Daydream fund challenge part 4

Davesnave

I wrote a longish post on smoking,drinking and....er...other stuff, but I lost it. :whistle: Maybe just as well

One of my claims to fame is that I was required by the police to walk along the white line in the middle of the the road, which was the standard method of determining drunkenness in the days before breathalysers. Yes, I know, great elf n'safety! :rotfl:

I was a bit rowdy when I alighted from the late bus. OK, it was almost 11pm and I was a 'loud' teenager, but I'm not the sort who fights or seeks confrontation when inebriated. :A

So, when the two policemen told me to walk the line I thought they were having a laugh. Then, when they explained what would happen if I failed, I suddenly realised that they were deadly serious. I was still at school! This could be an expulsion offence.....:eek:

Anyway, my walking was OK. They told me to keep on walking....home! I was worried because it was only 25 metres away, but they didn't tell my folks. :beer:

Better_Days

I must admit I was so glad when smoking was banned in public places. I recall having to work in smoke filled offices, travel in smoke filled public transport, eat in smoke filled restaurants. For a non smoker it was horrible and very difficult to avoid. I don't see the tax paid by smokers as compensation for the unpleasantness and health problems experienced by passive smokers.

For children it is even worse. As I understand it the concentration of toxins is exacerbated in cars and children are more vulnerable to those toxins. Other countries already have similar legislation, so it will be interesting to see how it pans out here.

choille

I must admit when I smoked I did find passive smokers useful in filtering the air when I was out for a pint or three......

phoebe1989seb

Better_Days wrote: »

I must admit I was so glad when smoking was banned in public places. I recall having to work in smoke filled offices, travel in smoke filled public transport, eat in smoke filled restaurants. For a non smoker it was horrible and very difficult to avoid. I don't see the tax paid by smokers as compensation for the unpleasantness and health problems experienced by passive smokers.

For children it is even worse. As I understand it the concentration of toxins is exacerbated in cars and children are more vulnerable to those toxins. Other countries already have similar legislation, so it will be interesting to see how it pans out here.

Hear hear BD :T

DH was brought up in a house full of smokers - both parents smoked heavily as did his older siblings/their partners (DH is the youngest of six with his eldest brother ten years his senior) - and has always detested smoking/smokers as a result. He has never, ever smoked and would never allow anyone, even his own parents to smoke in our house and would avoid being in their home when they smoked.

His mum died of lung cancer in 2006 and one of his elder sisters (54) has recently been diagnosed with emphysema (sp?). Even though he loved his mum to bits, he has absolutely no sympathy and firmly believes that smokers should have to pay for hospital treatment resulting from their habit. It especially makes his blood boil that people with dementia (such as my mum.....and late dad) have to pay for their care when their disease is through no fault of their own :mad:

Not only that but DH himself has had a persistent nasty cough for as long as I've known him and I'm convinced that one day he'll be diagnosed with lung cancer as a result of passive smoking

I'm not as bothered by smoking personally - it's a free country after all - but agree it shouldn't be inflicted on kids who have no say in the matter.....

Sorry guys, rant over!

alfie_1

choille wrote: »

I must admit when I smoked I did find passive smokers useful in filtering the air when I was out for a pint or three......

:doh: :think: :rotfl::rotfl: i didnt smoke in pubs/resteraunt as i cant stand smokey rooms. i never smoke near children, some do . but my point was that excuses for other problems always seem to be aimed at the smoker not the drinker.

choille

Well the old argument about not treating smokers on the NHS - what about the overweight?The diabetics The climbers? The poor....?

The health service is for everyone surely?

I must have funded a ward the amount of fags I smoked.

Better_Days

Yes, thank you phoebe for sharing your experience my Dad was a heavy smoker too and died at 66 from a heart attack. He had given up by then for a couple of years, but the damage had already been done I suspect. My MIL died in her early 50's as a result of liver failure bought on by alcohol, and probably not helped by heavy smoking. A lovely lady and such a shame.

I do hope there is nothing sinister about your DH cough - has he had it checked out recently?

My view is that if people want to smoke in their own homes that is fine, but it is not fair to jeopardise the health of others when they have no choice but to 'inhale' (unlike Bill Clinton ) such as public transport or in the workplace, and of course in the case of children.

I also have great sympathy for your DH views. As you may recall my health is very poor through no fault of my own, and I get no care whatsoever from the NHS because the services, and the commitment for people with my illness just isn't there. It is so sad to see others fritter away their own good health due to smoking, drinking, obesity. Of course at the end of the day that is their lifestyle choice, but as you point out it does have the effect of restricting the availability of NHS care in other sectors.

A very thorny issue all round and I have read some interesting research about how some people have certain receptors in their brains that make them more susceptible to nicotine addiction. Something similar is probably going on with alcoholism and obesity. The twin stressors of an aging population and obesity do make me wonder where the NHS is going to be in 10 years time.

Better_Days

choille wrote: »

Well the old argument about not treating smokers on the NHS - what about the overweight?The diabetics The climbers? The poor....?

The health service is for everyone surely?

I must have funded a ward the amount of fags I smoked.

The thing is choille is that the NHS already isn't caring for everyone that needs care. My experience is evidence of that. And things are only getting worse. I've seen this in the 8 years that I've been involved in meetings with the NHS to try and improve care. I feel I've paid into the system too through tax and NI contributions, but that has no direct relation to the level of healthcare I receive.

The question now is how limited funds should be allocated. It's a question that unfortunately politicians are refusing to address because it is politically toxic - the third rail.

I think that for acute care the NHS is on the whole excellent. But the real question is how dwindling resourses (increases in taxation are unpopular) are utilised to care for an increasing number of people with often multiple chronic conditions. Choices have to be made. And when like phoebe's DH you are on the sharp end of those choices it can seem unfair when those who need care for devastating conditions such as dementia have to pay when others don't have to pay.

The division between social care and health care is becoming increasingly blurred. Frankly it's a mess and I can't see it being sorted out anytime soon. Unfortunately governments can't resist messing around with the NHS. The latest round of 'reforms' creating CCG's has swallowed up resources that could have been much better used elsewhere. But I have little faith that the next goverment wont be able to resist yet more 'reforms'.

choille

I believe that the money that Doctors are now paid is incredible. The wages for locums per day we couldn't earn in a month. The money that has gone into PFI health centres/hospitals etc is scandalous.
I don't think Scotland is as far down the private route as England as yet, but it's a mess.

The money that drug companies charge for drugs is again scandalous.

I was speaking with someone quite highish up in Health care who travels through out the UK & she was telling me how bad the health is of the population. It's terrible.
A lot of it is down to education, money & poor diet - which goes back to the first two.
To blame an aging population is cheap & wrong and is what they are doing at present.

alfie_1

ive been fortunate that my family have never had extensive illness or need extended care.... except for my dad. he had a triple by pass 15 years ago and a major stroke nearly 2 years ago. his care under the NHS was exemplary. basically they saved his life twice. he is now 86. he didnt smoke and he only had the odd pint. evryone is responsible for thier own welfare, it is a lifechoice. there are thousands of things that could "kill us", nobody can predict that the smoker/drinker etc will need more care than the non smoker/drinker etc..... the system is at fault not the people who save lives. everyone will have an opinion and sadly it all leads back to whoever is in charge who makes descicions seemingly the 3 "wise" monkeys............