SELECTIVE NHS ABANDONS THOSE IN NEED

Image from this Smokerphobic site WARNING. It WILL offend.

Frank Davis wrote an excellent piece about the sheer propaganda lies chucked out by those hypocritical, self interest "doctors" who are wasting our precious NHS resources on scaring the public to death by inventing "epidemics."

Now if this could all be left to their own phobic imaginations I'd be happy to get on with my life and perhaps turn a blind eye to their paranoid ramblings.

However, this is past a joke and their prejudices are becoming dangerous to health and the stability of a decent society.

GPs have signed off a series of sweeping referral restrictions by NHS managers that will bar smokers and overweight patients from being referred for surgery, as PCTs across the country bring in new cost-saving restrictions.

I really could suggest better ways for them to spend the money than funding the ideological aim of a smoke free and skinny world but this isn't about saving costs.

We know that smokers more than pay their own cost of healthcare through high taxes imposed in many cases over a lifetime.

For example, I have paid tax on my tobacco for 43 years and so far have not needed one tobacco related piece of healthcare. I think I'll be more than entitled when and if my time comes. Despite this, the NHS would discriminate against me unless I surrender to the bullying and quit as they demand.

GPs will also be prevented from referring smokers for any orthopaedic surgery until they have been referred for smoking cessation.

Unethical "doctors" should be sacked and hauled up before the General Medical Council for encouraging such discrimination against patients who need medical care.

Dr Tony Kostick, joint chair of NHS Hertfordshire's clinical executive committee and chair of East & North Herts GP Commissioning Consortium, insisted the move was based on ‘sound' clinical evidence.
He said: ‘It's divisive in the sense some GPs don't want to confront the rationing debate. We spend fortunes on treatments of limited clinical value.'

Funny that as anecdotal evidence says quite the opposite. I think he should broaden his mind and his expertise. I've had FIVE Caesarians and always come out of it better than my non-smoking counterparts. Nurses were amazed at how quick I was on my feet after each one.

There was also no difference in the outcome for me as a lifelong smoker than anyone else who fell off a horse and needed surgery for a broken arm. And a commenter on Frank's blog has her own experience to share that puts the NHS propaganda in doubt :

Brenda says:
August 27, 2011 at 2:39 pm
I had minor surgery this year. The anaesthetist asked if I smoked and I replied that I did not. He said that would make my recovery from the anaesthetic quicker and easier.

I, along with 3 other women (all much younger than me) having the same surgery, went conveyor style into the operating theatre. I was 3rd in the queue.
Back in the ward I was the only one awake. I had my sandwich and drink and got up, got dressed and waited to be discharged. When the anaesthetist came round I told him that I had been a heavy smoker for over 50 years !! The other three women were just coming round (two were being sick and one was crying)
I left the ward and went out to have a smoke until my transport home arrived.

I wonder how these so-called "caring" professionals can be so inhumane. Are they stupid? Are they cruel? Are they bigots? Are we so low as human beings that we should even be denied the same healthcare as anyone else?

A spokesperson for NHS Hertfordshire said the changes had been legally approved, and were necessary to ‘make absolutely the best use of NHS resources'.

Perhaps they could drop the politics around health, stop funding propanda, false studies from self interest groups and academics, sack unethical doctors, get rid of the over paid top management, and go back to being a reactive service that actually does what it is supposed to do - treat sick people without fear or favour - and the NHS might find that it has more than it needs.

Sadly the only voice of reason, in this so called debate on how they can convince themselves that exclusion is a good thing, is as selective in the groups he feels worthy of compassion.

But Dr Mike Ingram, chair of the single-practice Red House Consortium and a member of Hertfordshire LMC, said: ‘Patients' access to services should be based on the care they require and not on a discriminatory policy.

He said : "I'm very worried about denying people care on the basis they are fat."

It looks like the legal details of our exclusion of the NHS are being worked out and finalised as I write :

Dr Nigel Watson, chief executive of Wessex LMCs and chair of the GPC's commissioning and service development subcommittee, said he was discussing the restrictions with the BMA's legal department.

He said : "My understanding is you cannot discriminate against patients on the basis of lifestyle choices."

Erm ... yes you can in the workplace so why not in the NHS. The groundwork has already been laid.

UPDATE 28/08/11 : This post reveals how NHS propaganda is throwing away £84 million of NHS funds a year

NHS Stop Smoking Services don’t increase smokers’ chances by any significant margin and are therefore a complete waste of valuable NHS resources.

I wonder how the NHS could better use that cash, and the very high salaries paid to those above who spend their time on designing exclusion policies so they can keep their wages, if it did was it was founded to do - spend money on direct patient care not political ideology.

MORALLY DEPRAVED ANTI-SMOKER INDUSTRY ATTACKS THE VULNERABLE

Can there really be anything more morally disgusting that the power, wealth and might of a hugely wealthy, state-backed industry being brought to bear on those who are the most vulnerable in society like the mentally ill



I am always shocked to discover just how low they can sink in pushing forward their own ideology to destroy legal industry, create fear and prejudice of legal consumers of a product they despise, and picking on the weakest members of communities just because they are an easy target.



Other bloggers have already mentioned the fine piece of writing I've linked to above from a woman who is angry at the way her daughter was treated in a mental health facility that forces smokers from self medication using a natural product to addicts dependent on pharmaceutical nicotine. She said :



How dare you anti-smoking fundamentalists impose your will on mentally ill patients, unable to leave the wards like ordinary patients who may smoke outside, forcing them to give up something that has been a self medication and comfort, and undermining their recovery!



Elsewhere greedy doctors with a conflict of interest have been exposed. In the name of humanity and fairness, it is time to take this matter out of the hands of industry and ideological political lobby groups and put it into the hands of those who really are impartial and independent and neither back Big Tobacco or the smokerphobics who are spreading their own vile prejudices for money.



I hope this lady's campaign in Australia achieves some success but I am astounded at the sheer intolerance of the country she lives in towards people who choose to buy a legal product.



And the way some of Australia's citizens justify their bigotry makes one's jaw drop



Michael said...

There is no place for smoking in a hospital. You do not have a right to smoke. Smoking is a freedom granted to you by our community via laws that allow the sale of tobacco products. That freedom is curtailed where appropriate as seen in laws banning smoking in eating places and inside buildings or areas with a roof. Claiming a right to smoke dilutes the value of the real rights we have. If smoking was a right, our government would be required to provide tobacco products for free or very cheap to ensure that you could exercise that right. That is something that is nonsensical given our damaging smoking is the the smoker and the community.





I think "Michael" would risen through the ranks of Govt in Germany in the 1930s and said so in a comment I left in response. Using his logic, one must assume that every single legal product from beer and chocolate to a new kitchen is only possible with permission from the state.



There is not one avenue that the anti-smokers take that doesn't leave them looking immoral. They've even perverted advice from humanist Nelson Mandela for their own political ends in trying to persuade us that this great man, who was subject to years of abuse of his own human rights, is an anti-smoker on their side.



If Nelson Mandela told fellow prisoners not to smoke it was because cigarettes can be used as political tools and not because he feared that beaten, starved and abused fellow inmates would die from a single whiff of a fag.



Yes, it is becoming abundantly clear that the anti-smokers have absolutely no morals and they will lie, cheat, bully and intimidate anyone who does not subscribe to their views.



This really is not about health - it is about hate.