Surgeons Refuse to Operate on Smokers

[michabo]

Remember too, that in Canada and Australia these operations are done in public hospital, under public health care system. The doctors have a responsibility to the health of the wider population, as well as to the individual.

If you had three people waiting for a donor lung, and one of them was a current smoker, it is reasonable to make them a low priority. You should be demonstrating a committment to change, and to achieving a healthy lifestyle so that the organ is accepted and you get the most use out of it. If one person is unwilling to do this, and because of this attitude, they have a high probability of suffering complications, it is, I think, the most moral decision to place them at the bottom of the list.

 

[kopilo]

Well from what I know (because it is happening in my city), what happens is that there is a waiting list on organs (a very long list) and
what may be happening is that smokers are being given organ transplants based on because they have been on the waiting list for a set amount of time rather then how well they are going to treat the organ.

As far as I know it doesn't matter if you have private cover or not, the waiting list for organ transplants is just as long.

Yes smokers are tax payers, in fact one of the highest taxes is on tabacco and tax does subsidies medical treatment.

 

[kopilo]

The link to the Toronto Sun article is bad, so I can't comment on it. When I searched the Toronto Sun's site, I can't find this quote. I can't help wonder if it is something similar.

Opps sorry, I hope I fixed it up properly, here is a copy of the link just in case. http://www.quitsmokingsupport.com/buttout.htm

 

[michabo]

Yes smokers are tax payers, in fact one of the highest taxes is on tabacco and tax does subsidies medical treatment.

The US has some of the lowest taxes on cigarettes in the western world, and the taxes don't begin to cover the costs associated with their use.

Take Canda for instance. We have more than double the taxes per pack, yet the taxes collected don't cover the directly associated health care costs let alone the incidental costs.

They estimate that, in Canada, the societal costs attributable to smoking for 1993 were approximately $11 billion, of which $3 billion was spent on direct health care costs such as hospitalization and physician time. The remaining $8 billion was due to lost productivity. In comparison, it is estimated that in 1993/94, revenue from taxes on cigarettes totalled $2.6 billion.

Source: http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/smoking/cost.html

 

[Ave Maria]

Nobody should be denied medical care.

 

[Jasminrose]

Nobody should be denied medical care.

Well noone should be subjected to second hand smoke, but it happenns all the time.

 

[TheUJKiller]

What's next??? Will doctors eventually refuse to operate on anyone with a BMI over 25? After all, being overweight increases your risk of several different diseases much more significantly than smoking does. I've known many perfectly healthy smokers but I've never known a perfectly healthy overweight person.

 

[TheUJKiller]

Well noone should be subjected to second hand smoke, but it happenns all the time.

Damage from second-hand smoke is only an issue if you subject yourself to it for a long period of time. If you have issue with the second-hand smoke, you can leave.

Instead of people focusing so much on smoking in this country, I think we really need to look at the crap we're putting into our bodies on a daily basis--MSGs, HFCSs, Hydrogenated oils, and all the other garbage that has helped lead to the significant rise in obese and heart attacks just waiting to happen. We (society as a whole) have this tendency to become so overwhelmed with the details of one tiny issue that we lose sight of the much bigger picture. We can choose to not smoke easily enough but it is becoming extremely difficult to obtain food without all of these additives that are so much more hazardous to our health.

 

[kopilo]

The US has some of the lowest taxes on cigarettes in the western world, and the taxes don't begin to cover the costs associated with their use.

I agree and it's not just about money but opportunity cost as well.

 

[kopilo]

Damage from second-hand smoke is only an issue if you subject yourself to it for a long period of time. If you have issue with the second-hand smoke, you can leave.

Instead of people focusing so much on smoking in this country, I think we really need to look at the crap we're putting into our bodies on a daily basis--MSGs, HFCSs, Hydrogenated oils, and all the other garbage that has helped lead to the significant rise in obese and heart attacks just waiting to happen. We (society as a whole) have this tendency to become so overwhelmed with the details of one tiny issue that we lose sight of the much bigger picture. We can choose to not smoke easily enough but it is becoming extremely difficult to obtain food without all of these additives that are so much more hazardous to our health.

So what about those who are health concious but have no choice but to breath in smoke because in order to live their life they have to go to public areas (such as universities and shopping malls) and about every fifth person is smoking?

How about something nutral such as a music gig, is it fair for an audience member to smoke indoors at a gig when people are there to see the show? Especially when someone in the band is athsmatic?

Sometimes it just seems to become a case of simply just don't breath at all and pass out.

What about parents who smoke in front of their children, that child has no choice but to be a passive smoker.

Is it fair to the dances who don't smoke, for when they have a dance event for people to come along and smoke indoors eventually filling the hall with smoke?

 

[marblehead]

So what about those who are health concious but have no choice but to breath in smoke because in order to live their life they have to go to public areas (such as universities and shopping malls) and about every fifth person is smoking?

How about something nutral such as a music gig, is it fair for an audience member to smoke indoors at a gig when people are there to see the show? Especially when someone in the band is athsmatic?

Sometimes it just seems to become a case of simply just don't breath at all and pass out.

It's not like standing by or walking past someone who's smoking every once in a while is going to give you cancer.

 

[kopilo]

It's not like standing by or walking past someone who's smoking every once in a while is going to give you cancer.

I've done an edit.

It's my health, my mouth, my clothes, why should someone make my clothes stink and my mouth taste of ash just because I decide to go to something designated as a latin dance event every now and then?

 

[NothingButTheBlood]

Public smoking is almost all but banned. There are few places you are really subjected to it anymore. I still think that doctors who smoke should be addressed as well.

 

[kopilo]

Public smoking is almost all but banned. There are few places you are really subjected to it anymore. I still think that doctors who smoke should be addressed as well.

I don't know what country or state you come from, but smoking is still allowed indoors (in certian places), outdoors and public areas where I come from. However not on public transport, restaurants and workplaces (save bars which requires smokers to smoke 5 meters away from the bar).

 

[Jasminrose]

So what about those who are health concious but have no choice but to breath in smoke because in order to live their life they have to go to public areas (such as universities and shopping malls) and about every fifth person is smoking?

How about something nutral such as a music gig, is it fair for an audience member to smoke indoors at a gig when people are there to see the show? Especially when someone in the band is athsmatic?

Sometimes it just seems to become a case of simply just don't breath at all and pass out.

What about parents who smoke in front of their children, that child has no choice but to be a passive smoker.

Is it fair to the dances who don't smoke, for when they have a dance event for people to come along and smoke indoors eventually filling the hall with smoke?

You are right. What choice does an infant have if their parent is a chain smoker? None, they are helpless, they don't have the ability to tell them selves that this isn't healthy, and leave.

 

[Jasminrose]

It's not like standing by or walking past someone who's smoking every once in a while is going to give you cancer.

That's not the point at all. Infants and children can't do anything about their parents smoking. I'm not trying to be complete downer on smokers, I understand its a very hard habit to break, and smoking isn't the only bad habit people have that is harmful.

 

[Jasminrose]

Public smoking is almost all but banned. There are few places you are really subjected to it anymore. I still think that doctors who smoke should be addressed as well.

Yes, I'm also not sure where are from but smoking is still allowed in many places, but there are movements going on to get rid of smoking in public places, but I would hardly call it "almost".

Yes, I agree with you about Doctors, they shouldn't smoke, and then try to educate people not to smoke.

 

[NothingButTheBlood]

You are right. What choice does an infant have if their parent is a chain smoker? None, they are helpless, they don't have the ability to tell them selves that this isn't healthy, and leave.

Are you sugesting that those who smoke loose their children? What about parents who have a drink or two in the evening, in an emergency they can't drive their children to the hospitol. Or those who don't eat well. Or those too poor to make house repairs? Once we decide that you can't smoke what else will follow.

 

[NothingButTheBlood]

Yes, I'm also not sure where are from but smoking is still allowed in many places, but there are movements going on to get rid of smoking in public places, but I would hardly call it "almost".

Yes, I agree with you about Doctors, they shouldn't smoke, and then try to educate people not to smoke.

The only place you can smoke here now is your home, porch, car and outside when there is not an event like a ballgame or concert. All indoor smoking is banned except at the casino. I rarely see people smoking outside their home, property or car.

 

[Jasminrose]

Are you sugesting that those who smoke loose their children? What about parents who have a drink or two in the evening, in an emergency they can't drive their children to the hospitol. Or those who don't eat well. Or those too poor to make house repairs? Once we decide that you can't smoke what else will follow.

I said nothing like that. I'm saying that a infant cannot get up and leave the room when their parent is smoking in front of them. How in the world did you get me saying that they lose their children?