Yep, we've read the books, heard the lectures and understood the principles, so we're all sold on the idea that prevention rightly occupies a higher perch on the management tree than correction. But what happens when a shift to a preventative culture requires a lifestyle change? There's an emotional dynamic in amongst all of the good sense that has to be managed. That is, there will always be a number of people with a vested interest in the status quo

So what has got us talking about all of this? Check out this thread on today's BBC website. Seems like the UK Government is keen on adopting a preventative approach to health care provision and has dared to suggest that if some people looked after themselves a bit better, then that might mean fewer trips to the doctors to put themselves right. Sounds good, but not everyone agrees whole-heartedly it seems
The case for...
The population is growing. A huge amount of health care resource is being spent on largely preventable medical conditions. What's more, the life style causes of these problems are continuing to drift in the wrong direction, suggesting that the situation will get a lot worse before it gets better. The resource consumed by these preventable problems are reducing our chances to meet other challenges such as waiting times, MRSA, early diagnosis of potentially serious but treatable conditions and others
The case against...
Help!!! Save us from the "Nanny State"!!! How dare the Government tell us how to live our lives? I'll eat, drink and smoke as much as I blimmin well like. It's my life to live as I choose and be damned with all of you smug politicians with all of your laws and restrictions, and your penny pinching

Oh, and by the way, when I do need medical treatment (which may well be with increasing frequency - what's it to you?) I expect it to be the best in the world, immediate and free
Guess which side of the fence we're on