chris mason
|
posted on 31/12/11 at 10:16 PM |
|
|
Breast Implants
Thought that might get your attention
Am i missing something here?
40,000 Uk women have had the PIP breast implants, they probably chose them because they were cheaper than other brands, and now it turns out they
could be dodgy, they want the goverment (IE, you and me) to pay for them to be removed!
They found the money to have them fitted, now they can find the money to have them removed.
I'm getting older and things like this annoy me, knowing that my hard earned contribution to the UK is being wasted on useless things, and i
don't blame the Conversatives, having never voted in my life, due to the belief that they are all out for what they can get, i'm comming
round to a conservative way of thinking, and i will probably vote for them at the next election
Happy New Year
Victor M
|
|
|
JoelP
|
posted on 31/12/11 at 10:33 PM |
|
|
This thread is pointless without pictures
|
|
spiderman
|
posted on 31/12/11 at 10:44 PM |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by chris mason
Thought that might get your attention
Am i missing something here?
40,000 Uk women have had the PIP breast implants, they probably chose them because they were cheaper than other brands, and now it turns out they
could be dodgy, they want the goverment (IE, you and me) to pay for them to be removed!
They found the money to have them fitted, now they can find the money to have them removed.
I'm getting older and things like this annoy me, knowing that my hard earned contribution to the UK is being wasted on useless things, and i
don't blame the Conversatives, having never voted in my life, due to the belief that they are all out for what they can get, i'm comming
round to a conservative way of thinking, and i will probably vote for them at the next election
Happy New Year
Victor M
Totally agree with the idiots having to pay to have them removed, they could then sue the manufactures for compensation as long as they do not expect
us to pay for that through legal aid. The same applys for tatto removal, self inflicted injury through stupidity. Only exception I would be happy to
pay for is those who had implants for medical reasons such as masectomy or deformed body, not for those who want to atract
"Celebrities/footballers and the like. Beauty as we all know comes from within, attractivness does not make you beautiful. Besides a couple of
inflated ballons in my opinion due not make you attractive just make you look ridiculous and shallow.
Money can be better used to help those out of work who are looking for meaningful employment. I feel for those people who want to contribute to
helping this country get back on its feet but are struggling, I have been there myself and It can be sole destroying asking for help only to see all
the money and assistance going to those who do not deserve it. Happily been back in employment for 10 years+.
End of Rant.
Happy and Prosperous New year to you all.
Spider
|
|
JoelP
|
posted on 31/12/11 at 10:52 PM |
|
|
good point spiderman, i think the manufacture is bankrupt but the clinics surely must be liable? Supplying dodgy goods?
|
|
Ninehigh
|
posted on 31/12/11 at 10:54 PM |
|
|
Actually that's a good point, but they could do the payments bit by bit though... I mean would you like to have a toxic testicle inside you
until you save up £6k?
|
|
TAZZMAXX
|
posted on 31/12/11 at 10:57 PM |
|
|
Don't all breast implants have to be replaced every 10 years anyway? That would mean that most women who could've afforded them in the
first place may either have to have them removed or replaced courtesy of the NHS. Also a bit of a pee take.
I do agree though, some photos of pneumatic bimbo blond wimmin may make the discussion a bit more interesting!
|
|
scootz
|
posted on 31/12/11 at 10:59 PM |
|
|
I can see where you're coming from guys and I suppose I agree, but I can't help but think there are loads of folk out there who've
also caused serious harm to their own health through gluttony, drink, drugs and smoking, yet the NHS bails them out ad infinitum to the tune of
billions!
I also guess that the cost to remove these implants will be a drop in the ocean compared to the treatment of a number of subsequent cancers caused by
inaction.
But then I could be wrong... I frequently am!
It's Evolution Baby!
|
|
scootz
|
posted on 31/12/11 at 11:02 PM |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by TAZZMAXX
I do agree though, some photos of pneumatic bimbo blond wimmin may make the discussion a bit more interesting!
I must be in the minority on this one as I find nothing even remotely sexy about fake boobies. For me, it's the equivalent of looking at an
undressed tailors dummy, or an inflatable-lady!
It's Evolution Baby!
|
|
MEERKAT
|
posted on 31/12/11 at 11:26 PM |
|
|
Lets put this in he terms we all can relate to
you buy new wheels and tires from a french company (government licensed the wheels as fit for purpose) to make your car look better then the wheels
fail at high speed making you crash the car. The French company goes bust so who do you go to for spoiling your fun?
"To alcohol, the cause and solution to all of life's problems"
- Homer J Simpson
|
|
MikeRJ
|
posted on 31/12/11 at 11:28 PM |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by scootz
I also guess that the cost to remove these implants will be a drop in the ocean compared to the treatment of a number of subsequent cancers caused by
inaction.
There is apparently no increase in cancer risk over and above the slight increase that goes with all implants.
|
|
scootz
|
posted on 31/12/11 at 11:30 PM |
|
|
... told you I was frequently wrong! Crikey... that means I was right!
It's Evolution Baby!
|
|
owelly
|
posted on 1/1/12 at 12:04 AM |
|
|
I once spent three hours in casualty with Miss O who was dribbling blood all over the place. The waiting room was full with broken sports folk! It was
a saturday around midday and the staff were utterly overwhelmed by the amount of folks who were coming in. Just about every sort of sport was
represented but mainly rugby, football and hockeyists.
So if all these folks want to go and hurt themselves, why should I be paying for them to be fixed! Likewise, why should I pay for smokers to be fixed
(the amout spent on remedy far outweighs the revenue from tobacco taxes)?
But I'm a fatty and if I get a fat-illness, I'd rather like to be fixed please.....
http://www.ppcmag.co.uk
|
|
austin man
|
posted on 1/1/12 at 12:21 AM |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by scootz
quote: Originally posted by TAZZMAXX
I do agree though, some photos of pneumatic bimbo blond wimmin may make the discussion a bit more interesting!
I must be in the minority on this one as I find nothing even remotely sexy about fake boobies. For me, it's the equivalent of looking at an
undressed tailors dummy, or an inflatable-lady!
Im with you Scootz, them falsies are like trying to make a Robin Hood Look like a Catering Van
Life is like a bowl of fruit, funny how all the weird looking ones are left alone
|
|
designer
|
posted on 1/1/12 at 12:26 AM |
|
|
Apparently 95% of the 40,000 were done private so the National Health should not touch them.
|
|
dave
|
posted on 1/1/12 at 02:29 AM |
|
|
Agree and disagree, why should the govt pay for the removal of the fake boobies,however I smoke so as far as I'm concerned when the time comes
for me needing Cancer and/or other respitory treatments the NHS/Govt can pick up the bill thank you very much.
|
|
Dusty
|
posted on 1/1/12 at 03:00 AM |
|
|
All these deluded women are going to be suing someone and making thousands. If, after all the evidence is weighed up, the NHS advises they should be
removed it should be on a 'Op now, pay up when the cash comes through' basis.
And has the NHS got the resources, surgeons, time to take out 80,000 implants without cancelling most work for genuinely sick people for the next
year?
|
|
trikerneil
|
posted on 1/1/12 at 05:27 AM |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by owelly
(the amout spent on remedy far outweighs the revenue from tobacco taxes)
Do you have any figures to back that statement up?
Neil
ACE Cafe - Just say No.
|
|
owelly
|
posted on 1/1/12 at 06:53 AM |
|
|
I did have figures to back-up my statement.....in 1995 when my other half did a paper on it for her degree!!
http://www.ppcmag.co.uk
|
|
Richard Quinn
|
posted on 1/1/12 at 08:37 AM |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by austin man
quote: Originally posted by scootz
quote: Originally posted by TAZZMAXX
I do agree though, some photos of pneumatic bimbo blond wimmin may make the discussion a bit more interesting!
I must be in the minority on this one as I find nothing even remotely sexy about fake boobies. For me, it's the equivalent of looking at an
undressed tailors dummy, or an inflatable-lady!
Im with you Scootz, them falsies are like trying to make a Robin Hood Look like a Catering Van
Aren't Catering Vans one of the smallest?
|
|
bobinspain
|
posted on 1/1/12 at 09:46 AM |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by austin man
quote: Originally posted by scootz
quote: Originally posted by TAZZMAXX
I do agree though, some photos of pneumatic bimbo blond wimmin may make the discussion a bit more interesting!
I must be in the minority on this one as I find nothing even remotely sexy about fake boobies. For me, it's the equivalent of looking at an
undressed tailors dummy, or an inflatable-lady!
Im with you Scootz, them falsies are like trying to make a Robin Hood Look like a Catering Van
"Inflatable lady," Scott?
Did you hear the one about the bloke who goes into the sex-shop to buy life-sze doll.
Chap behind the counter offers him a 'Muslim' doll.
Customer say's "what's so special about that then?"
Shop owner says, "well they blow themselves up."
Boom-boom! (in all senses).
|
|
iank
|
posted on 1/1/12 at 09:56 AM |
|
|
The reason the NHS is considering paying is partly due to the crap publicity of the French govt agreeing to pay if we don't (imagine the red top
headlines of the first woman to get cancer while having those implants).
But mainly due to the fact the company that made them had declared itself bankrupt before the announcement so there is no company that can be sued.
On the tobacco tax vs treatment cost. I can quite believe it, but was once told if you took into account the overall reduction in pension/benefit
payments from the average reduced life expectancy it worked out about evens - which is a cynical calculation if it's true and were ever made by
one of our glorious leaders.
--
Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience.
Anonymous
|
|
TheGiantTribble
|
posted on 1/1/12 at 10:35 AM |
|
|
Quite argree with if the women in question had it done private they should sort it not the NHS
But...actualy big but...BUT
Errrrr since it's a French company and Fance like us is part of the EEC, shouldn't there be some sort of payment for the treatments from
the EEC instead?
Or does the money only flow in one direction..London to Berlin not the other way round
|
|
jollygreengiant
|
posted on 1/1/12 at 10:42 AM |
|
|
Just to stir things up a bit.
So in the OP's original statement then (and to a degeree some of the later posters), does this general dengration of women and implants STILL
apply to those who were unfortunate enough to require breast reconstruction after suffering single or double mastectomy after cancer treatment or for
some other accidental reason then.
I pesonally think that some of you 'lads' out there should be a little careful with some of your statements.
Just my humble opinion, as I have known a few ladies who had this sort of treatment. God bless you ladies, and lads, just be glad that YOU are
unlikely to suffer what the ladies sometimes have to.
JGG
Beware of the Goldfish in the tulip mines. The ONLY defence against them is smoking peanut butter sandwiches.
|
|
Richard Quinn
|
posted on 1/1/12 at 11:08 AM |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by TheGiantTribble
But...actualy big but...BUT
Let's try to stick to the topic
|
|
bobinspain
|
posted on 1/1/12 at 11:26 AM |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by jollygreengiant
Just to stir things up a bit.
So in the OP's original statement then (and to a degeree some of the later posters), does this general dengration of women and implants STILL
apply to those who were unfortunate enough to require breast reconstruction after suffering single or double mastectomy after cancer treatment or for
some other accidental reason then.
I pesonally think that some of you 'lads' out there should be a little careful with some of your statements.
Just my humble opinion, as I have known a few ladies who had this sort of treatment. God bless you ladies, and lads, just be glad that YOU are
unlikely to suffer what the ladies sometimes have to.
JGG
A bit more light and a bit less heat.
There's a good article in the Telegraph which puts a number on those requiring reconstructive surgery as opposed to breast enhancement for
purely cosmetic/aesthetic/vanity reasons. It quotes 'at least 3,000.' The article goes on to say (and is endorsed by the majority of
posters) that breast augmentation without a sound clinical reason should be treated in the same way as tattoo removal, i.e. a conscious decision to
'decorate' ones body as a 17 yr old, shouldn't result in the taxpayer stumping up the cost of removal when the wearer decides it was
a bad decision ten years later.
Fair point, well made I think.
|
|