ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel
  • »
  • Education and Science»
  • Medicine & Health Science


Updated on April 30, 2012


Readers of past Hubs will be well aware of my concern about the spread of Obesity across modern Societies in the Western World. I see obesity as an insidious malaise that threatens, one way or another every man, woman and child in our parts of the world. I am hugely sympathetic and supportive of, the small percentage of those who are obese due to medical conditions beyond their own control and am thankful for the rest of us who do not have to grapple with the problems that inflict them. However, I wage war on the vast majority of those of all ages I see waddling their way through life apparently oblivious of the harm they do or present not only to themselves but to the rest of us all.

Now I am aware this is not ,at this time, considered to be a politically correct view to express {that alone means I am probably correct}, but chinks of enlightenment are beginning to appear around us. Readers may recall that my major concern is the cost that these greedy and selfish specimens place upon the rest of us and that they are the most singular threat to Health Care we face in this Century. As such, I campaign for ALL people to be tested for obesity at their Primary Health Care Centre and that General Practitioners be given total control over their right to receive Health Care from the State, by imposing strict programmes on the classified obese to bring down their weight and thus lessen their risks of contracting a wide range of ailments that require medical attention and often at great cost to the Health Service.

Simply put, the obese would be given programmes and help for 6 / 12 months during which there must be demonstrable reduction in weight on a progressive basis. If this obtains then all is fine and continues till the required weight prescribed is reached. I f no or little progress is made, then the patient is denied all other forms of medical treatment FREE until they begin to demonstrate a commitment to losing excess weight. The ball is thus in their court. Carry on being obese if you wish, but at the same time accept responsibility for the costs of treatments you may then require to deal with appropriate ailments related to your selfishness. Seems absolutely fair all round to me. Now, at last, it seems as if this type of view is being taken up by those at the sharp end of this particular ship, the Doctors themselves.



It seems that 54% of Doctors believe that non-emergency treatment should be withheld from those who do not lose weight following advice from GP!s. Music to my ears ! Quite simply they do not accept that the scant resources of the NHS should be given to those, on whom because of their own unhealthy behaviours, they are unlikely to work.

The above is seen by the website , via their Chief Executive, Tim Ringrose, as being a significant change of opinion as the NHS grapples with cuts up to £20 billion by 2015. Even so, there are still those who will not see the sense in this, and there are, unbelievably it seems to me ,to be Senior Doctors and patients groups claiming this policy would amount to a "blackmailing" of the sick.

Some Primary Care Trusts are however, acting responsibly and seeking to forge a new realism to the obesity problem and also let it be said, to problems involving smoking and alcohol related ailments and their availability for free treatment. Apparently, North Essex PCT requires the obese to lose at least 5% of weight to qualify for treatment. In figurative terms thus, a 20 stone male or female would have to reduce to just 19 stone to qualify. That does not seem adequate to me, but I suppose it is a start and as we all know, the longest journey begins with a small step. Certainly it would benefit the gross female I encountered at the Supermarket on Saturday. Wider than her trolley, she basically blocked the aisle and as one squeezed past her and her heavily laden goods transporter, her fragrance was definitely not Channel No 5. Maybe, in the near future she may require a hip or knee replacement, in which case she had best not go to Bedfordshire, where the obese like her are denied them.

Almost hilariously, I find we have an organization called "The National Obesity Forum" Predictably they roar that "NO ONE WHO IS OBESE CAN BE DENIED INITIAL TREATMENT BY THE NHS. THE NHS SHOULD NOT BE DISCRIMINATING AGAINST FAT PEOPLE" . In all honesty, you could not make it up. They completely overlook that the obese they claim to champion are NEVER denied initial treatment . The fact that that treatment comes with a codicil, advising weight loss which is palpably ignored appears to pass them by. Indeed I contend that the NHS should clearly discriminate against fat people who refuse to take the medical advice and help freely given to them about shedding some superfluous weight which is almost exclusively the very source of their medical problems. Further than that fat people develop fat children and that is something that needs careful monitoring. My contention is that children are not born obese, so fat children must cast doubt on the fitness of the parents in the same way as other forms of physical abuse rightly do now.


Years ago, children were abused and no notice was apparently taken by authority or society generally. Now, any Doctor or even neighbour suspecting abuse is rightly asked to act as a whistle blower. So in future years, there is no reason to suppose that the same will not be true of obesity. The basic difference, of course, is that, save for children, obesity is self inflicted and the parents inflicting obesity upon their children do so from ignorance and not wickedness. Yet that does not mean that the end result is any difference in real terms, for the child grows up inflicted and often passes that on to the next generation. The chain has to be broken and to do that require both public and private initiatives.

At airports we have units to indicate if a bag is small enough to be considered fit for the cabin. Then why not a similar one for people. Fail to fit in, then buy 2 seats ! It is not rocket science and could also apply to buses and trains. Instead of bemoaning about discrimination of the fat, consider their lack of consideration for the ordinary person. Doubt that? Then sit next to a 20 stoner on a Transatlantic flight. Your view will alter, trust me. Every aspect of life that puts people in close proximity to each other is affected by obesity. Idefy anyone to truly enjoy any Theatrical performance if wedged between two obese indiduals, or merely having to share part of your seat with the spillage from the person next to you.

In the Public sector, emphasis is fully on Health related affects and thus, as discussed above, the positive action of the Medical Practitioners is vital. For over 50 years now as a body they have failed palpably in dealing with the problem few of them saw coming and acted too little, too late.

Now the pendelum is swinging with 54% already favouring direct action on obesity. This action must be taken fully on the basis of helping the patient and not as some form of draconian punishment in the initial stages. The horse, so to speak, must be brought carefully to the water and encouraged to drink and effectively rewarded for so doing. If despite best efforts there is no progress then it is surely time, for the benefit of all, including the patient, for sterner measures to be invoked.

Time is not on our side to deal with this problem and we must look to the Medical profession to serve us better in the first half of this century than they did in the latter half of the last, if we are to stand any chance of preserving our National Health Service. It really is as clear cut as that.


    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No comments yet.