QuoteApparently this isn't as true as you would like to believe...
But yeah the NHS will still care for people who smoke and drink and over-eat and cut themselves and overdose. That's what it's there for.
http://junkfoodscience.blogspot.com/2008/01/truth-in-advertising.html
Quote
... First some background. For years, there has been growing documentation of NHS (National Health Service) patients being denied care and suffering, even dying, as a result. The elderly, smokers and fat people were increasingly the targets of rationing. Back in 1999, the BBC reported that 20% of doctors questioned had known patients who had died as a result of being denied care on the NHS.
Over recent years, for instance, fat people have been denied transplants to joint replacements, under the reasoning: “NHS resources are finite, and, unpopular though the idea is, some degree of rationing is a fiscal necessity.†In the Scotland on Sunday, Dani Garavelli wrote an editorial critical of the NHS policies and the political correctness behind them. Fat people are wrongly perceived as “greedy pariahs who refuse to exercise any self control,†Garavelli wrote, and as a result they’ve become a repressed group that “accepts the abuse they suffer in silence.†They already fare worse in receiving healthcare and are marginalized when it comes to their health. Ruling them out of fairly routine operations on the grounds of weight stigmatizes them further, Garavelli said, concluding:
When making these difficult judgments, it is important for primary care trusts to remember that fat people pay taxes too. After all, it is one thing to insist everyone should be required to give a portion of their income to fund services they may not use (such as education or improved transport networks), it is quite another to demand people pay for a service they will be denied when they need it.
And if we decide the best way to cut costs is to punish people for “self-inflicted" conditions, where is the blame game going to stop? Could we see health authorities refusing to treat people who are sexually promiscuous for STDs or those who use sunbeds for skin cancer? Perhaps those in the throes of a heart attack should be interrogated on their diet before an ambulance is dispatched and anyone who fails to do pelvic floor exercises after childbirth should surely have to thole that self-inflicted prolapse. Indeed, if fat people are refused treatment for fat-related conditions, why shouldn't sports fanatics be denied treatment for sports-related injuries?
The point is, we are all fallible: we all make choices every day that impact on our health, from eating junk food to having children. And unless we are willing to sacrifice our own right to NHS treatment when the time comes, we should not be so hasty in judging other people's lifestyles, and finding them wanting.
And there is also this ...
Doctor's Keep Cancer Drugs Quiet
which may have something to do with this ...
June 2006, The NHS deficit in England has reached £512m - more than double the amount last year.
[edit]
Mr Flibble, thanks for your reply. I apologize if this comes across as being (or is) a harsh response. I am sincerely curious about how such difficulties in the UK system since it seems our Obma is hell bent on duplicating the same over here. Upon refelection, I guess I should apologize getting off topic.