Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by sck_rse)
    How touching, guess I won't make a good human rights activist considering my ruthlessness and in the end I'm not too bothered if you 'find me horrendous already'...I was making my mind up,that's why I posted the thread-to see what people think and maybe help me make a more reasoned and informed choice, yes I hate the sight of lard, but no need to get that touchy-feely
    What is your weakness?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Exactly that-spite of 'fat' as I was chunkier when I was young but I changed my habbits, how prejudiced does that make me and do I have a right to be judgemental then?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I'm gonna have to add my 2 cents hear. I beleive if you have never worked in your life and sit there stuffing your face with kfc, then you don;t deserve a gastric band. however, some people arn't like this. I myself am overweight. I'm not in 30st vicinity, but i am quite big. I am one of those unfortunate people with an extreamly slow metabolism, i eat the right things and don't overeat, but i'm still this size. and of course i am resentful of those who have become that weight, through glutony and lazyness and are able to get a gastric band, while people who have tried exaustivly to lose wieght, for somereason or another are being refused. Yes gastric bands should be on the NHS but only for those who have worked, slaved and deserve them. not those who have never been to work and stuffed there gobs!

    Unfortuatly i'm put in to that sterotype, and i am used to being judged but untill something is done. and it will be!
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    I agree with what Howard has said, the 'fat people' in question have paid tax towards the NHS so why should they be denied treatment from something that they've actually paid for? And a hospital is a place for sick and suffering people, self-inflicted or not, if your a doctor and your job is to tackle sickness then that's what you do.
    The doctor can advise someone say who has an unhealthy diet, or is a chain smoker, or is prone to having unprotected sex, to find ways to get better and try and help them that way but they can't straight out refuse to help these people.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    When all's said and done, would we really want to set this precedent- allowing a political stance to control the prescription policy of a health authority? As far as I know, if this kind of high-horse medicine were to be put into practice, it would be the first case of it's kind. What's more, it seems to allow decisions made in the realm of politics relying on observation based assumptions surrounding actual science, and therefore (untrained) politicians to interfere again in a decision making process which is really the responsibility of a trained medic. My view? Let the relevant professionals decide what the treatment of a patient should be.
    In addition to this, if you do believe in the involvment of politics in medicine, consider that the budget of the NHS is assigned by a government which is democratically justified in its decision of what to fund. People seem to forget this- If you don't like the spending policy of the NHS, then excercise your democratic claim to that public money, and vote for a party which wishes to change it in a way in which you agree with. If there is no party, then assume that the majority of people are happy in not restricting treatment to certain conditions, and that your own personal financial contribution to funding this one issue is lost to the compromise we make through taxation to justify our nationality.
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by sck_rse)
    Excuse moi if this has come up earlier,but I was feeling rather opinionated on the matter-should it be available to people who have deliberately morphed themselves into lard-balls,especially considering its cost+the fact that for example Herceptin isn't available to breast-cancer suferers in many cases?
    1) people who are deliberately fat don't want gastric banding
    2) it would be limited to those for whom reasonable weight loss programmes have failed.
    3) it would also be used in those whose stomach is abnormally large for their body size.
    4) Your posts show your lack of insight into the whole area of national health, and you fail to realise the subjectivity of 'self-induced'.
    Should a depressed person who has self harmed not be treated because it is self-induced?
    how about a diabetic who through their own indulging of booze goes intoa hypo coma?
    5) *Red Phoenix* - if i had a biscuit for everytime someone says 'slow metabolism' I'd be 30stone.
    Quit with this excuse unless you actually have a proven hormone problem/hypothyroid.
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by -Leo-)
    When all's said and done, would we really want to set this precedent- allowing a political stance to control the prescription policy of a health authority? As far as I know, if this kind of high-horse medicine were to be put into practice, it would be the first case of it's kind. What's more, it seems to allow decisions made in the realm of politics relying on observation based assumptions surrounding actual science, and therefore (untrained) politicians to interfere again in a decision making process which is really the responsibility of a trained medic. My view? Let the relevant professionals decide what the treatment of a patient should be.
    In addition to this, if you do believe in the involvment of politics in medicine, consider that the budget of the NHS is assigned by a government which is democratically justified in its decision of what to fund. People seem to forget this- If you don't like the spending policy of the NHS, then excercise your democratic claim to that public money, and vote for a party which wishes to change it in a way in which you agree with. If there is no party, then assume that the majority of people are happy in not restricting treatment to certain conditions, and that your own personal financial contribution to funding this one issue is lost to the compromise we make through taxation to justify our nationality.
    i would agree with the spirit of your post if i were not for the fact that you must vote for a party on more topics than just health, plus there is a slot of damamge that poro health policies can do in 4/5 years.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Robot Chicken)
    i would agree with the spirit of your post if i were not for the fact that you must vote for a party on more topics than just health, plus there is a slot of damamge that poro health policies can do in 4/5 years.

    All fair points which I'm not going to dispute.
    Just to summarise mine: The government is timelessly percieved to be almost stealing in the media by investing money in a cause which may controvertial regardless of the administration in power. Now whether or not that's morally right is a different issue for maybe another thread, but as far as whether they have the right to do that or not under the current system- if they're democratically elected, they do.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Robot Chicken)
    5) *Red Phoenix* - if i had a biscuit for everytime someone says 'slow metabolism' I'd be 30stone.
    Quit with this excuse unless you actually have a proven hormone problem/hypothyroid.
    that has just upset me.

    because it has just made me realise that you are just like the other people who happen to be judgemental

    i'm sure you don't mean to and i'm not trying to provoke an argument
    as for one i'd rather get on a treadmill and lose my weight then get a gastric band.

    i am at a gym. i do exercise. i do eat the right things

    why do i put on weight

    tell me that you seem to be the Doctor here

    how dare you accuse me of having excuses. it IS slow metabolism.
    take this for example i never eat cakes, sweets or chocolates. if i do have a bar of chocolate i make it last for 2 or 3 days

    excuses where?

    sorry rant over, but i am pissed off with being judged. last time i give an insight into my life! :mad:

    not kidding i'm stuing now
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by *Red Phoenix*)
    that has just upset me.

    because it has just made me realise that you are just like the other people who happen to be judgemental

    i'm sure you don't mean to and i'm not trying to provoke an argument
    as for one i'd rather get on a treadmill and lose my weight then get a gastric band.

    i am at a gym. i do exercise. i do eat the right things

    why do i put on weight

    tell me that you seem to be the Doctor here

    how dare you accuse me of having excuses. it IS slow metabolism.
    take this for example i never eat cakes, sweets or chocolates. if i do have a bar of chocolate i make it last for 2 or 3 days

    excuses where?

    sorry rant over, but i am pissed off with being judged. last time i give an insight into my life! :mad:

    not kidding i'm stuing now
    'Slow metabolism is the oldest excuse in the book. Certainly some people naturally have a slower metabolism than others, but not to the extent that they become seriously overweight.
    that implies a pathologically slow metabolism with conditions such as hypothyroidism. or diseases that give similarish patterns like chushings disease. Do you have a medical problem of this ilk?
    No?
    Well some people do, and its kind of unfair to say that because you have real troubles shifting the weight that you are in the same group as them.

    I don't doubt you find it ery hard. But i'm a realistic, I believe in logic, and i believe in science.
    If you eat less, and exercise more you'll lose weight. Of course it won't be as fast as you'll hope. You'll feel like you're working your arse off yet only losing a pound or two a week, but over time you will shed it.

    the laws of physics are simple. if you eat 1500 calories a day, and you exercise off 3000 calories you will lose weight. Slowly, but surely.

    My bet is that you try the gym, maybe for as much as a couple of months, but find you don't get thinner (s far as you can see) and you barely lose any weight.
    Well thats because at the moment you have sod all muscle mass and the exercise from the gym will first start bulking that up. muscle weighs more than fat so you'll not lose as much as you hoped.
    but eventually it will go.

    Unless you have a medical condition.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Robot Chicken)
    'Slow metabolism is the oldest excuse in the book. Certainly some people naturally have a slower metabolism than others, but not to the extent that they become seriously overweight.
    that implies a pathologically slow metabolism with conditions such as hypothyroidism. or diseases that give similarish patterns like chushings disease. Do you have a medical problem of this ilk?
    No?
    Well some people do, and its kind of unfair to say that because you have real troubles shifting the weight that you are in the same group as them.

    I don't doubt you find it ery hard. But i'm a realistic, I believe in logic, and i believe in science.
    If you eat less, and exercise more you'll lose weight. Of course it won't be as fast as you'll hope. You'll feel like you're working your arse off yet only losing a pound or two a week, but over time you will shed it.

    the laws of physics are simple. if you eat 1500 calories a day, and you exercise off 3000 calories you will lose weight. Slowly, but surely.

    My bet is that you try the gym, maybe for as much as a couple of months, but find you don't get thinner (s far as you can see) and you barely lose any weight.
    Well thats because at the moment you have sod all muscle mass and the exercise from the gym will first start bulking that up. muscle weighs more than fat so you'll not lose as much as you hoped.
    but eventually it will go.

    Unless you have a medical condition.

    i have in fact got quite, a large muscle mass cause my part-time job is quite strenuous coupled witht he fact i've got a large frame.

    ok i admit that i don;t get as much exercise as i should but i do exercise never the less.

    However please believe me when i say i've got a slow metabolism because i have, i've been overweight since i can remember, i was even born big (10oz)

    i know i've got alot of work to do, and i appreciate the input i just got upset when you said i was making excuses. which i possible misinterpreted, as your making all the excuses not to shift the wieght.

    any way i've calmed down now and i am able to look at this in an objective way! also coupled with the fact that i weighed myself and lost 3lb. which i'm quite chuffed about!
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by *Radioactive Phoenix*)
    i have in fact got quite, a large muscle mass cause my part-time job is quite strenuous coupled witht he fact i've got a large frame.

    ok i admit that i don;t get as much exercise as i should but i do exercise never the less.

    However please believe me when i say i've got a slow metabolism because i have, i've been overweight since i can remember, i was even born big (10oz)

    i know i've got alot of work to do, and i appreciate the input i just got upset when you said i was making excuses. which i possible misinterpreted, as your making all the excuses not to shift the wieght.

    any way i've calmed down now and i am able to look at this in an objective way! also coupled with the fact that i weighed myself and lost 3lb. which i'm quite chuffed about!
    ok, firstly the weight you are at birth rarely has anything to do with adult weight.
    secondly, the very fact you have been overweight since you were young (i think it becomes significant after the age of two-ish) means you are going to have to fight to lose every pound.
    the 25 stone fat man who was 15 stone a year ago will find it much easier to drop a stone than a 25 stone fat man who was 23 stone a year ago.

    and then i suppose you get into the debate as to whether it is 'better' health wise to have someone overweight for 3 years as they struggle to slowly bring their weight down, or overweight for one year as the weight falls off them due to banding.
    my view would be the former is better. less malnutrition problems, less issues with loose skin, less complications.

    it should be ntoed alot of dieting programmes and books are by women who gained lots of weight after a child, rather than people who have been fat since they were young. For you to achieve a 3ib loss of weight is damned site more of an achievement than for one of these authors.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Robot Chicken)
    For you to achieve a 3ib loss of weight is damned site more of an achievement than for one of these authors.
    why, thank you
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    There was too much talking so I skipped over your argument

    Gastric banding should be allowed because it costs a lot more to pay for triple-heart bipasses that follow when obsesity is unchecked.
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by Jacktion)
    There was too much talking so I skipped over your argument

    Gastric banding should be allowed because it costs a lot more to pay for triple-heart bipasses that follow when obsesity is unchecked.
    and the cost of treating people for malnutrition related diseases? and the success rate of banding?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Robot Chicken)
    and the cost of treating people for malnutrition related diseases? and the success rate of banding?

    Hey the guy only said it should be "allowed", lol its not as if he's advocating going after every fatty with a tranquiliser dart gun and forcing it on them...
    ....or is he?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by *Radioactive Phoenix*)
    that has just upset me.

    because it has just made me realise that you are just like the other people who happen to be judgemental

    i'm sure you don't mean to and i'm not trying to provoke an argument
    as for one i'd rather get on a treadmill and lose my weight then get a gastric band.

    i am at a gym. i do exercise. i do eat the right things

    why do i put on weight

    tell me that you seem to be the Doctor here

    how dare you accuse me of having excuses. it IS slow metabolism.
    take this for example i never eat cakes, sweets or chocolates. if i do have a bar of chocolate i make it last for 2 or 3 days

    excuses where?

    sorry rant over, but i am pissed off with being judged. last time i give an insight into my life! :mad:

    not kidding i'm stuing now
    For the love of God, stop eating!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cottonmouth)
    For the love of God, stop eating!
    and who asked you for your imput, if your gonna be insulting, **** off, grow up and let me not waste my time with a pathetic individul like your self

    bye!
 
 
 
Poll
Black Friday: Yay or Nay?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.