merkin
Darren Bullock Terrier
Posts: 878
|
Post by merkin on Jan 13, 2012 11:01:12 GMT 1
why the fuck should the government cover it for private patients?
and why should the private companies cover it unless they provided life time guarentees.
these vain slags should cough up again.
can anyone convince me differently...
|
|
|
|
Post by markelt on Jan 13, 2012 11:38:09 GMT 1
It's never happened before. I know facts never seem to work. So maybe not.
|
|
brispie
Andy Booth Terrier
[M0:0]
Posts: 3,386
|
Post by brispie on Jan 13, 2012 11:39:23 GMT 1
What about the women who had mastectomy's and were advised to have these implants?
|
|
Bernie
Jimmy Glazzard Terrier
[M0:0]
Posts: 4,322
|
Post by Bernie on Jan 13, 2012 11:52:58 GMT 1
What Elt said, mainly. Though partially also what Merk said. Surely everyone should just be suing, or governments fining, the arse off the French goons who made them?
Brispie shall be ignored for his rape of the apostrophe. And his DISGUSTING implication that mastectomy patients are "vain slags".
|
|
merkin
Darren Bullock Terrier
Posts: 878
|
Post by merkin on Jan 13, 2012 13:00:08 GMT 1
Nice to see my special Elt rod still works
|
|
Bernie
Jimmy Glazzard Terrier
[M0:0]
Posts: 4,322
|
Post by Bernie on Jan 13, 2012 13:12:41 GMT 1
Oh get a room, you two. Then bum each other in it and make a right old mess.
|
|
merkin
Darren Bullock Terrier
Posts: 878
|
Post by merkin on Jan 13, 2012 13:14:00 GMT 1
we may meet up in Valencia if he can be arsed to go
|
|
|
|
Post by Gag_N_Bone_Man on Jan 13, 2012 13:48:35 GMT 1
Not as simple an issue as the OP would have think.
1. The NHS has used a great many of these implants
2. Can it be proven that the private companies conducted due diligence in checking that the products were fit for purpose, legal, safe and do on?
3. Who allowed these products to be sold and marketed in the UK? with medical issues, a regulatory body like NICE would have to have licened the products. NICE are a governement run organisation, forming part of the NHS.
I also resent the vanity argument, to a point. Ultimately if a widespread number of people have effctively been "conned", I like the fact that we live in a society where our government (by the people, for the people etc) will help those people.
Different example:
Bloke has vasectomy on NHS.
Bloke experiences severe pain and discomfort for months/years. Having researched it , finds that only a reversal will alleiate symptoms.
Bloke gets told he has to go private, as the vasectomy was carried out correctly, and this is just a side effect, so has to pay £2 - £3k privately.
This happens regularly. Why shouldn;t this be available on the NHS?
Not a hugely different argument - an elective surgery, undertaken for what cold be reasons of convenience (i.e. to improve one's sex life - breast implants could arguably be acheive same benefit), painful outcome - why not use our magnificent NHS to cover the cost?
|
|
merkin
Darren Bullock Terrier
Posts: 878
|
Post by merkin on Jan 13, 2012 15:18:45 GMT 1
i don't think you would get the go ahead from your GP for a vasectomy to improve your sex life in the same way they probably wouldn't let a bird get bigger paps just so she can entice more blokes to spazz all over them.
|
|
|
|
Post by ToyBoy on Jan 13, 2012 15:35:46 GMT 1
why the fuck should the government cover it for private patients? and why should the private companies cover it unless they provided life time guarentees. these vain slags should cough up again. can anyone convince me differently... Vain slags! I'm liking that!  Who was the Governmental Numpty that said that the Government would only fund the cases where the private clinic refused to pay? You can guarantee the private sector doesn't employ such numpty's |
|
brispie
Andy Booth Terrier
[M0:0]
Posts: 3,386
|
Post by brispie on Jan 13, 2012 17:42:57 GMT 1
Talking about apostrophe's Bernie. Did you s'ee that Waterstones have decided to drop their apostophe?
|
|
Bernie
Jimmy Glazzard Terrier
[M0:0]
Posts: 4,322
|
Post by Bernie on Jan 16, 2012 16:38:30 GMT 1
That's it, I'm never coming back. A bookshop of all things
|
|
ab
Andy Booth Terrier
[M0:0]
Posts: 3,001 
|
Post by ab on Jan 17, 2012 15:24:16 GMT 1
The "what about mastectomies" line looks compelling. However, I'd have thought that the campaigners for free NHS removal and replacement would have found someone in that category to make the point. They don't appear to have done so (instead getting bints like the one who was on Look North moaning about how the NHS would remove the leaky one but leave the intact one there and wouldn't replace and she wanted both removed and replaced - that the National HEALTH Service only really needed to address her health issue rather than her desire to continue to have two enhanced jugs escaped her). I'd suggest this is because there aren't any.
Those who were advised during NHS treatment of breast cancer leading to a mastectomy to have implants fitted would have been advised to do so on health grounds and would therefore be almost certain to have had their implants fitted on the NHS. The NHS would then do whatever remedial work necessary. Those who have had mastectomies but did not have a sufficient health reason to make implants medically advised so went private are not really in a different category to other vanity customers. There are plenty of cancer survivors who have managed to get on with their lives post-mastectomy without an implant so it is not invariably medically advised to get an implant.
|
|
