NICE targets friends and families
Friday, April 5, 2013 at 9:47 New guidelines to stop people smoking.
According to the Telegraph's interpretation of the guidelines, smokers are to be offered nicotine replacement gum and other inducements to quit smoking regardless of the reason for their being in hospital.
In other words, they could be in hospital for a non-smoking related illness or procedure and the guidelines would still be implemented.
For the record, here's my response to the Telegraph's request for a comment (although I don't think they ran the story in the end):
"The guidelines seem very heavy-handed. If enforced they will heap guilt on people at a time when they are already stressed or anxious."
"If a patient is being seen for a non smoking-related illness or procedure it's a gross invasion of their privacy to use every contact as an excuse to tackle them about their habit.
"What happens if a patient declines the offer of nicotine replacement therapy or refuses to be tested as prescribed? Will they be refused treatment?
"The NHS has a duty to treat everyone equally, regardless of their lifestyle, yet this smacks of discrimination."
The guidelines also call for a ban on smoking on hospital grounds, something I spoke about on BBC Radio London this morning.
Reader Comments (3)
Not sure how many ailments that require hospital treatment are considered not to be smoking related. In any event, If surgery was required smokers would still be asked to quit. It's actually become an obsession within the NHS to nag whenever/wherever possible. Anyway, it's more like the International Health Service nowadays.
Interesting that the presumed cost has fallen to £2.7 billion. They really don't know, do they? Nevertheless, it seems a small amount for all those so called smoking related diseases. About 2% of total spending. I mean, if nobody had smoked for the last 50 years, would the state of the NHS really be any better? And why do they consider this to be a 'bill'? To whom? Smokers more than cover this, in addition to any other contributions. Even by their guesstimate the net gain to The Treasury is £9 billion+.
TBH, the way they bang on I've given up trying to comprehend why the government hasn't attempted (let alone publicly considered), to ban smoking altogether. Please tell me that it has nothing to do with money. Or votes. Surely not - that would be truly dreadful. I'm sure of one thing at least, it has little to do with preserving personal liberty.
This shows how crucial it is not to admit to being a smoker when questioned by your GP or, more usually, the Practice nurse. If you are a smoker and need to spend time in hospital, invest in a decent electronic cigarette and a plentiful supply of liquid and accessories. I'm guessing modern hospitals cater for mobile phone charging, so you can even recharge the device during your stay. (Put a book on top of it)
There is no such thing as smoking-related illness. There is not one single disease that affects smokers and not non-smokers. Perhaps these goody-two-shoes should read the evidence that tobacco does not cause cancer and in all probability helps to prevent it.
http://www.health-matrix.net/2012/12/15/nicotine-the-zombie-antidote/
Outdoor air contains some of the nastiest cocktails of pollutants. Most people tend to think of air pollution as having effects on the lungs, but exposure to road traffic and air pollution may also trigger heart attacks6. But people are right: air pollution does cause lung cancer. A much-anticipated government study of more than 12,000 miners has found that exposure to diesel engine exhaust significantly increases the risk of lung cancer. For NON-smokers, the risk was seven times higher. The authors of the study say “we also observed an interaction between smoking and 15-year lagged cumulative REC [marker for estimation of diesel exhaust exposure] such that the effect of each of these exposures was attenuated in the presence of high levels of the other.7” What does that mean? It means that research suggests that people who smoke are less vulnerable to the toxic effects of inhalation of diesel fumes than people who don’t smoke.
You have no idea how many times we have found again and again the protective properties of tobacco smoking.