The Vale of York to be precise has decided to put fat/ter people on probation for a year or however long it takes them to starve off 10% of their body mass-whichever period comes around first. No reports on what will happen to their organ amputation provision.
The excuse for this obvious attempt to leverage pain to bully people into starvation induced weight loss is excused as the; "best way of achieving maximum value from the limited resources available”. Oh go on Vale of York, we so believe you!
Sommers is quoted as saying this is like discriminating on the basis of their colour or religious persuasion, as wait for it, "obesity is an illness". We all know that's false, the AMA openly they were saying that to get paid.
This is nothing like racism. The discrimination is that anybody no matter their weight has to lose it via a pathological and ineffective means the body is designed to reject. This isn't acknowledged. Worse still it disregards patient consent, which is fundamental to the practise of medicine.
Even if you are one of those invested in delusion about the efficacy of calorie restriction induced weight loss-CRIWL, you've still got the fact that much injury and illness is just as much the "fault" of the individual as fat is supposed to be, especially if you apply the same standard of judgement as used for 'obesity'.
Whether its people injuring themselves to people having accidents-one that springs to mind was a wheelchair user who injured several of her friends, doing lasting damage and ended in being a quadriplegic through their own careless driving.
Self inflicted is an irrelevant concept in medicine. Or it was until 'obesity' became a verbal tic.
The urge toward deserving and undeserving unwell is as bigger bunk as is possible to imagine. Things you wouldn't dream of require far less effort to manage or even resolve than fighting your body's endless defences against calorie restriction. It would, will be a surrprise to us as biology hacks get more sophisticated, just how much we can do for ourselves.
The estimate amount of pscycho somatic illness would shock people.
That's the real discrimination against fat people and in this case smokers two very easy targets. It just so happens that both have vociferous cults aimed at them. Weight is especially bad. I don't wish to throw smokers under the bus, but there is no comparison between not lighting up and inhaling tubers of tobacco and fighting your body's survival instincts. Though I daresay many of them wouldn't see it that way.
Led by an elected Governing Body made up of GPs, other clinicians including a nurse and a secondary care consultant, and lay members;Um hum.
In keeping with that Summers isn't even against this punishment fandango, oh heavens to Murgatroyd no;
Shaw Somers, a bariatric surgeon from Portsmouth, said the move was a logical step and could save money, but amounted to discrimination because obesity was an illness.A "logical step" huh? So would using racial religious discrimination to ration medical treatment be "logical" then? That would make the medical principle of treatment according to need, "illogical." Yet, no other criterion would appear to make more sense.
Then comes the laughable shilling,
“Just saying you can’t have surgery and there is no access to alternative treatments really doesn’t help anyone.”"Alternative treatments" is reference to his bowdlerising chop socky or some other ghastly item on the iatrogenic 'obesity' repertoire. Neither alternative nor treatment. The sympathy pose is big right now with the 'obesity' promoters.
Sadly for them, cutting out people's organs isn't remotely sympathetic at all.
There's no question something has gone badly awry with certain elements of the medical profession's psyche. A feeling has grown that any action they may disapprove of-real or imagined-undoes their hard work and those who do deserve to be left in agony or death - serve them right.
They consider medical training to have given them the power of life or death over others.
I personally couldn't care less. I'd just wish to remind them their practise is a monopoly. That fact has served them very well. It is over the moment they consider themselves too grand to treat anyone on the basis of their irrelevant prejudice.
Update: Vale of York is backpeddling;
Major surgery poses much higher risks for severely overweight patients who smoke. So local GP-led clinical commissioning groups are entirely right to ensure these patients first get support to lose weight and try and stop smoking before their hip or knee operation."Severely overweight patients who smoke" Really V of Y? You said BMI 30 + and smokers, don't try and fib, its in writing.