BRB I'm shocked the Mail on line??? - while I guess the it may support your views it also contains all the usual MOL nonsense!! - and could of course be entirely made up (a bit like some of the stuff on twitter at the moment) R
I was actually waiting for some to say that - lol No in truth, someone sent me the link. They also know I despise the MOL but could not resist temptation. You obviously have the knowledge to know also, I never even read the story but just read the opening line...and thought...I wonder what I can do with this link. I'm pleased to have amused.
Well obviously there are always associated risks with any under the knife surgery and those risks increase with major surgery. Apart from the initial risks, we all have two kidneys for a reason, so to lose one will have an impact on the effectiveness of the body. At best the remaining kidney can operate at about 140% but that doesn't cover the lose of the cover completely, so living with one kidney would require some life style changes . These are the damages I speak of.
My brother gave his daughter one of his kidneys about 12 years ago now .... He has had no problems what so ever But as you say i would probably only do that for one of my children
Sorry BSG and with respect that is completely incorrect. Yes, a kidney will operate at a higher capacity if the other kidney fails. Hence the failed kidney needs to be removed but there is absolutely no lifestyle change what so ever for a person with one kidney. Certainly in a young child it may require monitoring for a number of their early years but this is just to ensure everything is as it should be in that early growth. A person with one kidney can drink, eat, smoke, exercise, swim exactly the same as a person with two kidneys. I know someone very close that has survived on one kidney for 26 years and still has no current health issues, along with carrying out ALL the activities I have just mentioned. I'm sorry but your perception of the situation for some reason appears to be very misguided imho.
Fair enough, both Minxy and yourself have had greater knowledge of such scenarios than myself. I was lead to believe that the lifestyle changes were nessecary after the donation, by which I mean you can still drink, smoke etc but only to moderation. Thinking back I am not 100% sure where this infomation came from so I can admit there may be flaws in my understanding, but everyday is a school day! Still not sure I would just donate a kidney to someone I didn't know though, but they have the lot once I am brown bread.
BSG - No problem fella. I think what kicked me off initially was that Cllr who knows nothing about me but still tries to blindly defend the opt out scheme without any attempt of understanding how and why my opinion comes about. This idea just erodes everything that I was open minded about but to bring legislation in like this just goes completely against my principles and all the fear I have had for many years well documented, about government control. My views are not blind one's. I've been up and seen the many kids in Guys Hospital - I think it was Dickens Ward with all the mum's and dad's lovingly supporting their children at such an early life. I have also made gifts to that ward. I've also been inside St Thomas's hospital in the adult heart ward, where many people sadly will see their dying day. So I certainly don't need any education from our interfering government on what this is all about.
I've been offline for a couple of days - attending a family funeral - whilst at the same time another member of family died. I am also struggling to prevent another elderly member of family from placing herself in a position of risk to her wellbeing that I might as well not buy her a Christmas card until at least the 24th., December ! SO - Thanks for continuing in the morbid mood - I note that the woman in brb's MOL link successfully committed suicide a little while later - Oh happy days ! I was saved from total depression by the news of Cody McDonald. I will catch up on threads, posts etc and then see if I can get at you all with some 'neighbourly' good humour.
Dunmihedin ! Over the last few days I've had to visit a house in a long, fairly well built up road, where nearly every house had a name - not a number. Some of the houses definitely did not have anything to identify them ! Whilst this is not high on my list of pet hates - it is frustrating - driving & not looking at the road ahead is not good. It doesn't help if the nameplate is hidden behind overgrown foliage. I tried to phone for a better reference point -but the call went straight to answerphone. ( perhaps they knew I was coming ). What was most annoying was that the house was tucked down a small lane, in between and behind two of the 'unnamed' houses in the road - and the nameplate for the house I was visiting had been on a wooden post that had broken and was being repaired ! - by the time I found the house it was almost time to go home again. What is the point of a house name - apart from, perhaps, Satis House ! ( who can work out that without Googling ?) There is a road near me where there is No. 1 at both ends of the street - owing to some sort of numbering dispute between the occupants ! - the postman must love it !
Dishonesty in sport has raised it's 'ugly' head. Stuart Broad was quite clearly caught by the Australian fielders - but didn't walk because the umpire did not give him 'out.' Should he have just owned up and walked ? I'm all for honesty - but ( and being honest ) - I'm not sure that I would have walked if it was me.... cue the call for me to be labelled a hypocrite ! but Is this any different to a football referee not awarding a goal because he didn't see the ball cross the line - when was the last time that a goalkeeper told the referee that he should signal a goal ? - how many times have we seen a clear handball / shirt pulling / jostling etc by Gills defenders in the penalty area and everyone kept quiet ? I suppose it could be considered that these things even themselves out ( I'm not so sure on that point ) - so perhaps we should just accept that the referee / umpire has sole responsibility to award goals etc ..... It just stinks when you're on the receiving end.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23381448 You don't have to read all the article to understand that women get a raw deal in the middle east - but if you do read it, you might be as surprised as me to see that when it comes to rape a successful conviction depends on a confession or 4 adult male winesses - what do they think it is ? - a spectator sport ? When it comes to matters of human rights in the UAE, women are literally buggered On the bright side - at least you can become rich without having to do anything http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23373186
What the hell happened to summer? I left deepest, darkest Yorkshire where the temperature was 30+ and bright sunshine to this; dull and overcast. Sort it out Kent!
Completely and utterly disgraceful and demonstrates the many issues with the world, while our government is more concerned with wrapping our citizens up in cotton wool in an ever interfering regime. I think it goes without saying my stance on human rights. I probably have more arguments about that then any other topic. One thing concerns me with the story from the BBC though. As soon has I saw the BBC article the first thing I was tending to find myself doing was trying to gather the truth between the lines. Eventually after just a few minutes, I realised this woman is not actually in prison but secured on conditional release since being charged. The opening paragraph tends to mislead... 'A Norwegian woman has spoken out about the 16-month prison sentence she received in Dubai after reporting a rape incident to police'. Still a complete injustice but to help in gathering the truth of human rights, we need to ensure journalists take the sensationalism out of the story, it took nearly eleven paragraphs to get a clear indication of the woman's actual plight in regards to her freedom. While we fight for the human rights of people, what does our government do in ensuring pressure on these countries that so breach them. Although some may argue cases where we breach their human rights in this country and they are never reported. I note during the story the BBC highlighted two other previous mis-justices since 2008 - I wonder during that same five year period, how many serious cases of mis-justice have been carried out in this country. Sorry not trying to generalise the the woman's story but just expressing my continued thoughts on the BBC because we all know how they 'fix'd' things for many young people over decades within there institute. As with all media reporting...
