why not just let these heal health sinners die?

[red states rule]

Once again, Gov Palin was 100% when she warned that Obamacare would lead to death panels, rationed care, and higher taxes.
Faced with the high cost of caring for smokers and overeaters, experts say society must grapple with a blunt question: Instead of trying to penalize them and change their ways, why not just let these health sinners die prematurely from their unhealthy habits?Annual health care costs are roughly $96 billion for smokers and $147 billion for the obese, the government says. These costs accompany sometimes heroic attempts to prolong lives, including surgery, chemotherapy and other measures.
But despite these rescue attempts, smokers tend to die 10 years earlier on average, and the obese die five to 12 years prematurely, according to various researchers' estimates.
And attempts to curb smoking and unhealthy eating frequently lead to backlash: Witness the current legal tussle over New York City's first-of-its-kind limits on the size of sugary beverages and the vicious fight last year in California over a ballot proposal to add a $1-per-pack cigarette tax, which was ultimately defeated.
"This is my life. I should be able to do what I want," said Sebastian Lopez, a college student from Queens, speaking last September when the New York City Board of Health approved the soda size rules.
Critics also contend that tobacco- and calorie-control measures place a disproportionately heavy burden on poor people. That's because they:
—Smoke more than the rich, and have higher obesity rates.
—Have less money so sales taxes hit them harder. One study last year found poor, nicotine-dependent smokers in New York — a state with very high cigarette taxes — spent as much as a quarter of their entire income on smokes.
—Are less likely to have a car to shop elsewhere if the corner bodega or convenience store stops stocking their vices. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=170342399

[Missileman]

Once again, Gov Palin was 100% when she warned that Obamacare would lead to death panels, rationed care, and higher taxes.

It's strange that they only want certain people to have personal responsibility for their health. I would argue that should be the case for everyone. I mean, how many liver transplants would you give to an alcoholic that won't stop drinking?

[taft2012]

It's strange that they only want certain people to have personal responsibility for their health. I would argue that should be the case for everyone. I mean, how many liver transplants would you give to an alcoholic that won't stop drinking?

Three come right to mind:

John Phillips (singing group "The Mamas & The Papas")
Mickey Mantle (NY Yankee)
Larry Hagman (Actor, "Dallas")

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Once again, Gov Palin was 100% when she warned that Obamacare would lead to death panels, rationed care, and higher taxes.

Its called "conditioning" and if given enough years it becomes the majority view. I remember back when most people laughed like hell at the few that would go into a store to buy bottled water but look now its thought to be a normal and healthy action. Why? Because "conditioning" works quite well. Governments (dictatorial) always take over the media to do just that. We see it so well with the MSM HERE IN OUR COUNTRY.
Obama would have lost handily had the MSM not plied its trade and its only purpose now!
We will be "condition" to see that solution as being absolutely correct!
The sheeple will graze on the grass that they are put on!!-Tyr

[Missileman]

Three come right to mind:

John Phillips (singing group "The Mamas & The Papas")
Mickey Mantle (NY Yankee)
Larry Hagman (Actor, "Dallas")

I don't know these stories, but assuming they all got a liver transplant, would you give them a second if they are still drinking?

[Abbey Marie]

I don't know these stories, but assuming they all got a liver transplant, would you give them a second if they are still drinking?

I think that David Crosby did just that.

[aboutime]

Three come right to mind:

John Phillips (singing group "The Mamas & The Papas")
Mickey Mantle (NY Yankee)
Larry Hagman (Actor, "Dallas")


Money Talks. And it seems. So do Liver's.

[Missileman]

I think that David Crosby did just that.

Doubtful that it was paid for with taxpayer dollars though.

[gabosaurus]

I have to agree with this in principle. I don't believe that health insurance should cover illnesses directly caused by smoking. The same way life insurance doesn't cover deaths by suicide.

[ConHog]

I have to agree with this in principle. I don't believe that health insurance should cover illnesses directly caused by smoking. The same way life insurance doesn't cover deaths by suicide.

of course the whole problem with that is who decides whether an illness was directly caused by smoking? Damn sure the insurance companies would see a broken leg sustained by a smoker as caused by smoking LOL

[Missileman]

of course the whole problem with that is who decides whether an illness was directly caused by smoking? Damn sure the insurance companies would see a broken leg sustained by a smoker as caused by smoking LOL

Well, if he broke it because he slipped on the sidewalk while going to the corner to get a pack of smokes...just sayin.:laugh2:

[ConHog]

Well, if he broke it because he slipped on the sidewalk while going to the corner to get a pack of smokes...just sayin.:laugh2:

LOL , that's what I'm saying...... We all know insurance companies try to deny any claim they can.

[Trigg]

I have to agree with this in principle. I don't believe that health insurance should cover illnesses directly caused by smoking. The same way life insurance doesn't cover deaths by suicide.


slippery slope, next thing you know insurance would refuse to treat illnesses caused by being over weight.

[gabosaurus]

Obesity can be caused by factors that are not chosen by the person.

If you have lung cancer or other health concerns related to smoking, no one should feel sorry for you. It is your fault alone. You are committing suicide by your own volition.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

If you have lung cancer or other health concerns related to smoking, no one should feel sorry for you. It is your fault alone. You are committing suicide by your own volition.

Really??? How is it that you do not apply such responsibility on women that get pregnant and then demand an abortion as a right and even demand THAT TAXPAYERS PAY FOR IT TOO?
Seems you apply such principles haphazardly and very selectively. -Tyr

[ConHog]

Obesity can be caused by factors that are not chosen by the person.

If you have lung cancer or other health concerns related to smoking, no one should feel sorry for you. It is your fault alone. You are committing suicide by your own volition.

My grandmother died of cancer, she never smoked in her life. Bet some insurance company would have blamed her cancer on second hand smoke and refused to pay her medical bills if they could have.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I have to agree with this in principle. I don't believe that health insurance should cover illnesses directly caused by smoking. The same way life insurance doesn't cover deaths by suicide.

My first wife's grandmother died from lung cancer, she was a heavy smoker. If I remember correctly her husband's insurance covered the medical bills. Her illness lasted well over a year and was extremely costly and you think she should have suffered without proper medical care by the insurance refusing to pay!! My how merciful are your selective tender mercies..-:rolleyes:

[red states rule]

I have to agree with this in principle. I don't believe that health insurance should cover illnesses directly caused by smoking. The same way life insurance doesn't cover deaths by suicide.

Does that include treatment for AIDS? In most cases it is risky behavior that leads to one getting the disease - just like smoking

[bingster]

Once again, Gov Palin was 100% when she warned that Obamacare would lead to death panels, rationed care, and higher taxes.

Good article but Palin was not spot on. Obamacare has no death panel. You got that wrong, she didn't say it would "lead to death panels", she said it had one built in. And please, McCain's first act as a Senator to topple across the aisle respect for him was picking a Vice Presidential candidate who failed twice to even correctly define the office of vice president. I think quoting her hurts your argument more than supports it.

[red states rule]

Good article but Palin was not spot on. Obamacare has no death panel. You got that wrong, she didn't say it would "lead to death panels", she said it had one built in. And please, McCain's first act as a Senator to topple across the aisle respect for him was picking a Vice Presidential candidate who failed twice to even correctly define the office of vice president. I think quoting her hurts your argument more than supports it.

Oh yes she was Bing. The NY Times even ran an article on how care would be rationed and who would get care and who would not. Obama told his supporters NOT to use the word "rationed"
You have advanced kidney cancer. It will kill you, probably in the next year or two. A drug called Sutent slows the spread of the cancer and may give you an extra six months, but at a cost of $54,000. Is a few more months worth that much? If you can afford it, you probably would pay that much, or more, to live longer, even if your quality of life wasn’t going to be good. But suppose it’s not you with the cancer but a stranger covered by your health-insurance fund. If the insurer provides this man — and everyone else like him — with Sutent, your premiums will increase. Do you still think the drug is a good value? Suppose the treatment cost a million dollars. Would it be worth it then? Ten million? Is there any limit to how much you would want your insurer to pay for a drug that adds six months to someone’s life? If there is any point at which you say, “No, an extra six months isn’t worth that much,” then you think that health care should be rationed.
In the current U.S. debate over health care reform (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/health/diseasesconditionsandhealthtopics/health_insurance_and_managed_care/health_care_reform/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier), “rationing” has become a dirty word. Meeting last month with five governors, President Obama (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/o/barack_obama/index.html?inline=nyt-per) urged them to avoid using the term, apparently for fear of evoking the hostile response that sank the Clintons’ attempt to achieve reform. In a Wall Street Journal op-ed published at the end of last year with the headline “Obama Will Ration Your Health Care,” Sally Pipes, C.E.O. of the conservative Pacific Research Institute, described how in Britain the national health service does not pay for drugs that are regarded as not offering good value for money, and added, “Americans will not put up with such limits, nor will our elected representatives.” And the Democratic chair of the Senate Finance Committee, Senator Max Baucus (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/b/max_baucus/index.html?inline=nyt-per), told CNSNews in April, “There is no rationing of health care at all” in the proposed reform.
Remember the joke about the man who asks a woman if she would have sex with him for a million dollars? She reflects for a few moments and then answers that she would. “So,” he says, “would you have sex with me for $50?” Indignantly, she exclaims, “What kind of a woman do you think I am?” He replies: “We’ve already established that. Now we’re just haggling about the price.” The man’s response implies that if a woman will sell herself at any price, she is a prostitute. The way we regard rationing in health care seems to rest on a similar assumption, that it’s immoral to apply monetary considerations to saving lives — but is that stance tenable?
Health care is a scarce resource, and all scarce resources are rationed in one way or another. In the United States, most health care is privately financed, and so most rationing is by price: you get what you, or your employer, can afford to insure you for. But our current system of employer-financed health insurance exists only because the federal government encouraged it by making the premiums tax deductible. That is, in effect, a more than $200 billion government subsidy for health care. In the public sector, primarily Medicare (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/health/diseasesconditionsandhealthtopics/medicare/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier), Medicaid (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/health/diseasesconditionsandhealthtopics/medicaid/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier) and hospital emergency rooms, health care is rationed by long waits, high patient copayment requirements, low payments to doctors that discourage some from serving public patients and limits on payments to hospitals. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/19/magazine/19healthcare-t.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

[Abbey Marie]

If the insurer provides this man — and everyone else like him — with Sutent, your premiums will increase. Do you still think the drug is a good value? Suppose the treatment cost a million dollars. Would it be worth it then? Ten million? Is there any limit to how much you would want your insurer to pay for a drug that adds six months to someone’s life? If there is any point at which you say, “No, an extra six months isn’t worth that much,” then you think that health care should be rationed.

More inconsistency to suit. Would the same people be willing to say that lawsuit damages are out of control? Do they ever ask, "at what point is a life not worth the money?", when reaching into another's pocket for damages?

[aboutime]

My first wife's grandmother died from lung cancer, she was a heavy smoker. If I remember correctly her husband's insurance covered the medical bills. Her illness lasted well over a year and was extremely costly and you think she should have suffered without proper medical care by the insurance refusing to pay!! My how merciful are your selective tender mercies..-:rolleyes:


Tyr. Look at the number of people who have NEVER SMOKED, who make claims about 2ND HAND SMOKE giving them Cancer. Wonder how gabby would handle that question...since those people didn't have any choice either...and they insist the smoke gave them cancer????

[red states rule]

Oh yes she was Bing. The NY Times even ran an article on how care would be rationed and who would get care and who would not. Obama told his supporters NOT to use the word "rationed"

Hey Bing - any comment on the article?