Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
observer

Premature death?

Recommended Posts

Seems in the land of those dark satanic mills, we're more liable to die earlier than those in the green and pleasant land of the South. But what exactly is "premature death" - 60, 70, 80, 90 or what? And why this obsession with living longer, just for the sake of it? With an increase in age related disease like Alzeimers and the news that cancer will strike nearly 50% of us; isn't it time we tackled the issue of quality of life, rather than the length of it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This seems to be the mantra of the "Health Care Professionals" that so many lives can be "saved" by stopping people drinking, smoking, eating the "wrong" things or, to put it in a nutshell, enjoying life their own way and not the way the "HCP" say life should be lived. The truth is that lives can't be "saved" this way. Sure you can prolong your life by being sensible about how you live, but not save it. We all die eventually and it should be down to the individual whether he/she arrives at the inevitable end point in mint condition or worn out. No doubt we shall now get the usual claptrap about the "costs" to the NHS. Well the tax revenues from smokers and drinkers far outweigh any perceived "cost" no matter how strenuously the "cost" figures are massaged to create a perception that there is a major problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I watched an interesting program a few weeks back where scientist were trying to establish if people could survive a trip to Mars. To test this, the spacecraft carrying the latest Curiosity probe had instruments on board to monitor the amount of lethal gamma radiation. 

 

The results showed that although the dosage wasn't actually lethal, it would reduce life expectancy but to put some perspective on the issue it was said that it would be no worse than being born in the north west of England! :|

 

Bill :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This seems to be the mantra of the "Health Care Professionals" that so many lives can be "saved" by stopping people drinking, smoking, eating the "wrong" things or, to put it in a nutshell, enjoying life their own way and not the way the "HCP" say life should be lived. The truth is that lives can't be "saved" this way. Sure you can prolong your life by being sensible about how you live, but not save it. We all die eventually and it should be down to the individual whether he/she arrives at the inevitable end point in mint condition or worn out. No doubt we shall now get the usual claptrap about the "costs" to the NHS. Well the tax revenues from smokers and drinkers far outweigh any perceived "cost" no matter how strenuously the "cost" figures are massaged to create a perception that there is a major problem.

 

I agree :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A figure of 75 was mentioned on the news today as dying young ,but none of these Public Health figures seem to fit in with the government stance of wanting to eventually work people to death ,sorry raise the pension age to 70 , and their efforts to save money on the welfare bill.May be it's time for the government to start sponsoring unhealthy pastimes like smoking & drinking & lack of exercise to promote early death syndrome !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And think of all the extra duty and VAT that would produce! A win win situation :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The main problem is, that folk may be living longer BUT not necessarily in good health, which in turn is overloading our health and care system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So we need more young people smoking and drinking, producing extra revenue to pay for today's elderly and ensuring that they don't become a burden in their twilight years themselves!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So leaving people alone to live or die as they wish would save the taxpayer £10 million a year for Warrington alone. If this policy was spread countrywide the deficit would be solved overnight!! Of course a few busybodies would have their noses pushed out of joint (and their income stream cut off) but so what?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you weigh up there are so many inconsistences....patients with locked in syndrome refused the chance to die with dignity ,but on the other hand you could if terminally ill be placed on a pathway to your death. And ,then again we have the nice people at NICE who will seemingly decide according to post code if a cancer sufferer will be given life prolonging drugs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the Independent today:

 

"Local councils recently took over responsibility for public health, including initiatives to cut smoking and drinking and lower obesity rates, from the NHS. They are now under pressure to improve in order to achieve Government targets of saving 30,000 lives a year by 2020".

 

So instead of making sure that the roads are free of pot holes and our bins are emptied to our satisfaction, the Local Councils have become our nanny telling us what we may or may not do. Who is the paymaster here, us or them?

 

Oh, and here we go with the "saving lives" garbage again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is all a load of bunkem.....

 

How the hell can they possibly know (other than guessing) that if I smoke and die at 70, that I would live until I was 72 if I didn't....

 

These people make things up to suit the latest round of "advice"... don't do this and this will happen" and all that nonsense.... I have a mate whose grandma is 102. When she was 100, the doctor advised her to give up smoking...... as if it bloody matters at that age.

 

Life is a lottery; my own granddad was born in 1883. He saw action in France in WW1 at the ripe old age of 31. He lived in Bewsey and drank much beer in the Imperial on Bewsey Road.... He walked there every night until he was 92. He died in 1976 at the age of 93. He smoked from the age of 9

 

He could have took a bullet in 1918; but he didn't..... but the odds were he should have done like millions of men that did....

 

Live life to the full because the bus that runs you over might have just turned into your street!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plus.... the boffins keep finding ways to keep us alive longer with better treatments and medicines, we have massive immigration and the birth rate isn't slowing down.... if this carries on, we will have an island full of oldies and no one to pay for them........ to paraphrase an old statement..... "Nature must be allowed to take its' course"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds about right Baz. Heard on the news that the optimum age for death is 75. So that leaves 10 years to enjoy your pension, which is now getting shorter due to the increase in retirement age. So the only incentive for the grumpies to kling-on, is to get as much pension out of them as possible; which the powers that be, seem to be encouraging. Problem is, there won't be the money to do justice to the term - "elderly care".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does make you wonder though if the reason a lot of younger people these days go in for extreme sports is get all your thrills in before you are too old to have them.

 

Predicting when somebody is liable to die is one of those proffessions that has made a lot of people a lot of money.How many have taken the bet that they won't die with somebody who says they will. Everybody who has life insurance for a start. so the longer you live the more money they get off you. even factoring in your lifestyle it is a winner for them and I suppose for you until you die and then you lose and they lose a little bit of money.

 

I suppose a private pension is a similar thing. You pay in with the hope that you will live long enough to get your hands on some of the money when you reach retirement age.

 

How old you live to is partly due to how you live your life but mostly down to luck. Eating "healthy" foods and not drinking to excess,smoking or taking addictive drugs can help prolong your life somewhat but there is always that bus you did not see coming and splat your brown bread.

 

Work on the principal that everyday that you wake up is a bonus and you may just feel happier about life.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know 2 people who gave up smoking who finished up on every inhaler possible. One was even advised to start smoking so she could "clear her chest" but because she had struggled so hard to stop smoking she didn't want to start again. She died. Both had stopped on doctor's advice.

 

My chest is knackered but from industrial dust & exhaust fumes , mostly diesel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My chest is knackered but from industrial dust & exhaust fumes , mostly diesel.

 

My god.... and I thought people only smoked tobacco!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems the elephant in the room on this, is now becoming apparent; with the Gov admission that our elderly care services are not up to scratch. On a personal level, my Dad asked one of his carers to do him fried egg on toast - she replied that she couldn't fry an egg, but could do scrabbled - of course in the 10 minutes of her visit. Who employs these people? Surely basic cooking skills should be a requirement? So the Gov wants to see improvements; but surely that will require huge investment to ensure sufficient numbers and quality of carers, so they can spend more than 10 minutes and actually care for the elderly in their home? In this age of austerity, Councils just won't have the money (WBC are already talking about making savings), so the situation is going to get worse; with Hospitals being swamped (try visiting ward A1 at the Hospital), with a rising number of age related illness. Sounds like a rock and a hard place, and cause for some deep soul searching on future policy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obs.... get your mum reassessed. My mum had 4 visits a day by two carers. Two visits were for 40 minutes each and the other two were for 50 minutes so she had someone with her for almost 4 hours a day. Plus I had fitted CCTV so they knew they couldn't short change her (Mum had to pay for some of her care over the allocated funding)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...