Quote: SLIMply the best "no offence taken with this question, as a nurse of 23 years i am fully aware of the risks i take being overweight, no different to the risks i took whilst in the army, parachuting,abseiling etc or even on active duty, the risk is premature death. i'm 45 don't have diabetes, the only injuries i carry are from my time in the army and playing rugby for 20+ years, so yes i am fully aware. now if i make negative lifestyle choices the only person i can blame is myself, but saying i am less entitled to health care than any one else is a tad bigoted in my opinion. forcing me to change my lifestyle is worse. no one told me not to parachute/ climb/ abseil from big cliffs which hold risks in their own rights, so making sweeping moral judgements about who should be and who shouldn't have access to healthcare is wrong.
i asume you don't take any risks in your life? ever driven your car/motorbike too fast? taken part in contact sports? with the logic that you and a few others share on this thread your access to health care should be restricted due to your poor lifestyle choices! it just doesn't pan out once you put any thought into the arguement does it? the belief that hill walking is healthy is not a constructive counter arguement when the cost of an air ambulance is taken into account is it?
anyway i'm off for a pasty!'"
I agree with most of your post and I certainly believe that people should be free to choose their own lifestyle, risk-free or not. I was just curious that if you realised the possible implications of your weight, then perhaps it might be an incentive to do something about it.
My main gripe with this thread was the poster (think it was dj birchy?) who seemed to take pride and glee in the fact that his weight induced diabetes had its perks in the manner of free health checks that others don't..... Personally, this p!$ses me off, but maybe because I'm a grumpy sod!!...
