From someone gasping for air:
Now that, at last, common sense has prevailed and smoking will be banned in enclosed public spaces in England, we hear that NHS will provide treatment to help smokers quit. Is it common sense to provide the drugs on the NHS, instead of asking the smokers, who possibly spend £5 on their habit a day, to pay the fiull cost for it ?
Provide common sense...
About us
We are experts in all matters of life. You may consult us on any topic. On some matters, that we consider trivial or uninteresting, we may provide a short, even terse response to your query; in others, where the fancy takes us, we may pontificate at length providing an extensive discussion of the issue from which we shall draw appropriate conclusions. The choice is ours, after all, we know best.
Past sense
May 31st, 2007 at 3:13 pm
NO! These are the afflicted. We do not ask drug addict or alcoholics to pay for help so in the same way we should help them. Just think, if you are happy that they cannot pollute you when you are in a pub and then they give up then you will also not be polluted outside the pub!
May 31st, 2007 at 3:35 pm
Interesting one, and I am not sure it can be answered by common sense alone. Common sense means that you would not start smoking in the first place. Likewise, you would not start drinking to excess, or abuse the other drugs that are illegal. We do not expect car drivers to pay for their treatment following car crashes that they have caused through neglect, so why smokers too ?
This is an issue of money and, assuming that no one doubts that treatment for lung cancer, heart disease etc that are also caused by smoking will be available through the NHS, then it makes economic sense to provide any treatment that helps folk stop smoking if it is cheaper than these treatments.
Of course, the issue comes when this treatment is funded, but drugs that would treat other diseases that are not self inflicted (e.g. Alzheimer’s) are not.
May 31st, 2007 at 3:57 pm
I have to disagree with G just on this. He states that drivers do not pay for treatment following an accident. They do in two ways. one is through insurance (which the UK NHS now claims money from when a car crash occurs) and the other is through National Insurance payments. Smokers pay NI also and so are paying for their treatment. On the other hand when you use emotive comparisons with Alzheimer’s this does not help as there is an entire department within the NHS doing cost benefit analysis of drugs. Sadly it does all come down to money. We would love a road or rail system that was accident free but this would cost too much therefore we accept that some folk will die each year.
May 31st, 2007 at 4:21 pm
I do not think we are disagreeing on most of this. Clearly in the UK those who are in a position to contribute to the NHS do so, and so I would assume it was clear that I was referring to additional charges. And we both agree that it does indeed all come down to money. There will never exist a system through which every singe treatment will be available to everyone for free – that is simply a fantasy, so of course we have to rationalise and be pragmatic.
Where I would disagree is that mentioning other conditions is emotive. Any illness that you or someone you know suffers from is the most important one to get treatment for at that time – it is just a personal thing. Whether it is induced by smoking, or inherited, it is still important. This is why common sense falls down.