|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: From TICTH - The dozy chav
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
seekingsister: The point of the NHS is choice?
It should be, at least to a degree.
quote:
seekingsister: Look at the damage stories like this do to trust in the NHS. If you Google this lady's name you see articles saying "Why did she get a boob job when my son is going to die of cancer?"
The NHS should base its treatment decisions on the outrage it would generate on the internet ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Matt Black
Shipmate
# 2210
|
Posted
And you don't think the views of those who help pay for the NHS' treatment are relevant? ![[Disappointed]](graemlins/disappointed.gif)
--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)
Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
Matt Black: And you don't think the views of those who help pay for the NHS' treatment are relevant?
I'm sorry, I don't have time for false dichotomies like this one.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Tubbs:
The figure that the DM is getting outraged out - OMG she had a £4,000 op on the NHS - is pretty much what it would have cost to go private.
Yes, but then we wouldn't have been paying for it.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
Ok, why is it acceptable to do cosmetic surgery for the non-functional consequences of a cleft lip and palate, or post mastectomy, or a malformed but functional penis, but not for breasts that have not grown. We'd do surgery for malformed earlobes or a hairy birth mark.
What exactly is your issue, her career choice afterwards ?
Secondary sexual characteristics are a normal part of body growth. In the same way, we'd treat alopecia if we could - because - normally you have hair.
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
Cost between a B or DD should be negligible, so that is rubbish.
We've determined that getting implants can be done for positive, healthy reasons.
So why are we outraged again?
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
mark_in_manchester
not waving, but...
# 15978
|
Posted
Reminds me a little of the episode of 'Embarrassing Bodies' I found myself semi-conscious in front of the other night, on telly.
To generalise - poor, not-very-bright people who might be a bit greedy or a bit desperate and are certainly naive concerning the media - are easy prey for turning into fodder to sell advertising space. This goes as much for the outrage porn of the Heil as it does for the 'what's this weird goo leaking from my ass' titillo-edu-shtick of EB.
I guess rich, not-very-bright people who might be a bit greedy and are naive concerning the media could at least hire Max Clifford to limit their personal PR disaster. Or at least, that used to be the case ![[Devil]](graemlins/devil.gif)
--------------------
"We are punished by our sins, not for them" - Elbert Hubbard
(so good, I wanted to see it after my posts and not only after those of shipmate JBohn from whom I stole it)
Posts: 1596 | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink:
Ok, why is it acceptable to do cosmetic surgery for the non-functional consequences of a cleft lip and palate, or post mastectomy, or a malformed but functional penis, but not for breasts that have not grown. We'd do surgery for malformed earlobes or a hairy birth mark.
Is standard cleft lip and palate surgery done to make the person have the lips and jawline of Angelina Jolie? I suspect not.
I still am wondering what is wrong with expecting the NHS to have an average range of breast size for women based on height and weight and propose that as standard in these situations.
Certainly when I fight with my GP over one of my prescriptions (I believe the dose is too low and I have side effects) I'm told that for my height and weight that's the dose I'm meant to have. But for boobs it's a free-for-all?
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tubbs
Miss Congeniality
# 440
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by Tubbs:
The figure that the DM is getting outraged out - OMG she had a £4,000 op on the NHS - is pretty much what it would have cost to go private.
Yes, but then we wouldn't have been paying for it.
The OP was on the NHS because she had a medical problem that needed to be treated. The treatment was a breast op. Are you and Seeking Sister saying that someone whose breasts haven't developed "normally" because of hormone imbalances or bone deformaties shouldn't get treatment at all? Are we rationing treatment on the basis of "acceptablity" - of either the treatment or the person - now as well as cost?!
Tubbs
[ 01. October 2014, 16:26: Message edited by: Tubbs ]
--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am
Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
Cost between a B or DD should be negligible, so that is rubbish.
We've determined that getting implants can be done for positive, healthy reasons.
So why are we outraged again?
It makes people lose trust in the NHS's decision making, because there are a lot of people waiting for essential treatments who feel quite bitter to hear stories like this.
That is in my view enough of a reason to review the practices on this and potentially other cosmetic procedures that are paid for with tax money.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
seekingsister: I still am wondering what is wrong with expecting the NHS to have an average range of breast size for women based on height and weight and propose that as standard in these situations.
What's wrong with this is that you don't get to determine someone else's treatment. You don't get to impose on other people the cup size that you happen to find 'standard'. You don't get to choose for them.
quote:
seekingsister: Certainly when I fight with my GP over one of my prescriptions (I believe the dose is too low and I have side effects) I'm told that for my height and weight that's the dose I'm meant to have. But for boobs it's a free-for-all?
As long as there is a medical need for the operation and there are no contra-indications against this cup size, yes. I don't see why not.
In your example you're poisoning the well. When your GP refuses to prescribe a higher or lower dose to you, it's usually because there are medical reasons against it. I have seen no evidence that there are medical reasons against Ms. Cunningham having this cup size. You assume there are, but that means nothing to me. You're not her doctor.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
Cosmetic repairs are done for cleft lip and palate, in addition to functional surgery, - I am not sure what you are suggesting, surgeons should make their nose slightly wonky so they don't get above themselves ?
No effort or investment should go into prosthetics, they should be functional but obviously fake ?
Post chemo wigs should be obvious ? Post-mastectomy repair shouldn't be offered because it is not medically necessary - and if it is they should be offered a standard size, preferably not well enough done to be be use din modelling ?
[ 01. October 2014, 16:32: Message edited by: Doublethink ]
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
I continue to be disturbed at the way a flat chest (whether or not congenital) is treated as the same sort of physical deformity as a cleft palate or as equivalent to the replacement of a body part that was removed as part of cancer treatment, by some on this thread.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Matt Black
Shipmate
# 2210
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
quote:
Matt Black: And you don't think the views of those who help pay for the NHS' treatment are relevant?
I'm sorry, I don't have time for false dichotomies like this one.
I'm sorry you're so dismissive of the views of others whose loved ones are dying of cancer because NICE have decreed in their infinite wisdom that their treatment should be withheld and yet have to see their taxes spent on boob-jobs. It's about prioritising of resources and need, surely?
--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)
Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
seekingsister: I continue to be disturbed at the way a flat chest (whether or not congenital) is treated as the same sort of physical deformity as a cleft palate or as equivalent to the replacement of a body part that was removed as part of cancer treatment, by some on this thread.
Just to make sure, I haven't made this comparison.
In this discussion, I've been making these assumptions:- There is a medical reason for having a breast operation.
- The cost difference between different cup sizes is insignificant.
- There are no medical contra-indications against the requested cup size.
Under these conditions, I don't see a reason why the patient shouldn't be allowed to choose.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
Right, 'cause that is how it really works.ETA: response to MB
[ 01. October 2014, 16:46: Message edited by: lilBuddha ]
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Matt Black
Shipmate
# 2210
|
Posted
I'm questioning the validity of the operation in this instance, not merely its...er...size: in an era of ever-scarcer resources, when people are being turned down for life-saving medical treatment on the grounds of - let's be honest, dress it up however you like it - cost, I would question the ethics of such a procedure on the NHS.
[ETA - to LB -then explain how it does 'work', cos I ain't seein' it]
[ 01. October 2014, 16:49: Message edited by: Matt Black ]
--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)
Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
Matt Black: I'm sorry you're so dismissive of the views of others whose loved ones are dying of cancer because NICE have decreed in their infinite wisdom that their treatment should be withheld and yet have to see their taxes spent on boob-jobs. It's about prioritising of resources and need, surely?
I'm not dismissive of the views of people whose loved ones are dying of cancer, and I find your suggestion that I have been offensive. Within this discussion I have assumed that there is an established medical need for a breast operation. I'm not interested in a discussion about prioritization.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Matt Black
Shipmate
# 2210
|
Posted
I refer you to your post at the top of the page.
--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)
Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
Matt Black: I refer you to your post at the top of the page.
I'm familiar with this post, thank you.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Matt Black
Shipmate
# 2210
|
Posted
Then explain what you meant by this:
quote:
quote:
seekingsister: Look at the damage stories like this do to trust in the NHS. If you Google this lady's name you see articles saying "Why did she get a boob job when my son is going to die of cancer?"
The NHS should base its treatment decisions on the outrage it would generate on the internet [Roll Eyes]
, if not being 'dismissive of the views of those whose loved ones are dying of cancer'?
[ETA - Host comment noted; I don't particularly want to take it to Hell but would like Le Roc to clarify what was meant by the above]
[ 01. October 2014, 16:56: Message edited by: Matt Black ]
--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)
Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
The basis of my discussion is this. I assume that:
- There is a medical reason for having a breast operation, enough for the NHS to approve this operation.
- The cost difference between different cup sizes is insignificant.
- There are no medical contra-indications against the requested cup size.
Under these assumptions, I asked seekingsister on what basis she wanted to withhold the choice for the patient. The basis she gave for withholding this choice (here) is that giving her this choice would cause outrage over the internet, including people who have relatives suffering from cancer.
As much I respect people who are in this situation (I've been in this situation myself), I don't believe that their collective opinion as expressed over the internet is a sufficient basis for withholding the choice for a patient.
Of course, within this discussion you may challenge my assumption 1, but that's not really a discussion I'm interested in.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331
|
Posted
Matt: quote:
I'm sorry you're so dismissive of the views of others whose loved ones are dying of cancer because NICE have decreed in their infinite wisdom that their treatment should be withheld and yet have to see their taxes spent on boob-jobs. It's about prioritising of resources and need, surely?
Yes. Yes, it is, which is why you can't just waltz into your GP's surgery and say you're fed up with your boobs and expect to get them resculpted to your specifications on the NHS, no questions asked. Like Doc Tor, I am willing to believe that whatever treatment this woman had met the criteria for NHS funding and I don't see what her subsequent career has to do with it. Doctors are there to cure you; what you do when you've been restored to health is up to you. Or are you suggesting that we should only cure people whose lifestyle you approve of?
Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Matt Black
Shipmate
# 2210
|
Posted
OK, thx, I understand what you're saying now; I'm just not sure about #1. Pax vobiscum.
[cp with Jane - I accept that 'bad cases don't make good law', but that doesn't alter my concerns that this may very well be a bad case. Not because of her lifestyle, but because cases like this serve, as Seeking Sister has said, to discredit and undermine the NHS in the eyes of many who help pay for it. And, no, I'm not a doctor so, no, my opinion doesn't and shouldn't carry anywhere near the weight that that of a medic does and should, but I am a taxpayer who wants to see the NHS thrive and I think that gives me a right to have some kind of opinon.]
[ 01. October 2014, 17:10: Message edited by: Matt Black ]
--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)
Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
Under these assumptions, I asked seekingsister on what basis she wanted to withhold the choice for the patient. The basis she gave for withholding this choice (here) is that giving her this choice would cause outrage over the internet, including people who have relatives suffering from cancer.
You keep saying "internet" as if it matters. I am sure the outrage extends to the actual lives of the people who happen to be featured in newspapers, which have websites that are on the internet.
My opinion is that if the NHS offers augmentation to "repair" flat chests caused by congenital reasons, it should offer to do so within guidelines that are based on an average size for a woman within certain parameters.
Therefore I disagree with the treatment offered to Miss Cunningham and anyone else who has received it. Had she come out with a B/C cup not only would I be OK with it, it wouldn't be in the press because there's no news story in such an outcome in the first place.
This is my opinion and so I am not going to be able to convince you of it, but I wish for it to be clear so that people can actually evaluate it fairly.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
Like Doc Tor, I am willing to believe that whatever treatment this woman had met the criteria for NHS funding and I don't see what her subsequent career has to do with it.
Some of us are questioning the NHS' position entirely. Just because it met the criteria, doesn't mean the criteria themselves are appropriate.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
Matt,
"Mum died of cancer because Josie got a boob job" is a lovely Mail headline, but rarely are things so clear cut.
Who was denied? What were the odds of survial after procedure? And for how long?
Your wording makes it sound like "Young child denied guaranteed long life" when it is often "85 year old denied 3 additional months after rejection of 4th treatment".
Yes, it is about prioritising, but not necessarily in the manner you seem to imply.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
Actually, for me, a case like this doesn't undermine the NHS. In fact, I would say that it is in the spirit of the NHS; that patients are given some choice over their treatment. The fact that this lady has been given a hard time in the tabloids does not really impress me.
[ 01. October 2014, 17:23: Message edited by: quetzalcoatl ]
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
Matt Black: OK, thx, I understand what you're saying now; I'm just not sure about #1.
I know too little about this case and I'm not a doctor, so I can't comment on #1. Vobiscum pax.
quote:
seekingsister: My opinion is that if the NHS offers augmentation to "repair" flat chests caused by congenital reasons, it should offer to do so within guidelines that are based on an average size for a woman within certain parameters.
You're entitled to your opinion, but you haven't given me a good reason of why the NHS should stay within these guidelines.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Twilight
Puddleglum's sister
# 2832
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
I continue to be disturbed at the way a flat chest (whether or not congenital) is treated as the same sort of physical deformity as a cleft palate or as equivalent to the replacement of a body part that was removed as part of cancer treatment, by some on this thread.
That's what bothers me, too. It's an example of our medical profession going along with a cultural slant that says small breasts are abnormal and huge boobs on a smallish body are normal.
I'm a "D" cup myself and don't want to offend any larger women but I wasn't a "D" when I was a thin young woman, really large sizes usually come with increases in weight and age. I was watching a pre-code 1930's film the other day and during a big production number about thirty young show girls were doing a mermaid thing with nothing above the waist but little shells they were holding. And I mean very little shells. I doubt if there was a "B" cup in the bunch. That's what we used to expect pretty young girls to look like and now plastic surgeons and fashion have taught us to think it's really possible to have very low body fat and very large breasts at the same time. Possible maybe, but certainly rare.
I don't think serious doctors should be a party to this fad. Outsize breasts can cause problems of their own, back aches, difficulty detecting breast cancer, to name a few. Would they surgically implant a big red bulb on the end of a man's nose because he said he wanted work as a clown? He can get that done privately just as some people are having horns implanted for shock value, but I would think NHS doctors would be less into extreme fashion and more about the, "first do no harm," bit.
Posts: 6817 | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
I've given a reason, you just don't like it. I said large breasts cause back ache, your answer is "I trust the doctors." Mine is a fact, yours is an opinion.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
seekingsister: I've given a reason, you just don't like it. I said large breasts cause back ache, your answer is "I trust the doctors." Mine is a fact, yours is an opinion.
No, it isn't a fact that the cup size Ms. Cunningham has been given will cause her back aches or other medical problems. Not at all. That's very much your opinion, and one you have based on absolutely nothing.
[ 01. October 2014, 18:01: Message edited by: LeRoc ]
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331
|
Posted
seekingsister: quote:
Some of us are questioning the NHS' position entirely. Just because it met the criteria, doesn't mean the criteria themselves are appropriate.
So far the only reasons you've given for this opinion of yours are (a) "It's unnatural to have boobs that size" and (b) "Anyone with boobs that size gets backache."
Well, with all due respect to you and Twilight, there are women around whose boobs are naturally bigger than a C cup. Some of us even manage to avoid the curse of backache. It's hardly our fault that the current ideal of female beauty is a kind of stick figure with a couple of melons bolted to her chest. Blame Barbie, if it makes you feel better.
And if a treatment is offered (by any doctor) then the patient should have some say in how it will proceed. Anything else would be unethical.
Oh, and what quetzalcoatl said.
Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
quote:
seekingsister: I've given a reason, you just don't like it. I said large breasts cause back ache, your answer is "I trust the doctors." Mine is a fact, yours is an opinion.
No, it isn't a fact that the cup size Ms. Cunningham has been given will cause her back aches or other medical problems. Not at all. That's very much your opinion, and one you have based on absolutely nothing.
We don't know yet. But as breast implants are typically good for 10-15 years before needing additional surgery, her doctors will know the impact then. And we'll be paying for that too.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
seekingsister:
Well, with all due respect to you and Twilight, there are women around whose boobs are naturally bigger than a C cup. Some of us even manage to avoid the curse of backache. It's hardly our fault that the current ideal of female beauty is a kind of stick figure with a couple of melons bolted to her chest. Blame Barbie, if it makes you feel better.
And if a treatment is offered (by any doctor) then the patient should have some say in how it will proceed. Anything else would be unethical.
Oh, and what quetzalcoatl said.
Jane you might want to read upthread. I'm a D. I'm also very tall and in proportion. If they were on my much smaller mother she'd fall forward. And I get older honestly I'd rather less than more.
I disagree in principle with NHS-funded augmentation beyond they bounds of average size. And you're not going to convince me otherwise.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
seekingsister: We don't know yet.
So, by your own admission you don't know whether these implants will cause her back aches or not. Yet you have already disapproved of the doctors' decision to give her these implants.
quote:
seekingsister: But as breast implants are typically good for 10-15 years before needing additional surgery, her doctors will know the impact then. And we'll be paying for that too.
We already agreed on the assumption that there is a medical need for her to have implants. As I understand it, she will need this additional surgery regardless of the implant size. So, this is rather irrelevant.
quote:
seekingsister: I disagree in principle with NHS-funded augmentation beyond they bounds of average size. And you're not going to convince me otherwise.
As I've said before, you have a right to disagree with it. You just don't have any good arguments for it.
[ 01. October 2014, 19:27: Message edited by: LeRoc ]
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
I continue to be disturbed at the way a flat chest (whether or not congenital) is treated as the same sort of physical deformity as a cleft palate or as equivalent to the replacement of a body part that was removed as part of cancer treatment, by some on this thread.
Why ? Most human characteristics are normally distributed. If your IQ was more than two standard deviations from the norm, you'd probably be defined as having a learning disability, two standard deviations above and you might be described as a genius. If a child falls too far off the curve in terms of their height, we give them growth hormone. Too tall and we worry about that too.
The health service is designed to do key things, treat ill health and prevent ill health.
Essentially, cosmetic work on people who are born looking significantly different from most people - at their request - is designed to prevent the long term deterioration in mental health.
Depression and social anxiety can be debilitating conditions that cost, far, far more than £4000 to treat over the long term.
The NHS itself says this.
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
seekingsister:
Well, with all due respect to you and Twilight, there are women around whose boobs are naturally bigger than a C cup. Some of us even manage to avoid the curse of backache. It's hardly our fault that the current ideal of female beauty is a kind of stick figure with a couple of melons bolted to her chest. Blame Barbie, if it makes you feel better.
And if a treatment is offered (by any doctor) then the patient should have some say in how it will proceed. Anything else would be unethical.
Oh, and what quetzalcoatl said.
Jane you might want to read upthread. I'm a D. I'm also very tall and in proportion. If they were on my much smaller mother she'd fall forward. And I get older honestly I'd rather less than more.
I disagree in principle with NHS-funded augmentation beyond they bounds of average size. And you're not going to convince me otherwise.
The UK average bra size in 2012 was 34DD
[ 01. October 2014, 19:36: Message edited by: Doublethink ]
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink:
The UK average bra size in 2012 was 34DD
And I repeatedly said average within height and weight parameters. The average UK woman is also overweight bordering on obese, hence the bra size.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
And you have some sort of stats on this ? Breast size is not in some sort of totally linear correlation with height and weight.
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
Oh look, information.
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Firenze
Ordinary decent pagan
# 619
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
The average UK woman is also overweight bordering on obese, hence the bra size.
Whereas US women are becoming ever more - taller, bigger and fatter apparently.
Posts: 17302 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink:
And you have some sort of stats on this ? Breast size is not in some sort of totally linear correlation with height and weight.
Do you know what "average" means? Doctors have height and weight charts to see if children are under developing. I've certainly had my chest measured. So let's make the same chart.
What is the typical bra size for a 5'5 woman who weighs 150 pounds - 25th - 75th percentile. Let the NHS patient choose her size from this range. Still get the breasts you need.
I think this is pretty reasonable but apparently not based on the reaction here.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
..... if the NHS is proclaiming all flat chested women, "deformed," then it's just one more step in convincing us all that we must exaggerate our bodies beyond nature just to make ourselves acceptable to men.
It angers up my feminist blood.
I sure it does if you want to believe another -everything's the man's fault- feminist myth.
AIUI women do not have cosmetic surgery for the benefit of men, nor do they spend billions on apparell and beautification for the benefit of men. It is done for themselves, one reason being that women compete with each-other on a subliminal level. If the cosmetic industry makes women more 'acceptable to men' then that is a byproduct, it is not the driving force behind it.
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
Why fuss about it? The bigger sizes don't cost more, do they? And as for backache, I'm also a DD to E with no backache. That isn't a guaranteed thing.
And I was large-breasted when I was thin. It's genetics, I think. We have both sizes, C-D cups and A cups, running in our family. (Which causes a certain amount of crankiness between sisters who get the opposite genes)
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tubbs
Miss Congeniality
# 440
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Actually, for me, a case like this doesn't undermine the NHS. In fact, I would say that it is in the spirit of the NHS; that patients are given some choice over their treatment. The fact that this lady has been given a hard time in the tabloids does not really impress me.
Having spent some time working on a fairly poor housing estate, I realised pretty quickly the only difference between me and the people that lived there was geography. Being born at the start of the bus route meant I was encouraged to think I could be more than I knew. Being born at the end of it meant being presented with a fairly limited set of options and not a lot of encouragement.
This woman had a medical problem and the treatment was a breast op. That's pretty standard if the breasts don't develop properly. Properly can mean both not developing or one developing and the other not. We could save money and just give people some socks to stuff into their bra. Cheap ones.
But woman needing medical treatment has medical treatment doesn't really suit the DM's agenda. Chav wastes precious NHS resources that could be given to the more deserving is much more up their street. Two of the DM's obsessions in one article! Win!
Tubbs
--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am
Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink:
And you have some sort of stats on this ? Breast size is not in some sort of totally linear correlation with height and weight.
Do you know what "average" means? Doctors have height and weight charts to see if children are under developing. I've certainly had my chest measured. So let's make the same chart.
What is the typical bra size for a 5'5 woman who weighs 150 pounds - 25th - 75th percentile. Let the NHS patient choose her size from this range. Still get the breasts you need.
I think this is pretty reasonable but apparently not based on the reaction here.
Creating such a chart is going to be a very expensive exercise, because apparently you want it to only include people who fall within a medically approved BMI range, who have no condition effecting their breasts, and it needs to be age normed, height normed and pre-post menopause divided.
We'd also need to adjust for back size. And revise every five to ten years to allow for generational change.
And maybe adjust for physical fitness level, because BMI is a poor guide for people who have a high percentage of muscle.
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tubbs
Miss Congeniality
# 440
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink:
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink:
And you have some sort of stats on this ? Breast size is not in some sort of totally linear correlation with height and weight.
Do you know what "average" means? Doctors have height and weight charts to see if children are under developing. I've certainly had my chest measured. So let's make the same chart.
What is the typical bra size for a 5'5 woman who weighs 150 pounds - 25th - 75th percentile. Let the NHS patient choose her size from this range. Still get the breasts you need.
I think this is pretty reasonable but apparently not based on the reaction here.
Creating such a chart is going to be a very expensive exercise, because apparently you want it to only include people who fall within a medically approved BMI range, who have no condition effecting their breasts, and it needs to be age normed, height normed and pre-post menopause divided.
We'd also need to adjust for back size. And revise every five to ten years to allow for generational change.
And maybe adjust for physical fitness level, because BMI is a poor guide for people who have a high percentage of muscle.
It doesn't take into account that some people have this treatment because one breast has developed normally and the other hasn't. The surgeon would normally make the artificial breast a similar size to the other one. Would that be allowed under this system if the natural breast was considered too big?!
Tubbs
--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am
Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Printer-friendly view
