What are your thoughts on this, Veeky Forums?

Dole-scum detected

MD in a few months here. Operating on fat people is a fucking nightmare. You have multiple inches of fat to cut through, it's hard to keep it retracted out of the way, they start to have problems if you lower them into the Trendelenburg position, they're harder intubate, etc. For many procedures that can be done on an elective basis, surgeons make fatties lose weight before they let them into the OR.

Unhealthy people are cheaper for the NHS than ""healthy"" people who live to be 100, and pay the same (actually more) taxes.

>You're literally fighting thousands of years of evolution
That's what medicine is.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalistic_fallacy

>access to medicine is a fundamental human right

kys

good. They're subhumans anyways.

The obese should be burned alive for energy, this is still much nicer treatment than they deserve

You're the one who doesn't understand how fucking retarded your argument is.
Why are you on a computer on the internet? Shouldn't you be out there chasing a rabbit to exhaustion? That's what you evolved to do you faggot

Beautiful. Just when I'm about to lose all hope in humanity, we get some good news. Brings a tear to my eye.

>we should spend money on people who don't contribute to the system/use more resources than the average person

good, more fat people need to die

>use more resources than the average person

hurrr you realize there will always some someone above the average right

>

This , plus it's not even true that smokers and fatties cost more money to the system in the long term. As said above, healthy people cost A LOT to society after retirement, at least in 1st world countries unlike the US or Somalia.

Best option given budgetary constraints, but really goes on to show why non-privatized healthcare is (unfortunately) bound to fail. A better policy would be somewhere in between the overpriced but effective healthcare system in the States and the European system of nationalized healthcare.

That being said, this is unfortunate for people who knew the risks of their lifestyles but didn't quit their vices. This is one of the reasons why I always lie and tell my doctors that I'm a nonsmoking teetotaler. There will come a point when that information won't be confidential, even in the States. When that day comes, I will be seen as healthy, despite my vices, and my healthcare will be prioritized.

Always lie to people who work in bureaucracies of any sort about your vices and potentially criminal activities. Cops, Government workers, HR departments, doctors, the list goes on and on. They will stereotype you based on superficial characteristics/ behaviors, and you might pay with your life if you're too honest.

This. We're better than letting people go without medical care. We should take care of one another. I'll spend another grand in taxes if it means my neighbor doesn't go without preventative care for financial reasons.

Also, it makes economic sense. Eventually people without healthcare end up in county hospitals with serious illnesses they've let go on too long. Then major surgery or treatment is required and we as tax payers pick up an even larger bill.

>effective healthcare system in the United States
>always lie to your doctors

You're a different level of dumb.

Great, make healthcare even more inaccessible to people. As if it weren't already expensive, private and shit enough.

It is. Media m8

>What are your thoughts on this, Veeky Forums?
Call it evolution in action.

>people who knew the risks of their lifestyles but didn't quit their vices
If anything, you deserve to be discriminated all the more

>NHS
>private
wat

Smoker/fat bastard detected

I'm neither.

I know what the NHS and public healthcare is, but monetised healthcare is already inaccessible to a lot of people that you might as well make it private.

Survival of the fittest, finally!

>only the fittest people get to have healthcare

Yeah, let's give healthcare only to the healthiest people out there :^)!

The NHS only makes sense if people are responsible enough to take steps to maintain a reasonable level of health.

Fatties, smokers and those abusing alcohol and drugs fuck it up for the rest of us.

Do you have a single source to back that up?

Why is that :^) worthy? Do you really think fit people don't get sick?

>force people to take care of their bodies so the shared pot of money meant for healthcare is distributed only to those who truly need it without choice

sounds pretty sound to me. no more need for constant E.R. trips for cardiac arrest because people couldn't say no to a donut.

No sympathy for people who brought that upon themselves. That leaves more money for people who were genuinely unlucky.

If you're not going to make healthcare available to the sickest people out there (obese people, diabetic people, depressed people, smokers etc.) then what's the fucking point of it in the first place. Why not just run it as an expensive, private system? This isn't only bad news for fat people and smokers, this is bad news for everybody. The more they keep making it exclusive, the more it's gonna be harder to get healthcare.

Why tf am I paying for someone that I don't even know? If it's my money, I should spend it how I please.

Because someone else is also paying for you.

Obese people and smokers put themselves in a shitty position because of their own self indulgence. These conditions do NOT fucking appear out of thin air, they're a byproduct of destructive lifestyle choices.

I'm from north Yorkshire and i think its a great idea. That's coming from someone who smokes (cut down like fuck, I'll have to quit) and has a fat mother, she needs to sort it out. Si thee.

Most illnesses aren't going to appear out of thin air either.

I am paying for the people in poverty. The people in poverty aren't paying anything.
Again, everyone should have the option to do what they want with their money.

>overpriced but effective healthcare system in the States

You mean the country that spends the most on healthcare for the worst outcomes among industrialized nations?

It's not true. Obese people and smokers will be refused elective surgery (until they lose weight/quit smoking). So they won't get liposuction on national health, but they'll still get care for injury or illness.

If they're gonna do that then they have to make the free medical system and opt-in system. You can't take someones money through taxes to spend on programs that they are ineligible for. That is straight up theft.

In theory yes, people who don't fix the underlying cause of their illness shouldn't have the government pay tax money repeatedly to put a plaster over a problem that will continue. You wouldn't give an alcoholic a liver transplant without curing his alcoholism first. That being said, BMI is a shit measure of a person's healthiness, especially beefed up manlets. Also, it's worrying to set a precedent that an injury that is 'self-inflicted' is somehow not worth treating, I'd hate to see people being discouraged from sports because they wouldn't be eligible for treatment if they fucked a ligament up

See
It's because a lot of surgeries that fat people have for serious obesity require them to lose substantial amounts of weight first, or there will be major complications.

>spot the freshmen

this

Source?

This is nothing but a paranoid lanklet conspiracy theory

t. manlet defense league spokesman

Fat fucks typically don't even work, they are on benefits.

Even if the NHS started charging for services people on the dole would still get it for free, like they can get free education.

Simple. Make them pay more.

>make them pay more
What a typical jewish answer.

>You wouldn't give an alcoholic a liver transplant without curing his alcoholism first.

actually...they do..a lot.

what is mass manipulation?
consumption is caused by psychological warfare to make people WANT products.

yeah sure willpower..but nobody has lessons on healthy eating at school etc.

HOW ABOUT WE ALL JUST PAY FOR OURSELVES CRAZY IDEA LMAO

My mummy smokes and I think she has brain tumour.

I hope this is bait..

>healthy people cost a lot to society after they develop health problems
No shit

Can't fat people and smokers just pay higher taxes? I mean, they should be offered a reliable and free weight loss or stop smoking program and if they dont make any change they should be given a fat/smoker tax (smokers pretty much already do with the cost of cigarettes)

That's not what they're saying you retard, smokers and fat cunts bring their own health ricks upon themselves despite countless warnings and scientific evidence to back it up.

Here in Australia a packet of cigarettes is 27.50 for a shitty brand (JPS) and we do actually cover what we cost to the health system, in fact we contribute more than what we cost through cigarette taxes.

My medications for genetic conditions utterly beyond my control to affect a difference cost USD 48,000 a year. Without the ability to get insurance, I die. It's that simple.

Who has a half-million banked to cover their health care after getting broadsided by a drunk driver?

>no operations on fat fucks and smokers
>no help for those who self-destruct
Very very cruel, but on a strict logic basis, I can't disagree.

I think a fat tax would be a better idea, those over 30BMI who aren't enrolled in some sort of fat loss program get fined; or something on those lines.

That and increase the tax on cigs.

Welfare problems.
If a person can afford to pay for their medical care they should be allowed any coverage there is.
If a person doesn't have a full time job or make a basic number that could afford some form of healthcare, yes they should be barred from any health benefits if they lead lifestyles that increase risk.
Also full drug screening.

>5'9
>very thin (wide shoulders, dense bones)
>175 lbs
>tfw BMI says overweight

Feels extremely Ayn Rand in here. What happened to her? Oh wait...

>you should pay for jamal's wife to have a gastric bypass and diabetes medication

OP image says cutoff is 30BMI

you're okay... for now

also lol how are you "very thin" at 175. I'm 6'2 and 170 and I'm skinnyfat

>paying taxes so that obese people and smokers can keep killing theirself with my money

>implying charities wouldn't help provide a safety net for those people.

Could you britbongs use the money you save on smokers and fats to insure Americans?

ya this isn't true or it would already be the case for currently uninsured people

this argument is just so fucking lazy. absolutely no basis in reality where you can literally see charities not pick up the slack in any social welfare context.

what's funny is the alt-right virgins on here all literally live off their parents in some form. youd think they'd love welfare

>what is st jude childrens hospital
>what is childrens miracle network
There are healthcare systems that do operate on charitable basis. Granted it's kind of a chicken or the egg situation, and it's obviously not big enough at this point to support all or even most of the healthcare cost issues that exist. But to say that there is no charitable safety net for healthcare coverage is nonsense

> and it's obviously not big enough at this point to support all or even most of the healthcare cost issues

which is my entire point

No, your point was that the concept of charity use covering healthcare costs has no basis in reality. Just because you're not happy about the extent of it doesn't mean it doesn't exist or isn't realistic.

>let me go ahead and tell you what your point was

fix your autism please

>ignore what i literally typed as i move this goal post

>not Australia's based private/public system

regardless, I don't think forcing some inefficient government run program is a good solution either.

would be nice if they extended this to anyone who drinks alcohol as well;for consistency sake.

It's pretty cruel that the people who would need health services the most would effectively be neglected, but thinking of things from the perspective of a doctor I understand that these conditions carry a lot more complications and risks in major surgeries/procedures. I think it's more of a protective measures for doctors regarding malpractice than anything since ppl in america are so sue happy these days.

pretty sure my point is sound and you're just retarded

feel free to reread though

I bet the surgeons working there are greatful that they don't have to have as many patients die on the table because of obesity-related health issues.

>absolutely no basis in reality where you can literally see charities not pick up the slack in any social welfare context
Your argument is because charities don't do enough, they can't do enough. That's not sound, that's myopic

Are you guys actually idiots or just pretending to be retarded?

It is a known fact that bmi sucks for people, especially shorter people, that have muscles.

if charities cant handle the current burden they aren't going to be able to handle an increased burden caused by govt giving less people free healthcare

This

Free health care means you pay 5% of your gross earning your entire life and when you need healthcare they tell you it will be a 6 month wait.

Oh you have a cancerous organ that could spread at any moment? Ok, only a one month wait for you.

Charities already handle a large burden in the first place. Those two programs I mentioned raise hundreds of millions of dollars a year to reduce the cost burden of patients' families, and there are numerous charities on all levels for all causes that contribute to reduction of burden. People already donate to charity willingly, so reducing their tax burden creates more opportunity for them to donate higher amounts.

And arguably the government involvement drives up healthcare costs due to the bloated inefficiency of their systems. A charity bureaucracy is miles different than a government one.

>lift, run, train martial arts, almost never need healthcare
>get good money with degree
>get cucked out my wage by government to pay for healthcare of fat unemployed Chad's

t. healthy young person who likely has never been in hospital.

hit me up in 15 years when you have a kid or some shit who has an illness and you need to spend hundreds of thousands a year to support it.

then we can talk about how

> every1 juz pay for dem selvz okk uhh my dad pays taxes and dats not fair.

in b4

> if its sick let it die

again, hit me up in 15 years when you have a kid about the idea of letting your kid die because its sick.

realistically, you aren't ever going to derange your bmi more than slightly into 'overweight' if you're under 20% bodyfat and natural.

if you think you can reach obese rating and that

> it's just muscle bruh

you're deluded.

if your bmi is over 30 it's not because you're solid muscle, Gimli