These are actually some old findings, subtitled --. The basic idea being that, although the actual health related costs of smokers (and obese people) are higher, because non-smokers and the thin live longer, they run up higher costs in total health care expenditure during years when they are retired.
The basic idea being that people are productive until about the age they retire, and during that time are contributing. After that time they are basically draining what they already produced, since smokers produce just as much as non-smokers, but die earlier, they leave the world with the greatest contribution!
Well the simple solution is to just shoot everybody at their retirement party. Problem solved.
Works for me.
Well the simple solution is to just shoot everybody at their retirement party. Problem solved.
Balongna already smells like old people. I won't go near the stuff.
Well the simple solution is to just shoot everybody at their retirement party. Problem solved.
the money spent on a patient who has been diagnosed with lung cancer must be overwhelming till his/her death,
and can include more than one surgery, and many months and years of drugs and effort to save the patient,
and I can imagine, could easily amount to 'more', than a healthy person living many many years longer.
These are actually some old findings, subtitled --. The basic idea being that, although the actual health related costs of smokers (and obese people) are higher, because non-smokers and the thin live longer, they run up higher costs in total health care expenditure during years when they are retired.
The basic idea being that people are productive until about the age they retire, and during that time are contributing. After that time they are basically draining what they already produced, since smokers produce just as much as non-smokers, but die earlier, they leave the world with the greatest contribution!
Short of dying from case of lead injection or dropping dead from a heart attack, the largest amount of health care dollars will be spent on an individual in the last year of their life. Shooting people at 65 is the fiscally responsible thing to do.
Advocating murder, is a troubling descent into idiocy.
These are actually some old findings, subtitled --. The basic idea being that, although the actual health related costs of smokers (and obese people) are higher, because non-smokers and the thin live longer, they run up higher costs in total health care expenditure during years when they are retired.
The basic idea being that people are productive until about the age they retire, and during that time are contributing. After that time they are basically draining what they already produced, since smokers produce just as much as non-smokers, but die earlier, they leave the world with the greatest contribution!
the money spent on a patient who has been diagnosed with lung cancer must be overwhelming till his/her death,
and can include more than one surgery, and many months and years of drugs and effort to save the patient,
and I can imagine, could easily amount to 'more', than a healthy person living many many years longer.
I've been saying this for years. It's an easy tax grab.
A healthy person has to get sick and die sooner or later. That cost won't change, but the "healthier" live longer collecting social benefits longer on top of the end of life care etc.
It would be interesting to know what percentage of seniors die in an uncomplicated fashion such as sudden heart attack or pneumonia.
Pneumonia or heart attacks are usually a complication from something else. People with healthy lungs don't usually die from pneumonia. Heart attacks by themselves, usually strike younger men
It would be interesting to know what percentage of seniors die in an uncomplicated fashion such as sudden heart attack or pneumonia.
That didn't answer the phenomena I brought up.
Yes it did. Heart attacks and pneumonia are very, very rarely uncomplicated. They inevitably are tied to other things.
so as usual you are full of bullsh*t again.
Short of dying from case of lead injection or dropping dead from a heart attack, the largest amount of health care dollars will be spent on an individual in the last year of their life. Shooting people at 65 is the fiscally responsible thing to do.
It would figure that you would take the comment without the sarcasm in which it was indended.
--
What are the Risk Factors?
Underlying illnesses such as Alzheimer's disease, emphysema, cystic fibrosis, diseases of the immune system, smoking and alcoholism increase the risk of pneumonia. Hospitalization puts seniors at high risk for pneumonia elderly.
Other risk factors for pneumonia elderly:
- Chronic heart, lung, spleen or kidney disease
- Any medical condition that impairs the immune system
- Diabetes
- Alcoholism
- History of smoking (damages the lining of the respiratory tract that helps to remove bacteria)
- Swallowing difficulty due to muscle weakness from a stroke or Parkinson's disease
- Difficulty initiating swallowing due to advanced dementia
- Decreased ability to cough
- Poor dental hygiene leading to higher amounts of potentially harmful bacteria in the mouth (which can then go into the lungs)
- Previous history of pneumonia
- Hospitalization
Bull****? That's a strange euphemism for wisdom.
,
A healthy person has to get sick and die sooner or later. That cost won't change, but the "healthier" live longer collecting social benefits longer on top of the end of life care etc.
Works for me.
Turn them into food. Another problem solved.
the money spent on a patient who has been diagnosed with lung cancer must be overwhelming till his/her death,
and can include more than one surgery, and many months and years of drugs and effort to save the patient,
and I can imagine, could easily amount to 'more', than a healthy person living many many years longer.