have never smoked but still wouldn't punish those who do/have.

For someone capable of being in a job which pays well (based in the £80k tax) you don't appear very good at critical thinking, op.

The OP is surely feeling very silly now, realising the astounding amount of ignorance and condescension she has inflicted upon us all.

The biggest risk factor for an early death is loneliness, should we refuse to treat lonely people?

Perhaps we should ban:

Cigarettes, tobacco and vapes
Crap food - fast food, takeaways, highly processed ready meals, cheap, rubbish, biscuits, cakes, pizzas etc.
Alcohol
Football/rugby and cycling.
Drugs.

Invest NHS savings in police and customs to stop illegal import/production.

Of course we'd all have to pay much higher taxes to cover the gaps from these industries and the unemployment caused.

100% agree.

Shit life syndrome is real,

Indeed. Perhaps those who lack critical thinking skills should pay higher amounts of tax, as it is quite burdensome for those around them.

Yes!
smoking is obviously bad but obesity costs the NHS a fortune, as does Alcohol and drug use.

Have you ever been treated for something self-inflicted?

Are you a parent?

So OP, who do you think is worthy of treatment? Only young people whose disease came out of a
blue sky or no fault accident victims?

What about those with a familial history of cancer or heart disease. Should we refuse to treat their descendants because they should have known better than to breed?

Surely we should be addressing addiction issues like smoking or eating/metabolic disorders including obesity in the NHS at an earlier stage; not punishing people who have developed diseases as a result.

I completely agree. It is different to driving. Driving has a positive purpose and only in the minority of the time people get injured. Smoking has no positive and will almost certainty lead to cancer of some kind. They even put it on the packet. There is going to need to be radical change in the NHS at some point towards more personal responsibility. We are seeing generation after generation living longer but less healthily which is just too costly. Maybe somekind of health care pension. You get free treatment to 70 then after that depending on how much you have saved depends on the amount spent to keep you alive. I don't think anyone should suffer but there is a difference between giving pain relief and complex procedures. .

To be fair, our two big hospitals says you can't but there are always people near the doors smoking. I've never seen them moved on or asked to stop.

I don't agree with the OP's premise at all but lets not kid ourselves: it's undeniable that smoking increases your chances of myriad illnesses, not just lung related illnesses. Around 30% higher risk of type 2 diabetes; higher risk of other cancers; higher risk of alzheimer's; and, a much higher risk of circulatory system issues - strokes and heart conditions.

So as smoking actually causes Alzheimers as well as preventing it (due to earlier death) I'm not sure the costs balance out.

And let's not get on to those who may be deemed "not worthy" of treatment OP

I mean, whose more worthy... the stabbed and battered pedophile or the 80yr old smoker with COPD?

Surely that's another way of. discriminating.

hint: it's not

Really?

£342 million a quarter in uk for revenue on cigarettes on one website www.gov.uk/government/statistics/tobacco-bulletin/tobacco-statistics-commentary-april-2024

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/alcohol-drugs-and-tobacco-commissioning-support-pack/tobacco-commissioning-support-pack-2019-to-2020-principles-and-indicators

https://ash.org.uk/media-centre/news/press-releases/14bn-a-year-up-in-smoke-economic-toll-of-smoking-in-england-revealed

then social care costs of caring for people with disease caused by smoking

The difference between smoking and most of the other things cited on here (skateboarding, driving, sports/exercise, pregnancy, etc) is that there is no benefit to society and individuals from smoking. Zero, zip. Only damage in the forms of poor health, pollution, waste (vapes) and grossness, and it also hurts others in the form of second hand smoke. And in some families, children go without while their parents find the money for cigarettes and vapes.

YANBU

Mother died of emphysema

She started smoking during WWII where it was pretty much encouraged and very few didn't smoke

She was addicted by her 30s and died in her 50s

You don't want to know what I think of you but I am surprised how distressing this thread is for me and she's been dead nearly 50 years