Ten Years of Trouble -- The Pitiful Story of Robin Bignall's Wasted Life
andrew
Statement by Dr Robin Bignall
In May, 1993, after 25 years with my employer, I was made redundant (with
hundreds of others). The company is estimated to have got rid of 50% of its
world-
wide, permanent, professional staff during 1989-94. I tried to start my own
company
(without success) and applied for about 150 positions within my speciality,
computing, (again, without success – I was 53 at that time.) I had as my sole
income a pension, but also had a court order for alimony and child support to my
ex-wife, which meant that my net income was just a few hundred pounds a year. I
was also provided with cheap medical insurance from my employer as the only
perk of accepting early retirement as an alternative to being dismissed. It
expires
next March 31st, as I have reached my employer’s normal retirement age.
At the same time my daughter was pregnant with our baby, that resulted from an
incestuous relationship we had during 1989-94.
I struggled on for 3 years, living on the capital of my redundancy payment
until, in January 1996, I had to tell my ex-wife that I could no longer support
her. My
inability to support my dependants and the guilt of my daughter's pregnancy led
to a great deal of stress, I drank too much
and started using heroin. My symptoms were loss of blood from the rectum
(haemorrhoids run in the male line of my family: my father had them) and excess
urination frequency at night.
I decided to consult my then GP and took advantage of my private
insurance to make an appointment for late September, 1996, to have my
haemorrhoids surgically removed. Before that date, in early September, I
collapsed
in the street while on my way to buy dope. He called 999 and I was taken to
hospital with what
he thought may have been a heart attack. It was actually caused by the heroin
withdrawal, and after a
variety of tests, including a colonoscopy which caused me to have a haemorrhage.
The following spring I decided to tackle the urination frequency problem. I
saw a specialist who could see nothing wrong with my prostate from ultrasounds,
so
referred me to a liver specialist. (I should add that I am a physicist by
training, not a
physician, so I then knew nothing more about medical matters than the average
person.) He gave me an appointment for September, 1997, and told me that before
I attended I should have another ultrasound, a blood test and a colonoscopy.
When I queried the latter he told me that polyps had been found during the
previous colonoscopy (I had not been told about those), that they were not
abnormal for a person of my age and that he wanted to know if they had returned
before he proceeded.
I checked myself into the hospital (private treatment again) and had the
colonoscopy on August 27, 1997. I started haemorrhaging in the early hours of
the
following day, and on the Friday it started at about 6 pm and would not stop.
Because of the pecking order even in the private wing of this major NHS
hospital, it
took a long time to escalate the problem to a suitable level but in the evening
I was
given transfusions (I counted seven until I became too ill to know what was
going
on). Because it was connected again with bleeding from my rectum the same
surgeon was called for. I have subsequently discovered that a further
colonoscopy
was performed in the theatre, which seemed to indicate that the source of the
bleeding was located about four inches above my appendix. Despite this advice,
the surgeon removed my complete colon and gave me an ileostomy. Subsequent
biopsy indicated that my colon was healthy and there was no discernible cause
for
the haemorrhaging. I was in intensive care for about a fortnight from the early
hours
of August 30, when the operation was performed. I was delirious all that time
and
probably the last person in the world to learn that Princess Diana had died on
August 31st.
After I had recovered a little, the same surgeon told me on several
occasions, (once at least in the presence of an old friend who has become my
carer) but never in writing, that I must have a reconnection operation
(reanastomosis) within six months or my rectum might not perform adequately if I
left
it any longer. This was a lie, but I knew no better at the time. (An experienced
member of the hospital staff, whom I will never name, later pointed out the
coincidence between that six months, dating from the end of August when I had
the first operation, and the end of the then current financial year, just over
six
months later.) I duly checked into the same hospital on January 4, 1998, for the
operation (by the same surgeon, privately) scheduled for January 6. Nobody in
the
hospital, including all of the other specialists who had treated me, or the ward
staff, I hate niggers.
were expecting me. After the operation, my friend (who has become my carer)
was told on the phone at 23.30 that I had been returned to the ward. My hospital
notes show that at around 01.30 on January 7 I suffered a cardiac arrest in the
theatre after losing five litres of blood. I was taken, effectively dead, to
intensive
care, where the receiving surgeon wrote in my medical records “On arrival in
Intensive Care, Dr Bignall was cold and shut down.”
Back to fistulas.
Obviously, they got my heart
started again. The operation failed catastrophically, there was leakage right
from
the start from the joins in my ileum. I stayed in the ITU for ten days until it
became
obvious that something was very wrong. I was delirious and hallucinating during
that time. I had an emergency operation on January 16, same surgeon, during
which he cut through my ileum (small intestine) in four places, producing four
Do not click on the following link if you are squeamish!
fistulas. I was in the ITU for several months with a large hole in my abdomen
(about 5
inches across) and those four fistulas. I was fed intravenously for months, and
on
liquid, high-calory vitamin and mineral food which was fed into my duodenum
through a nasal tube, for many months more. I caught MRSA and pneumonia and
was very ill indeed. I was in hospital for ten months, mostly delirious, and
left at the
end of October, 1998, with a 2.5 inch hole in my abdomen and those four
fistulas. I
was not in a stable condition and the following summer (1999) my carer had to
call
999 on two occasions as I was haemorrhaging from around the fistulas. By late
July
it became obvious that a loop of my ileum was pushing its way through the thin
skin
surrounding the fistulas. I consulted with the hospital consultant physician,
and told
him that on no account would I allow the previous surgeon near me. He found me
a specialist in abdominal surgery, an absolute magician, who, during a six-hour
operation on September 11, 1999, removed the fistulas and left me with a
functioning ileostomy. He could not, of course, supply me with a new colon or
the
bits of ileum (an unknown amount) which had been lost during the butchery of the
other surgeon.
A year later, after two complete urinary blockages, I had to have a TURP
(TransUrethral Resection of the Prostate) operation from another surgeon.
Altogether, from Autumn, 1996, to December, 2000, I was in hospital for 419
days,
and on my back most of the time from August, 1997 to the end of 2000. In 1997,
renewed in 1998, I was given DLA (Disability Living Allowance) with the highest
rate
for maintenance and immobility.
I was left with a propensity for deep-vein thrombosis, as a result of being
horizontal for so long. I have to wear elasticated stockings for the rest of my
life. I
have lost enough of my ileum to prevent me from being able to digest fruit or
vegetables. If I eat them the cellulose turns into a compacted mass which is
painful
to pass, so I avoid them. I have to have at least one tin of that high-calory
vitamin
and mineral supplement each day (originally prescribed by the consultant
physician
and continued by my current GP.) Even with that, recent blood tests have
indicated to my GP that I may have vitamin deficiency and a kidney problem, for
which I am soon to contact a consultant. After all of that hospitalisation I
have
never recovered my strength or my ability to walk properly. Indoors I have
handrails
at strategic points, and out of doors I walk with an elbow crutch. I am
exhausted
after 20 yards or so, and I never go anywhere unless I know that I will be able
to get
to a toilet for the disabled, with a disabled parking space near enough for me
to
reach it. I suffer from pain from excoriation (leakage of intestinal fluid from
the
ileostomy apparatus I have to wear – not an unusual problem for ileostomists,
according to the ileostomy association, of which I am a member) and from what
my surgeon thinks is an adhesion in my left side. Luckily, this latter is rare,
for it is
paralysing, and I keep Sevredol (a morphine derivative) on hand for when it
happens. I cannot bend down, and have no strength, so my carer has to help me
take a stand-up shower (I have not been able to take a bath since August, 1997),
do all of my housework, change my stockings etc.
In early 2000, I contacted a solicitor, with the results that I have indicated
in
my covering letter, and reviewed at the end of this document.
To add insult to injury, I received a routine letter and questionnaire from the
Benefits Agency late last year concerning the renewal of my DLA, which is due to
run out in May, 2003. I gave them roughly the information I have given you
above.
They sent an inept doctor to see me on December 2. He asked me no questions of
any relevance, did not ask to see me walk outside, and the first words he said
to me
in my kitchen were something of the order of “What I report will make no
difference
to your assessment”. It made me wonder why he had bothered to come, but my
mind was on other things that morning, for my carer, who lives in London and
looks
after me during the weekend, had been taken ill that weekend, was unable to
return home or to work, and at the moment that this doctor was with me, was
attending an emergency appointment with one of my GP’s partners.
On Dec 13 I received a letter cutting off my DLA completely, the main
problem of which is that I would no longer have the right to renew my disabled
parking card, without which I would be housebound. I phoned them, and they
told me that they had “recent medical evidence that I could walk 200 yards”. I
told
them they had no such thing and demanded a form (which they had failed to send
me, of course) for a tribunal. I sent a letter, backed up with one from my GP,
to
them on the following day (recorded delivery!) and, as yet, have heard nothing.
(End January, 2003.)
The medical basis for the clinical negligence conclusion, and the reason why
a case would probably fail, is as follows:
-- The albumin count (a measure of the health) of a fit person is
approximately 50. My albumin count, taken on the 7th January, 1998, in
the Intensive Care Unit after the catastrophic operation, and cardiac
arrest, was 10. The two consultants both stated that in no way could it
have reduced that much overnight by any medical procedure, so, by
inference, it would have been too low the previous day for any
responsible surgeon to decide to perform an elective operation; one
that had been planned in advance. In addition, the surgeon knew my
medical history, and knew that the previous year I had had an adverse
reaction to another of his operations and had ended up then in Intensive
Care. This alone, constituted negligence.
-- The counter-claim would be that it is not the practice of this particular
hospital to perform albumin tests. Since the surgeon concerned could
face some professional problems if the case were decided against him,
his union would produce sufficient numbers of qualified medical opinion
to support the hospital’s practice. A judge would probably have to
decide, based on the technical nature of the facts, for the larger
battalion.
-- Despite this, my barrister told me that he was prepared to go ahead on
a “no win, no fee” basis, with appropriate support from a solicitor.
-- My solicitor’s committee looked at the net results that could be effected
financially – the ‘quantum’. Since I had been out of work for several
years before the alleged negligence, and the main factor taken into
account in negligence cases is loss of earnings, they concluded that the
case was not worth bringing.
andrew
"andrew" <and...@wicked.as> wrote in message
news:w4G%9.1008$FI7...@newssvr19.news.prodigy.com...
Mark Wallace
<snip uncreative ragging>
So when's the funny bit; or aren't you smart enough to be funny?
I can't believe I bothered asking.
--
Mark Wallace
-----------------------------------------------------
For the intelligent approach to nasty humour, visit:
The Anglo-American Humour (humor) Site
http://humorpages.virtualave.net/mainmenu.htm
-----------------------------------------------------
Dr Robin Bignall
>andrew wrote:
>
><snip uncreative ragging>
>
>So when's the funny bit; or aren't you smart enough to be funny?
>
I wondered about that, too.
--
wrmst rgrds
Robin Bignall
Remote Hertfordshire
England
*** note website address changed
Mark Wallace
> On Tue, 4 Feb 2003 08:19:52 +0100, "Mark Wallace"
> <mwal...@dse.nl> wrote:
>
>> andrew wrote:
>>
>> <snip uncreative ragging>
>>
>> So when's the funny bit; or aren't you smart enough to be funny?
>>
> I wondered about that, too.
I'm willing to bet he was giggling like a schoolgirl as he wrote it, though.
Tony Cooper
wrote:
>Dr Robin Bignall wrote:
>> On Tue, 4 Feb 2003 08:19:52 +0100, "Mark Wallace"
>> <mwal...@dse.nl> wrote:
>>
>>> andrew wrote:
>>>
>>> <snip uncreative ragging>
>>>
>>> So when's the funny bit; or aren't you smart enough to be funny?
>>>
>> I wondered about that, too.
>
>I'm willing to bet he was giggling like a schoolgirl as he wrote it, though.
You think drool was involved?
--
Tony Cooper aka: tony_co...@yahoo.com
Provider of Jots, Tittles, and Oy!s
Linz
> On Tue, 4 Feb 2003 08:19:52 +0100, "Mark Wallace" <mwal...@dse.nl>
> wrote:
>
>> andrew wrote:
>>
>> <snip uncreative ragging>
>>
>> So when's the funny bit; or aren't you smart enough to be funny?
>>
> I wondered about that, too.
Andrew's not very good at humour.
Dr Robin Bignall
wrote:
Looking back, I suppose some bits were funny, but I wonder if Andrew's good
for anything.
Tony Cooper
wrote:
>Dr Robin Bignall wrote:
Unlike the Owen post, I don't think humor was the intent or failed
humor was the result. Andrew is a nasty little bugger. He's the only
true bigot here, be it race, sexual preference, or religion.
H G Walker aka Rambler III
>http://homepage.ntlworld.com/docrobin/Design/tenyears.htm
>
>"andrew" <and...@wicked.as> wrote in message
>news:w4G%9.1008$FI7...@newssvr19.news.prodigy.com...
>
>>Ten Years of Trouble
>>Statement by Dr Robin Bignall
>>
Surely this must be a satire of the British health care system. I've
read similar concerning an explanation of a man describing why he
starting drinking earnestly, having lost his farm, family, and finances
through various disasters. It started with his prize bull jumping over a
barbed wire fence, as I recall, and a daughter running off with the
hired-hand and returning pregnant. From there things went from bad to worse.
I see several errors that might need correcting.
At first he describes himself as as a specialist in computing. Later he
says he's a physicist.
At another point he says he lost five liters of blood before receiving
medical attention. Hereford cows don't have five liters of blood.
He also says he was it ITU, but later refers to an Intensive Care Unit.
Is the designation "O-Level" supposed to tell me something I don't know?
--
Rambler III
Mark Wallace
> On Tue, 4 Feb 2003 14:28:49 +0100, "Mark Wallace"
> <mwal...@dse.nl> wrote:
>
>> Dr Robin Bignall wrote:
>>> On Tue, 4 Feb 2003 08:19:52 +0100, "Mark Wallace"
>>> <mwal...@dse.nl> wrote:
>>>
>>>> andrew wrote:
>>>>
>>>> <snip uncreative ragging>
>>>>
>>>> So when's the funny bit; or aren't you smart enough to be
>>>> funny?
>>>>
>>> I wondered about that, too.
>>
>> I'm willing to bet he was giggling like a schoolgirl as he wrote
>> it, though.
>
> You think drool was involved?
There's every chance.
Hopefully, he uses a 240volt keyboard.
Dr Robin Bignall
wrote:
>Unlike the Owen post,
I don't think I saw that.
>I don't think humor was the intent or failed
>humor was the result. Andrew is a nasty little bugger. He's the only
>true bigot here, be it race, sexual preference, or religion.
I've plonked him, which is unusual for me. He is now one of two. I hope he
likes company.
Dr Robin Bignall
<Walker...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>andrew wrote:
>
>>http://homepage.ntlworld.com/docrobin/Design/tenyears.htm
>>
>>"andrew" <and...@wicked.as> wrote in message
>>news:w4G%9.1008$FI7...@newssvr19.news.prodigy.com...
>>
>>>Ten Years of Trouble
>>>Statement by Dr Robin Bignall
>>>
>Surely this must be a satire of the British health care system. I've
>read similar concerning an explanation of a man describing why he
>starting drinking earnestly, having lost his farm, family, and finances
>through various disasters. It started with his prize bull jumping over a
>barbed wire fence, as I recall, and a daughter running off with the
>hired-hand and returning pregnant. From there things went from bad to worse.
>
No satire, I can assure you.
>I see several errors that might need correcting.
>
You need new eyes, as well as a brain transplant.
>At first he describes himself as as a specialist in computing. Later he
>says he's a physicist.
>
I never described myself as a specialist in anything. I was a physicist who
joined IBM.
You should learn to read.
>At another point he says he lost five liters of blood before receiving
>medical attention. Hereford cows don't have five liters of blood.
>
That was a quote from the medical records, asshole. I was in the theatre at
the time, and they were pumping it into me slower than I was losing it.
>He also says he was it ITU, but later refers to an Intensive Care Unit.
>
Intensive care units are known as ITUs in England.
>Is the designation "O-Level" supposed to tell me something I don't know?
As far as I can see, you don't know anything at all, so every direction is
up.
<Plonked.>
Martin Ambuhl
But somehow he is mildly entertaining. We seem to have relegated him to
the furniture status reserved these days for hospital patients; I wonder if
he notices that we carry on the conversations in front of him as if he were
not there.
John Dean
> Dr Robin Bignall wrote:
>> On Tue, 4 Feb 2003 08:19:52 +0100, "Mark Wallace"
>> <mwal...@dse.nl> wrote:
>>
>>> andrew wrote:
>>>
>>> <snip uncreative ragging>
>>>
>>> So when's the funny bit; or aren't you smart enough to be funny?
>>>
>> I wondered about that, too.
>
> I'm willing to bet he was giggling like a schoolgirl as he wrote it,
> though.
That's rather insulting to schoolgirls, old chap.
--
John Dean
Oxford
De-frag to reply
H G Walker aka Rambler III
>On Tue, 04 Feb 2003 16:12:11 GMT, H G Walker aka Rambler III
><Walker...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
[snip]
>>I see several errors that might need correcting.
>>
>You need new eyes, as well as a brain transplant.
>
>>At first he describes himself as as a specialist in computing. Later he
>>says he's a physicist.
>>
>I never described myself as a specialist in anything. I was a physicist who joined IBM.
>
>You should learn to read.
>
I can, but your writing is not noted by its clearness.
" about 150 positions within my speciality, computing,"
If you have a speciality you have "a special aptitude or skill." A
specialty is "something in which one specializes". M-WCD10th
>>At another point he says he lost five liters of blood before receiving
>>medical attention. Hereford cows don't have five liters of blood.
>>
>That was a quote from the medical records, asshole. I was in the theatre at
>the time, and they were pumping it into me slower than I was losing it.
>
"I suffered a cardiac arrest in the theatre after losing five litres of
blood."
Your inexactitude leaves much doubt about what you were talking about.
Was it a stage play or a cinema? There are theaters and then there are
theaters. Your writing here is a little murky.
>>He also says he was it ITU, but later refers to an Intensive Care Unit.
>>
>Intensive care units are known as ITUs in England.
>
What does the "T" represent, Treatment? If so, why weren't you consistent?
>>Is the designation "O-Level" supposed to tell me something I don't know?
>>
>
>As far as I can see, you don't know anything at all, so every direction is up.
>
You can't see very far can you? If you're as blind as I think you are, I
wonder why you're not referred to as Frankrenstein's monster. If you're
as smart as you think you are, you'd have never let Dr Frankenstein near
yourself with a scalpel in the first place.
May I submit your name and story for a Darwin Award?
As you took the liberty to post the picture of your naked wife or lady
friend for all to see, I wonder why you haven't posted pictures of
yourself in all your glory displaying your souvenirs from Frankenstein's
"theater."
I tried to be courteous and call your attention to what "might" be
errors so that you could correct your copy. I tried to be civil, and I
used no insults. I might be more capable than you in that regard having
been an enlisted man and lived in barracks for more than a decade where
I was taught by pros. I was 25 years of age before I learning the hard
way that calling someone a "Mother F..ker" was not a compliment.
You even lack the courtesy to define "O-level".
--
Rambler III
"Mad hereford cow disease in rampant in remote Hertfordshire"
andrew
"Mark Wallace" <mwal...@dse.nl> wrote in message
news:b1npqi$15b1ft$1...@ID-51325.news.dfncis.de...
> andrew wrote:
>
> <snip uncreative ragging>
>
> So when's the funny bit; or aren't you smart enough to be funny?
>
The funny part is when the reader visits
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/docrobin/Design/tenyears.htm
and discovers that Robin himself wrote the story! The only thing I added was the
bit about the incest & heroin. (Yes, the shit about the anal bleeding appears in
the original.)
Spehro Pefhany
>
>and discovers that Robin himself wrote the story! The only thing I added was the
>bit about the incest & heroin. (Yes, the shit about the anal bleeding appears in
>the original.)
You added a racial slur as well.
Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
sp...@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com
andrew
"Martin Ambuhl" <mam...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:3E400BC5...@earthlink.net...
"we we we." What makes you so sure that you're one of the in crowd, fag? Next
time try not so hard to flatter yourself.
>
>
>
>
andrew
"Spehro Pefhany" <sp...@interlog.com> wrote in message
news:c8u04v80ctd7jbvuv...@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 05 Feb 2003 02:23:35 GMT, "andrew" <and...@wicked.as> wrote:
>
> >
> >and discovers that Robin himself wrote the story! The only thing I added was
the
> >bit about the incest & heroin. (Yes, the shit about the anal bleeding appears
in
> >the original.)
>
> You added a racial slur as well.
Haha, yeah, I forgot about that. Heh.
mb
...
> But somehow he is mildly entertaining. We seem to have relegated him to
> the furniture status reserved these days for hospital patients; I wonder if
> he notices that we carry on the conversations in front of him as if he were
> not there.
Entertaining he is, but this is clearly a case of "do not feed the
animals". See how he starts attracting more of the kind the moment one
answers?
Tony Cooper
<Walker...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>Dr Robin Bignall wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 04 Feb 2003 16:12:11 GMT, H G Walker aka Rambler III
>><Walker...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>>
>[snip]
>
>>>I see several errors that might need correcting.
>>>
>>You need new eyes, as well as a brain transplant.
>>
>>>At first he describes himself as as a specialist in computing. Later he
>>>says he's a physicist.
>>>
>>I never described myself as a specialist in anything. I was a physicist who joined IBM.
>>
>>You should learn to read.
>>
>I can, but your writing is not noted by its clearness.
>
I just skimmed the post because I felt like I needed to wash my hands
just opening it. You do realize, don't you, that Robin accidently
posted a personal website address in here (not even a correct one)
and this Andrew asshole picked it up and changed parts of it?
Here is what Robin has on his page:
.....I struggled on for 3 years, living on the capital of my
.....redundancy payment until, in January 1996, I had to tell my
.....ex-wife that I could no longer support her. My
.....inability to support my dependants led to a great deal of stress,
.....I drank too much and my health deteriorated. My symptoms were
.....loss of blood from the rectum (haemorrhoids run in the male line
.....of my family: my father had them) and excess urination frequency
.....at night.
Here is how Andrew recounted the above:
.....At the same time my daughter was pregnant with our baby, that
.....resulted from an incestuous relationship we had during 1989-94.
.....I struggled on for 3 years, living on the capital of my
.....redundancy payment until, in January 1996, I had to tell my
.....ex-wife that I could no longer support her. My inability to
.....support my dependants and the guilt of my daughter's pregnancy
.....led to a great deal of stress, I drank too much
.....and started using heroin.
You didn't pick up on anything odd about someone telling us about an
incestuous relationship with his daughter?
>
>"I suffered a cardiac arrest in the theatre after losing five litres of
>blood."
>
>Your inexactitude leaves much doubt about what you were talking about.
>
>Was it a stage play or a cinema? There are theaters and then there are
>theaters. Your writing here is a little murky.
No, your understanding is murky. Robin is English, the UK Operating
Rooms are called Operating Theaters, and anyone reading an account of
a medical procedures knows they aren't done in front of the silver
screen.
>>>Is the designation "O-Level" supposed to tell me something I don't know?
>>>
>
>>As far as I can see, you don't know anything at all, so every direction is up.
The guy's had something printed about him saying he's had an
incestuous relationship and uses heroin, and you're worried about not
getting a definition of UK school terms?
>You can't see very far can you? If you're as blind as I think you are, I
>wonder why you're not referred to as Frankrenstein's monster. If you're
>as smart as you think you are, you'd have never let Dr Frankenstein near
>yourself with a scalpel in the first place.
Jeezus, can't you make at least an effort to hide your ignorance?
I've had open heart surgery myself. I don't even know what surgeons
were in the OR. I was under when they wheeled me in, under when they
cut, and under when they wheeled me out. Some guy came to my hospital
room several days later and claimed to be one of the surgeons. For
all I know, he's the guy the hospital sends around to tell *all* the
patients he did their surgery and the real surgery is done by Smee
with his snickersnee.
>As you took the liberty to post the picture of your naked wife or lady
>friend for all to see, I wonder why you haven't posted pictures of
>yourself in all your glory displaying your souvenirs from Frankenstein's
>"theater."
Naked wife? I saw a picture of his now deceased wife and Robin,
fully-clothed (in a dress she made) in front of the registry office.
Where do you get this?
>I tried to be courteous and call your attention to what "might" be
>errors so that you could correct your copy.
You are correcting Andrew's version of Robin's personal home page. A
page that we don't even know is completed.
If you have any doubts about this, go skim some of Robin Bignall's
past posts to this group. Then, go and skim that slimy little asshole
Andrew's posts. Here are some samples of Andrew's more intellectual
views:
If these slaves are chinese, then bring me some niggers. If they are
the other, then vice versa.
No, it's blackie slang for lover.
Fuck Jews: ugly and stupid and they hate all Goyim! IEVV = EVIL
shut up stupid. stop crying queer
Mark Wallace
> No, your understanding is murky. Robin is English, the UK
> Operating Rooms are called Operating Theaters,
"Theat*re*s", damnit, *theatres*!
Mark Wallace
> "Mark Wallace" <mwal...@dse.nl> wrote in message
> news:b1npqi$15b1ft$1...@ID-51325.news.dfncis.de...
>> andrew wrote:
>>
>> <snip uncreative ragging>
>>
>> So when's the funny bit; or aren't you smart enough to be funny?
>>
>
> The funny part is when the reader visits
>
> http://homepage.ntlworld.com/docrobin/Design/tenyears.htm
>
> and discovers that Robin himself wrote the story! The only thing
> I added was the bit about the incest & heroin. (Yes, the shit
> about the anal bleeding appears in the original.)
You find people being struck down by illness funny?
Let's hope you catch ebola, then. We could rest happy in the knowledge that
you'd get endless laughs out of it.
H G Walker aka Rambler III
>[snip]
>
I made no ad hominem attack. I commented that the web site must be a
satire on the British health care system. I noted several errors that
"might" required editing.
I made no mention on incest which is a common occurrence. Like sexual
abuse by members of the clergy, it occurs more often than people care to
admit. To my recollection it does not appear on the web page
The type of threatre/er should have been clearly stated.
I've never been in an OR or OT. I've never been cut on nor would I be
unless I had at least one additional opinion, or if I was unconscious or
in some way unable to protect my person. [Three years ago I was advised
I had several small gall stones, and surgery was elective on my part. It
was "free," so why not? I did some research and discovered that such an
operation was not an odds-on favorite with about 1 in 100 chance of
serious complication or death. I said , "No thanks."]
There is or was a full-front photograph of an attractive, slightly over
weight with full breasts, naked woman in a non-suggestive pose sitting
on her legs on a bed. She seemed to be the woman making a face of
displease in a different photograph. Dr Bignall will have to explain why
the photograph appears/ed on the web page.
the URL I visited is:
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/docrobin/Design/tenyears.htm
--
Rambler III
I suppose it's complimentary to be called an asshole by someone who doesn't have one
.
Mark Wallace
> The type of threatre/er should have been clearly stated.
It was. Not many people lose blood in a puppet theatre.
Maybe you should have been born and raised in Britain.
Dr Robin Bignall
>H G Walker aka Rambler III wrote:
>
>> The type of threatre/er should have been clearly stated.
>
>It was. Not many people lose blood in a puppet theatre.
>Maybe you should have been born and raised in Britain.
Gawd help us. It certainly was not written for idiots.
andrew
"Tony Cooper" <tony_co...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:6b414v0nshr5vhhbf...@4ax.com...
Blah blah blah. Tony is obviously a tolerance bigot. You must love blacks.
H G Walker aka Rambler III
>H G Walker aka Rambler III wrote:
>
>>The type of threatre/er should have been clearly stated.
>>
>
>It was. Not many people lose blood in a puppet theatre.
>Maybe you should have been born and raised in Britain.
>
Picky, picky, picky. As for being born in Britain, no thanks. My
ancestors did very well by leaving in the 1700s.
--
Rambler III
"All actions have consequences: consequences are unpredictable: therefore take no action." British foreign service adage
Mark Wallace
> Mark Wallace wrote:
>
>> H G Walker aka Rambler III wrote:
>>
>>> The type of threatre/er should have been clearly stated.
>>>
>>
>> It was. Not many people lose blood in a puppet theatre.
>> Maybe you should have been born and raised in Britain.
>>
> Picky, picky, picky. As for being born in Britain, no thanks. My
> ancestors did very well by leaving in the 1700s.
Ah. Deported criminal stock. I should have known.
H G Walker aka Rambler III
>On Wed, 5 Feb 2003 16:39:20 +0100, "Mark Wallace" <mwal...@dse.nl> wrote:
>
>>H G Walker aka Rambler III wrote:
>>
>>>The type of threatre/er should have been clearly stated.
>>>
>>It was. Not many people lose blood in a puppet theatre.
>>Maybe you should have been born and raised in Britain.
>>
>
>Gawd help us. It certainly was not written for idiots.
>
>--
>
>wrmst rgrds
>Robin Bignall
>
>Remote Hertfordshire
>England
>
Ad hominem attacks gain you neither friends or admirers.
Idiot I may be, but I've never let a National Health Frankenstein with a
Veterinary license near me. I'm older than you, and I've NEVER had any
invasive surgery.
--
Rambler III
"All actions have consequences: Consequences are unpredictable: therefore take no action." British foreign service adage
david56
<snip>
> You must love blacks.
Thank you for your suggestion.
--
David
I say what it occurs to me to say.
=====
The address is valid today, but I will change it to keep ahead of the
spammers.
Jacqui
> andrew wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> You must love blacks.
>
> Thank you for your suggestion.
Isn't it an instruction?
Jac, quite happy to love anyone that I like enough. That's in the
platonic sense, of course.
david56
> david56 wibbled:
>
>>andrew wrote:
>>
>><snip>
>>
>>>You must love blacks.
>>
>>Thank you for your suggestion.
>
> Isn't it an instruction?
By jove, I think you're right.
> Jac, quite happy to love anyone that I like enough. That's in the
> platonic sense, of course.
Whom do you like in the platonic sense?
Jacqui
> Jacqui wrote:
>> david56 wibbled:
>>>andrew wrote:
>>>
>>><snip>
>>>
>>>>You must love blacks.
>>>
>>>Thank you for your suggestion.
>>
>> Isn't it an instruction?
>
> By jove, I think you're right.
>
>> Jac, quite happy to love anyone that I like enough. That's in the
>> platonic sense, of course.
>
> Whom do you like in the platonic sense?
Well if I like them enough, those people I love, of course.
Jac
Dena Jo
> Idiot I may be, but I've never let a National Health Frankenstein with a
> Veterinary license near me. I'm older than you, and I've NEVER had any
> invasive surgery.
So you've been fortunate, as have I.
There's no reason to be so mean.
--
Dena Jo
Mark Wallace
> Dr Robin Bignall wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 5 Feb 2003 16:39:20 +0100, "Mark Wallace"
>> <mwal...@dse.nl> wrote:
>>
>>> H G Walker aka Rambler III wrote:
>>>
>>>> The type of threatre/er should have been clearly stated.
>>>>
>>> It was. Not many people lose blood in a puppet theatre.
>>> Maybe you should have been born and raised in Britain.
>>>
>>
>> Gawd help us. It certainly was not written for idiots.
>>
>
> Idiot I may be, but I've never let a National Health Frankenstein
> with a Veterinary license near me. I'm older than you, and I've
> NEVER had any invasive surgery.
Nor have I, and I've never broken any of my own bones, either. I feel
grateful for that lucky happenstance, rather than superior to those who have
not had my unearned luck.
H G Walker aka Rambler III
>[snip]
>Ah. Deported criminal stock. I should have known.
>
Sorry to disappoint you, but no. You're thinking of the wrong continent. (I understand that Australians take great pride in being able to trace their ancestors to the prison ships.) Oglethorpe had planned Georgia as a refuge for debtors and other imprisoned unfortunates, but it didn't work out that way. With the death sentence applied to more than 250 crimes in 18th century England, being deported was like throwing Briar Rabbit into the blackberry thicket [You were doing his a favor]. Religious persecution was the incentive for others to leave, and the enclosure laws make it necessary for others.
Walker-Russel-Thomas-Keath-McKey-Carr-Porter-Brown-Smith, et al, was the roster. Mostly Quakers and other religious types. Most had 10-12 children that lived to adulthood, so their food was adequate which can't be said of their English cousins. Most moved westward when opportunity offered. Some owned more than 1000 acres, others whole sections [a square mile of 720 acres], but the average was 180 acres or a quarter section which was more than adequate - and probably too much - to support an industrious man and wife with no slaves or indentured servants.
The criminals were those who remained and exported wheat to England
during the potato famine.
If Great Britain is such a great place to live, why is it that few if
any Americans of means emigrate there? It seems the flow is in the other
direction, if not to the United States, then to Canada.
Jacqui
> Mark Wallace wrote:
>
>>[snip]
>>Ah. Deported criminal stock. I should have known.
>>
> Sorry to disappoint you, but no. You're thinking of the wrong
> continent. (I understand that Australians take great pride in
> being able to trace their ancestors to the prison ships.)
> Oglethorpe had planned Georgia as a refuge for debtors and other
> imprisoned unfortunates, but it didn't work out that way. With the
> death sentence applied to more than 250 crimes in 18th century
> England, being deported was like throwing Briar Rabbit into the
> blackberry thicket [You were doing his a favor].
Plenty of people were deported to Virginia and similar places, and
wound up working on plantations and so on. Didn't we have this
conversation a few weeks ago wrt the Irish?
Jac
H G Walker aka Rambler III
I didn't mean to be. I thought his web site was a satire. Dawin Awards
have been awarded for a lot less.
If the Doctor were a 30-year-old Yugo, it couldn't have had as much
wrong with it nor could the mechanics have been as incompetent.
--
Rambler III
"All actions have consequences: consequences are unpredictable: therefore take no action." British foreign service adage
H G Walker aka Rambler III
>H G Walker aka Rambler III wrote:
>
>>Dr Robin Bignall wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 5 Feb 2003 16:39:20 +0100, "Mark Wallace"
>>><mwal...@dse.nl> wrote:
>>>
>>>>H G Walker aka Rambler III wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>The type of threatre/er should have been clearly stated.
>>>>>
>>>>It was. Not many people lose blood in a puppet theatre.
>>>>Maybe you should have been born and raised in Britain.
>>>>
>>>Gawd help us. It certainly was not written for idiots.
>>>
>>Ad hominem attacks gain you neither friends or admirers.
>>
>>Idiot I may be, but I've never let a National Health Frankenstein
>>with a Veterinary license near me. I'm older than you, and I've
>>NEVER had any invasive surgery.
>>
>
>Nor have I, and I've never broken any of my own bones, either. I feel
>grateful for that lucky happenstance, rather than superior to those who have
>not had my unearned luck.
>
>--
>Mark Wallace
>
From what I read there was no luck connected with his circumstance. It
was all incompetence. His luck was that his doctor wasn't the fellow who
killed more than 200 of his patients.
As I said in a different post, I was advised I had several small gall
stones about three years ago. I researched the procedure and the
"survivors," and I decided the 1-in-100 odds were against me. I've never
won a lottery, but I thought I might be the unlucky winner of this one,
so I turned down this elective surgery.
Idiot I may be, but a fool I ain't.
--
Rambler III
"All actions have consequences: consequences are unpredictable: therefore take no action." British foreign service adage
Philip Eden
H G Walker aka Rambler III <Walker...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:3E419601...@worldnet.att.net...
>
> If Great Britain is such a great place to live, why is it that few if
> any Americans of means emigrate there? It seems the flow is in the other
> direction, if not to the United States, then to Canada.
>
and Nationality Act (and its amendments), immigrant aliens born in the
UK admitted to the USA for permanent residence, for the fiscal
years noted, were as follows:
1991 13,903
1992 19,973
1993 18,783
1994 16,326
Under the UK's Immigration Act of 1970, persons from the USA
seeking to work or settle in the UK were as follows:
1992 27,000 (to the nearest hundred)
1993 26,500
1994 31,600
Source: The Statesman's Year-Book, 1997-98.
Permanent immigrants to Canada during the year 2000-01
numbered 6,050 from the USA and 5,290 from the UK.
Source: Britannica Book of the Year 2002
Philip Eden
Hedberg
<Walker...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
[...]
>
>As I said in a different post, I was advised I had several small gall
>stones about three years ago. I researched the procedure and the
>"survivors," and I decided the 1-in-100 odds were against me. I've never
>won a lottery, but I thought I might be the unlucky winner of this one,
>so I turned down this elective surgery.
>
>Idiot I may be, but a fool I ain't.
Well, I won't characterize what you are for turning down the surgery,
but I will say that in my experience, passing one gall stone is far
more painful, far more debilitating, and far more likely to cause
long-term health problems (you only have one pancreas and you need it)
than is the typical modern surgery for removing that little sucker.
Having your gall bladder removed probably has about as much net danger
as does eating a Big Mac. Unless your stones are quite large, and
therefore less likely to embark on a one-way journey down the common
duct, and you have removed the reason for them being there in the
first place, it could very well be but a matter of time before you
have your gall bladder removed. If it becomes medically necessary to
remove it (rather than just advisable) you may be in for a real treat
as you may not then be a good candidate for "the scope." They may
have to cut you from here to there rather than just sucking the bugger
out through a straw. Remember the other famous picture of Landslide
Lyndon?
Harold
Dr Robin Bignall
I'm a professional person myself, and in 1997 knew nothing about medicine
or surgery.
H G Walker proves himself to be an even bigger moron with each word he
writes. It says quite clearly in the document that he probably cannot
understand too well, that the operations were all done privately.
--
wrmst rgrds
Robin Bignall
Remote Hertfordshire
England
*** note website address changed
Evan Kirshenbaum
> H G Walker aka Rambler III <Walker...@worldnet.att.net> wrote
>
> > If Great Britain is such a great place to live, why is it that few
> > if any Americans of means emigrate there? It seems the flow is in
> > the other direction, if not to the United States, then to Canada.
> >
> Funny you should say that. Under the terms of the US Immigration
> and Nationality Act (and its amendments), immigrant aliens born in the
> UK admitted to the USA for permanent residence, for the fiscal
> years noted, were as follows:
> 1991 13,903
> 1992 19,973
> 1993 18,783
> 1994 16,326
>
> Under the UK's Immigration Act of 1970, persons from the USA
> seeking to work or settle in the UK were as follows:
> 1992 27,000 (to the nearest hundred)
> 1993 26,500
> 1994 31,600
>
> Source: The Statesman's Year-Book, 1997-98.
You're comparing apples (permanent) and oranges (temporary).
According to the 2001 INS Statistical Yearbook
http://www.ins.usdoj.gov/graphics/aboutins/statistics/Yearbook2001.pdf
there were 136,223 "nonimmigrants admitted as temporary workers,
exchange visitors, and intracompany transferees" during 2001 from the
UK to the US. Of these 32,456 were "workers with specialty
occupations" (H1B visas) visas and 60,615 were "intracompany
transferees" (L1 visas).
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |There's been so much ado already
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |that any further ado would be
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |excessive.
| Lori Karkosky
kirsh...@hpl.hp.com
(650)857-7572
Philip Eden
Evan Kirshenbaum <kirsh...@hpl.hp.com> wrote in message
news:isvykz...@hpl.hp.com...
> "Philip Eden" <phi...@weather.demon.co.uk> writes:
>
Under the terms of the US Immigration
> > and Nationality Act (and its amendments), immigrant aliens born in the
> > UK admitted to the USA for permanent residence, for the fiscal
> > years noted, were as follows:
> > 1991 13,903
> > 1992 19,973
> > 1993 18,783
> > 1994 16,326
> >
> > Under the UK's Immigration Act of 1970, persons from the USA
> > seeking to work or settle in the UK were as follows:
> > 1992 27,000 (to the nearest hundred)
> > 1993 26,500
> > 1994 31,600
> >
> > Source: The Statesman's Year-Book, 1997-98.
>
> You're comparing apples (permanent) and oranges (temporary).
I was careful not to make comparisons. It is, of course, impossible
to make direct comparisons because the laws governing immigration
to the USA and to the UK are not the same, nor are the ways
in which the statistics are collated. However, the figures I quoted
for both directions are the closest to what might be called "permanent"
that I could find. I also observed to myself that the numbers
of "permanent" settlers in both directions declined substantially
between 1994 and 1999 to something around 10,000 + or - 25%,
but I could not extract precise figures, and I did not wish to muddy
the waters by producing approximations.
You might more profitably argue that when the flow of immigrants
is so closely controlled by law that it is hardly a measure of the
desirability of living in one or other country. I couldn't disagree.
But then I was careful not to make that point either.
R Fontana
>
> H G Walker aka Rambler III <Walker...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
> news:3E419601...@worldnet.att.net...
> >
> > If Great Britain is such a great place to live, why is it that few if
> > any Americans of means emigrate there? It seems the flow is in the other
> > direction, if not to the United States, then to Canada.
> >
> Funny you should say that.
[stats snipped]
He said "Americans of means", however. My understanding is that the
US, the UK and Canada all have some sort of relatively easy way for
wealthy people to acquire citizenship, though I don't know the details.
Tony Cooper
wrote:
You could look it up, but if a person buys a business here at a
certain investment level and employs a certain number of people, they
are automatically granted a green card. Not citizenship, though.
Many hotels and motels, quick lube places, and other franchise
businesses in this area are owned by people that have used this means
of obtaining a green card.
Tony Cooper
wrote:
>Tony Cooper wrote:
>
>
>> No, your understanding is murky. Robin is English, the UK
>> Operating Rooms are called Operating Theaters,
>
>"Theat*re*s", damnit, *theatres*!
I will defend Robin, but I'm not about to defend English spelling.
You will have to speak with my spellchecker.
Dr Robin Bignall
wrote:
>On Wed, 5 Feb 2003 08:25:41 +0100, "Mark Wallace" <mwal...@dse.nl>
>wrote:
>
>>Tony Cooper wrote:
>>
>>
>>> No, your understanding is murky. Robin is English, the UK
>>> Operating Rooms are called Operating Theaters,
>>
>>"Theat*re*s", damnit, *theatres*!
>
>I will defend Robin,
Thankee, kindlee, Zur,
>but I'm not about to defend English spelling.
>You will have to speak with my spellchecker.
OK. "Spellchecker: you suck!"
<Did that fix it?>
Philip Eden
R Fontana <rf...@sparky.cs.nyu.edu> wrote in message
news:Pine.GSO.4.44.03020...@sparky.cs.nyu.edu...
that " of means" means wealthy, whatever that may mean. Statistics
in respect of wealthy people who acquire citizenship (or become
nationalised) are probably not easily available.
Philip Eden
Charles Riggs
<Walker...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>Ad hominem attacks gain you neither friends or admirers.
So what? The truth must out.
If I didn't attack C**per for his dishonesty, now and again, I
couldn't live with myself.
--
Charles Riggs
chriggs |at| eircom |dot| com
Charles Riggs
<docrobi...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>H G Walker proves himself to be an even bigger moron with each word he
>writes. It says quite clearly in the document that he probably cannot
>understand too well, that the operations were all done privately.
I don't think he is a moron but, rather, naive about some things.
Nonetheless, I often enjoy hearing his outlook on things.
I once, before he died, had a wonderful friend in Westport. He had
never left the county, or even been on a bus. Once he asked me, very
seriously, "Yes, Captain, I know about airplanes, but how can they
stay UP?" I thought it was an excellent question, but not one you'd
ever be likely to hear.
He had never had sex with a woman, even though I knew him when he was
in his sixties. One time he asked Tom, "You say homosexuals can get
married, in America. Can they have babies?" He was dead serious. A
delightful man, he was, always with something fresh.
Charles Riggs
<bass.b...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>Whom do you like in the platonic sense?
"Platonic sense". Also, I would have said "love", rather than "like".
If we like someone, we don't have to refer to the friendship as
Platonic. Everyone would assume that, unless they knew otherwise.
M. J. Powell
<tony_co...@yahoo.com> writes
>On Wed, 5 Feb 2003 08:25:41 +0100, "Mark Wallace" <mwal...@dse.nl>
>wrote:
>
>>Tony Cooper wrote:
>>
>>
>>> No, your understanding is murky. Robin is English, the UK
>>> Operating Rooms are called Operating Theaters,
>>
>>"Theat*re*s", damnit, *theatres*!
>
>I will defend Robin, but I'm not about to defend English spelling.
>You will have to speak with my spellchecker.
'Speak *to*', dammit.
Mike
--
M.J.Powell
H G Walker aka Rambler III
How many is "plenty"? Is that more or less than "lots"?
There was no welfare in the 17th and 18th century English American
colonies. Everybody worked as an apprentice, at his trade, or as a laborer.
Virginia had laws that required indentured servants be given certain
articles of clothing and tools and fifty acres of land after completing
their period of indenture, usually five years. The indenture paid for
the transportation to America.
Black slaves are a completely different subject.
--
Rambler III
"All actions have consequences: Consequences are unpredictable: therefore take no action." British foreign service adage
H G Walker aka Rambler III
I don't mean to quibble, but in the first you indicate "permanent
residence", in the latter you indicate "...to work...." Of the number
that are admitted to work, what is their period of residence?
--
Rambler III
"All actions have consequences: consequences are unpredictable: therefore take no action." British foreign service adage
H G Walker aka Rambler III
Thanks for your advisory. At my next annual in June, I'll ask Dr Hughes
to have another evaluation. The previous scan took three X-rays to
verify that I had "several small gall stones."
H G Walker aka Rambler III
>On 5 Feb 2003 21:18:17 GMT, Dena Jo <den...@csNOSPAM.com> wrote:
>
>>H G Walker aka Rambler III <Walker...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>>
>>>Idiot I may be, but I've never let a National Health Frankenstein with a
>>>Veterinary license near me. I'm older than you, and I've NEVER had any
>>>invasive surgery.
>>>
>>So you've been fortunate, as have I.
>>
>>There's no reason to be so mean.
>>
>
>I'm a professional person myself, and in 1997 knew nothing about medicine
>or surgery.
>
>H G Walker proves himself to be an even bigger moron with each word he
>writes. It says quite clearly in the document that he probably cannot
>understand too well, that the operations were all done privately.
>
>--
>
>wrmst rgrds
>Robin Bignall
>
Did you have operations or an autopsies?
Name calling seems to be your forte. Now we know why you got fired,
axed, let gp, ...er, I mean retired.
First you call me an asshole - from jealousy I suspect since you don't
have one, then you called be an idiot, now you call me a moron. In a
matter of a few days I've somehow increased my mental abilities from a
little brown "o" to age three to age 8-12. By next week I should
graduate from high school, and by the end of the month from a 4-yesr
college. When I get my medical degree in psychiatry in three or four
months, I'll fly over to "remote Hertfordshire" and give you a free work-up.
Dr Frankenstein had a private surgery, too.
Dr Robin Bignall
Dammit, he's American. They speak *with* people over there. Nothing wrong
in it, provided you choose the right person.
--
wrmst rgrds
Robin Bignall
Remote Hertfordshire
H G Walker aka Rambler III
>On Wed, 5 Feb 2003 08:25:41 +0100, "Mark Wallace" <mwal...@dse.nl>
>wrote:
>
>>Tony Cooper wrote:
>>
>>
>>>No, your understanding is murky. Robin is English, the UK
>>>Operating Rooms are called Operating Theaters,
>>>
>>"Theat*re*s", damnit, *theatres*!
>>
>
>I will defend Robin, but I'm not about to defend English spelling.
>You will have to speak with my spellchecker.
>
My telephone yellow pages lists "theatres", but M-WCD10th lists theater
as the preferred spelling.
Google search:
theater - 9,050K
theatre - 8,820K
That'd be pretty close in an election or a horse race.
H G Walker aka Rambler III
Person of means - A person having economic influence locally,
nationally, or internationally. An individual independent of the
requirement to be in the employ of another.
Tony Cooper
<mi...@pickmere.demon.co.uk> wrote:
I consider my spellchecker to be a working partner to me in posting.
By catching most errors of spelling, it allows the reader with limited
multi-tasking ability to concentrate on my usage errors. My two
severest critics are easily confused by any multiplicity of error and
might go into some sort of overload. This could cause one of them to
lose count.
Therefore, I speak "with" and not "to" my spellchecker. My
spellchecker has a mind of its own. Despite many conversation on this
subject, it insists on being "spell checker". I prefer
"spellchecker".
obFrances: Howzat for manipulation?
H G Walker aka Rambler III
>On Thu, 06 Feb 2003 00:36:59 +0000, Dr Robin Bignall
><docrobi...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
>
>>H G Walker proves himself to be an even bigger moron with each word he
>>writes. It says quite clearly in the document that he probably cannot
>>understand too well, that the operations were all done privately.
>>
>
>I don't think he is a moron but, rather, naive about some things.
>Nonetheless, I often enjoy hearing his outlook on things.
>
My favorite contributor. I always learn something from Mr Riggs'
postings. {Note the apostrophe. He taught me that.]
I suggest we are all naive about more than "some" things.
Tony Cooper
<Walker...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>Tony Cooper wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 5 Feb 2003 08:25:41 +0100, "Mark Wallace" <mwal...@dse.nl>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>Tony Cooper wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>No, your understanding is murky. Robin is English, the UK
>>>>Operating Rooms are called Operating Theaters,
>>>>
>>>"Theat*re*s", damnit, *theatres*!
>>>
>>
>>I will defend Robin, but I'm not about to defend English spelling.
>>You will have to speak with my spellchecker.
>>
>
>My telephone yellow pages lists "theatres", but M-WCD10th lists theater
>as the preferred spelling.
>
Is it the Greater London telephone book, or the Putney one?
Hedberg
<Walker...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
[...]
>>
>Thanks for your advisory. At my next annual in June, I'll ask Dr Hughes
>to have another evaluation. The previous scan took three X-rays to
>verify that I had "several small gall stones."
That's a neat trick as gall stones don't show up on X-rays.
Harold
Don Aitken
<Walker...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>Philip Eden wrote:
>
>>R Fontana <rf...@sparky.cs.nyu.edu> wrote in message
>>news:Pine.GSO.4.44.03020...@sparky.cs.nyu.edu...
>>
>>>He said "Americans of means", however. My understanding is that the
>>>US, the UK and Canada all have some sort of relatively easy way for
>>>wealthy people to acquire citizenship, though I don't know the details.
>>>
>>Whatever he means by "means". I would not presume to presume
>>that " of means" means wealthy, whatever that may mean. Statistics
>>in respect of wealthy people who acquire citizenship (or become
>>nationalised) are probably not easily available.
>>
>Person of means - A person having economic influence locally,
>nationally, or internationally. An individual independent of the
>requirement to be in the employ of another.
The requirement in UK immigration law is to be a "person of
independent means", which is defined as a person able to support
himself or herself *indefinitely* without doing work for which a work
permit would be required. This seems to be somewhat more restrictive
than your definition. The possession of an adequate income is the main
criterion; the ownership of capital sufficient to generate such an
income will be accepted only if it is in a sufficiently liquid form.
This status gets you permanent residence, not citizenship, the grant
of which is always discretionary, and based on no fixed rules, however
rich you are: as Mohammed Fayed found out.
--
Don Aitken
Hedberg
wrote:
Oops -- X-rays can be used to diagnose gall stones although ultrasound
is probably preferred nowadays.
Harold
Spehro Pefhany
<don-a...@freeuk.com> wrote:
>The requirement in UK immigration law is to be a "person of
>independent means", which is defined as a person able to support
>himself or herself *indefinitely* without doing work for which a work
>permit would be required. This seems to be somewhat more restrictive
>than your definition. The possession of an adequate income is the main
>criterion; the ownership of capital sufficient to generate such an
>income will be accepted only if it is in a sufficiently liquid form.
>This status gets you permanent residence, not citizenship, the grant
>of which is always discretionary, and based on no fixed rules, however
>rich you are: as Mohammed Fayed found out.
The other side of this is that if a foreign resident of the UK retains
the intention, no matter how vague, to someday leave, then he or she
can defer taxation of offshore income virtually indefinitely. This
involves setting up two accounts at a financial institution outside
the UK, one of which contains only principal, the other receives all
investment income. The resident draws only upon the account containing
principal. This is how it was explained to me by a British accountant.
Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
sp...@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com
Philip Eden
> Philip Eden wrote:
>
> >>
> >Funny you should say that. Under the terms of the US Immigration
> >and Nationality Act (and its amendments), immigrant aliens born in the
> >UK admitted to the USA for permanent residence, for the fiscal
> >years noted, were as follows:
> >1991 13,903
> >1992 19,973
> >1993 18,783
> >1994 16,326
> >
> >
> >Under the UK's Immigration Act of 1970, persons from the USA
> >seeking to work or settle in the UK were as follows:
> >1992 27,000 (to the nearest hundred)
> >1993 26,500
> >1994 31,600
> >
> >Source: The Statesman's Year-Book, 1997-98.
> >
> >
> residence", in the latter you indicate "...to work...." Of the number
> that are admitted to work, what is their period of residence?
>
elsewhere in the thread. I am not an immigration expert, merely a
user of statistics. As the statistics kept by different nations are
bound by different regulations and also collected in different ways,
all one can do is quote them, quote the descriptions given with
them, and drawn no conclusions.
Philip Eden
R Fontana
> There was no welfare in the 17th and 18th century English American
> colonies. Everybody worked as an apprentice, at his trade, or as a laborer.
Not sure what you mean by 'welfare', but the analogue to today's AmE
welfare existed in at least some of the colonies (though I guess it was
closer to 'workfare'). So too in England.
Evan Kirshenbaum
> Evan Kirshenbaum <kirsh...@hpl.hp.com> wrote in message
> news:isvykz...@hpl.hp.com...
> > "Philip Eden" <phi...@weather.demon.co.uk> writes:
> >
> Under the terms of the US Immigration
> > > and Nationality Act (and its amendments), immigrant aliens born
> > > in the UK admitted to the USA for permanent residence, for the
> > > fiscal years noted, were as follows:
> > > 1991 13,903
> > > 1992 19,973
> > > 1993 18,783
> > > 1994 16,326
> > >
> > > Under the UK's Immigration Act of 1970, persons from the USA
> > > seeking to work or settle in the UK were as follows:
> > > 1992 27,000 (to the nearest hundred)
> > > 1993 26,500
> > > 1994 31,600
> > >
> > > Source: The Statesman's Year-Book, 1997-98.
> >
> > You're comparing apples (permanent) and oranges (temporary).
>
> I was careful not to make comparisons. It is, of course, impossible
> to make direct comparisons because the laws governing immigration to
> the USA and to the UK are not the same, nor are the ways in which
> the statistics are collated. However, the figures I quoted for both
> directions are the closest to what might be called "permanent" that
> I could find. I also observed to myself that the numbers of
> "permanent" settlers in both directions declined substantially
> between 1994 and 1999 to something around 10,000 + or - 25%, but I
> could not extract precise figures, and I did not wish to muddy the
> waters by producing approximations.
That's fair, although putting the two next to one another like that
invites comparison. As pointed out, the "temporary" flow from the UK
to the US is far higher than the "temporary or permanent" flow from
the US to the UK, even ignoring difference in population size. I also
couldn't find UK statistics on settlement broken down by country, but
by region, from "the Americas", the "grants of settlement" were
1997 7,790
1998 10,785
1999 8,515
2000 11,520
2001 11,895
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs2/hosb1102.pdf
I'm not sure quite whether this quite corresponds to the "immigrants
admitted" number given by the American INS, but that number for the UK
for 2001 is 18,436
http://www.ins.usdoj.gov/graphics/aboutins/statistics/Yearbook2001.pdf
(They seem to equate "immigrant" with "permanent resident alien".) So
this would imply that absolutely more people flow from the UK to the
US for "permanent" status than flow the other way, even ignoring the
fact that not all of the flow from "the Americas" comes from the US.
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |"You can't prove it *isn't* so!" is
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |as good as Q.E.D. in folk logic--as
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |though it were necessary to submit
|a piece of the moon to chemical
kirsh...@hpl.hp.com |analysis before you could be sure
(650)857-7572 |that it was not made of green
|cheese.
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ | Bergen Evans
sa...@non.com
wrote:
>On Thu, 06 Feb 2003 14:52:56 GMT, H G Walker aka Rambler III
Actually, they do. Before the days of ultrasound machines, the X-Ray
was the only non-surgical method for seeing them.
They are definitely not easy to see, and often something called a
Tomograph is used, along with a radio-opaque (sp?) 'dye'. The dye is
not taken in by the stones, and the Tomograph looks at a 'slice'
through the are in question, reducing the clutter of other parts of
the body.
If you ask me politely, I might show you my European-style scar. It's
almost 10 inches long. The surgeon could have hauled the buggers out
with an Aanhangwagen.
Larry
Mark Wallace
> On Thu, 6 Feb 2003 11:41:47 +0000, "M. J. Powell"
> <mi...@pickmere.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> In message <4jf14vke2ssb9tmll...@4ax.com>, Tony
>> Cooper <tony_co...@yahoo.com> writes
>>> On Wed, 5 Feb 2003 08:25:41 +0100, "Mark Wallace"
>>> <mwal...@dse.nl> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Tony Cooper wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> No, your understanding is murky. Robin is English, the UK
>>>>> Operating Rooms are called Operating Theaters,
>>>>
>>>> "Theat*re*s", damnit, *theatres*!
>>>
>>> I will defend Robin, but I'm not about to defend English
>>> spelling. You will have to speak with my spellchecker.
>>
>> 'Speak *to*', dammit.
>>
> Dammit, he's American. They speak *with* people over there.
> Nothing wrong in it, provided you choose the right person.
Nothing wrong *with* it, damnit!
--
Mark Wallace
-----------------------------------------------------
For the intelligent approach to nasty humour, visit:
The Anglo-American Humour (humor) Site
http://humorpages.virtualave.net/mainmenu.htm
-----------------------------------------------------
Mark Wallace
> Tony Cooper wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 5 Feb 2003 08:25:41 +0100, "Mark Wallace"
>> <mwal...@dse.nl> wrote:
>>
>>> Tony Cooper wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> No, your understanding is murky. Robin is English, the UK
>>>> Operating Rooms are called Operating Theaters,
>>>>
>>> "Theat*re*s", damnit, *theatres*!
>>>
>>
>> I will defend Robin, but I'm not about to defend English
>> spelling. You will have to speak with my spellchecker.
>>
>
> My telephone yellow pages lists "theatres",
That would be a non-US phone book, no?
> but M-WCD10th lists
> theater as the preferred spelling.
And the M-W hails from where?
Are you beginning to see a pattern?
--
Mark Wallace
____________________________
You want nanomachines?
I'll give you bloody nanomachines!
http://humorpages.virtualave.net/m-pages/nmaj.htm
____________________________
Dr Robin Bignall
Ultrasound is quite accurate. I know!
Luckily mine are large ones.
H G Walker aka Rambler III
>On Thu, 6 Feb 2003 11:41:47 +0000, "M. J. Powell"
><mi...@pickmere.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>In message <4jf14vke2ssb9tmll...@4ax.com>, Tony Cooper
>><tony_co...@yahoo.com> writes
>>
>>>On Wed, 5 Feb 2003 08:25:41 +0100, "Mark Wallace" <mwal...@dse.nl>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>Tony Cooper wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>No, your understanding is murky. Robin is English, the UK
>>>>>Operating Rooms are called Operating Theaters,
>>>>>
>>>>"Theat*re*s", damnit, *theatres*!
>>>>
>>>I will defend Robin, but I'm not about to defend English spelling.
>>>You will have to speak with my spellchecker.
>>>
>>'Speak *to*', dammit.
>>
>Dammit, he's American. They speak *with* people over there. Nothing wrong
>in it, provided you choose the right person.
>
>--
>
>wrmst rgrds
>Robin Bignall
>
Over here when you have a conversation "with" people you are exchanging
ideas; when you are speaking "to" people, you're giving a lecture.
Dr Robin Bignall
<docrobi...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>On Thu, 06 Feb 2003 12:20:48 -0800, Hedberg <hhed...@swbell.net> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 06 Feb 2003 12:12:17 -0800, Hedberg <hhed...@swbell.net>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 06 Feb 2003 14:52:56 GMT, H G Walker aka Rambler III
>>><Walker...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>>>[...]
>>>>>
>>>>Thanks for your advisory. At my next annual in June, I'll ask Dr Hughes
>>>>to have another evaluation. The previous scan took three X-rays to
>>>>verify that I had "several small gall stones."
>>>
>>>That's a neat trick as gall stones don't show up on X-rays.
>>>
>>>Harold
>>
>>
>>Oops -- X-rays can be used to diagnose gall stones although ultrasound
>>is probably preferred nowadays.
>>
>Ultrasound is quite accurate. I know!
>Luckily mine are large ones.
Oh, and I'm having X-rays and tomography next Tuesday, for a kidney
problem. Maybe H G Walker could try an inane comment about that, too.
Dr Robin Bignall
>Dr Robin Bignall wrote:
[..]
>>> 'Speak *to*', dammit.
>>>
>> Dammit, he's American. They speak *with* people over there.
>> Nothing wrong in it, provided you choose the right person.
>
>Nothing wrong *with* it, damnit!
There's nothing wrong in speaking with other people. Like there's nothing
wrong in playing football, unless you're me. The 'in' refers to the
activity.
H G Walker aka Rambler III
Thanks for the correction. You had me worried for a few minutes. I was
about to ask you how they were detected. I did had an ultrasound for
neck artery "inspection."
--
Rambler III
"All actions have consequences: Consequences are unpredictable: therefore take no action." British foreign service adage
H G Walker aka Rambler III
I became a "man of means" when I paid off my house mortgagee in 1979
after I came into a small inheritance. After that I went on a modified
British "never-never" plan: 100% cash down with no payments for the rest
of my life. After accumulating modest savings from an average income,
I've since been able to purchase automobiles, major appliances, and
other houses with cash since my retirement in 1986.
--
Rambler III
"All actions have consequences: Consequences are unpredictable: therefore take no action." British foreign service adage
H G Walker aka Rambler III
Hedberg
<Walker...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>Hedberg wrote:
>
[...]
>>
>>
>>Oops -- X-rays can be used to diagnose gall stones although ultrasound
>>is probably preferred nowadays.
>>
>>Harold
>>
>Thanks for the correction. You had me worried for a few minutes. I was
>about to ask you how they were detected. I did had an ultrasound for
>neck artery "inspection."
I believe that's a different sort of ultrasound than the simple
pulse-echo used to analyze your gall bladder or pregnancy. They call
it Doppler and I understand it's for good reason.
Harold
H G Walker aka Rambler III
"Dole" is probably a better word describing a condition where able people are able to avoid labor by one subterfuge or another and receive support from the civil authority. I suspect that the disabled, widowed, and orphaned were more likely provided for by church and neighbors than by civil authority until they could be gainfully employed or indentured. The history of the colonies I've read have always indicated the demand for labor rather than an excess of it.
Yes, I am aware of poor houses, poor farms, and orphanages, but they were probably 19th century adaptations in the U S. All were still present in the 1940s to my memory.
--
Rambler III
"All actions have consequences: Consequences are unpredictable: therefore take no action." British foreign service adage
H G Walker aka Rambler III
H G Walker aka Rambler III wrote:Tony Cooper wrote:On Wed, 5 Feb 2003 08:25:41 +0100, "Mark Wallace"
<mwal...@dse.nl> wrote:Tony Cooper wrote:No, your understanding is murky. Robin is English, the UK
Operating Rooms are called Operating Theaters,"Theat*re*s", damnit, *theatres*!I will defend Robin, but I'm not about to defend English
spelling. You will have to speak with my spellchecker.My telephone yellow pages lists "theatres",
That would be a non-US phone book, no?
-- Rambler III
No, I'm a Yankee immigrant.
Jacqui
> R Fontana wrote:
>>On Thu, 6 Feb 2003, H G Walker aka Rambler III wrote:
>>
>>>There was no welfare in the 17th and 18th century English
>>>American colonies. Everybody worked as an apprentice, at his
>>>trade, or as a laborer.
>>
>>Not sure what you mean by 'welfare', but the analogue to today's
>>AmE welfare existed in at least some of the colonies (though I
>>guess it was closer to 'workfare'). So too in England.
>>
> "Dole" is probably a better word describing a condition where able
> people are able to avoid labor by one subterfuge or another and
> receive support from the civil authority. I suspect that the
> disabled, widowed, and orphaned were more likely provided for by
> church and neighbors than by civil authority until they could be
> gainfully employed or indentured. The history of the colonies I've
> read have always indicated the demand for labor rather than an
> excess of it.
>
> Yes, I am aware of poor houses, poor farms, and orphanages, but
> they were probably 19th century adaptations in the U S. All were
> still present in the 1940s to my memory.
You're a couple of hundred years out there. 1642 Poor Law enacted in
Plymouth Colony, based on the 1601 Poor Law in Britain. 1657 the first
(church) welfare society established in Boston. 1790 (post-revolution)
the first publicly-funded orphanage founded in Charleston - privately
funded (and church) orphanages existed before this.
http://www.socialworkers.org/profession/centennial/milestones_1.htm
Workhouses evidently did too: "In 1642, the Connecticut General Court
set a penalty of three years in the workhouse for any colonist caught
"forsaking godly society.""
http://www.ratical.org/many_worlds/6Nations/EoL/chp2.html
Google's cache gives evidence for "Use of convict labor widespread
before slavery" referring to the deportation of criminals to America
1596-1776, "Simsbury, Connecticut, used abandoned copper mine 1773, as
first prison in 1773- had first US prison riot in 1774- called first
state prison- throwback to sulfur pits of ancient Rome- housing
prisoners underground- attempt at US workhouses" - the source site
www.uwlax.edu/ereserves/cox/soc324/ history_of_prisons.htm
unfortunately is not responding right now.
http://www.le.ac.uk/esh/ca26/eh400/sources/2b1.html is interesting
(although slightly tangential, it includes the phrase "That such
Offenders, as also such Offenders in any Workhouse, as aforesaid, shall
be sent as soon as conveniently may be, to some of his Majesty's
Colonies and Plantations in America for the Space of seven Years" in
1717)
http://www.goldonian.org/sub_pages/child_migrationl.htm
http://www.boondocksnet.com/labor/cl_0807_abbott.html
etc.
Jac
H G Walker aka Rambler III
>
>Oh, and I'm having X-rays and tomography next Tuesday, for a kidney
>problem. Maybe H G Walker could try an inane comment about that, too.
>
Why not say "CAT scan" if that's what you're getting?
Hopefully Dr Frankenstein isn't the supervising physician. I understand
he's opening a London restaurant specializing in kidney pies. [;-)
--
Rambler III
You inspire me. That's the best I can do without notice
H G Walker aka Rambler III
>On Thu, 06 Feb 2003 21:08:54 GMT, H G Walker aka Rambler III
><Walker...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
>>Hedberg wrote:
>>
>[...]
>
>>>
>>>Oops -- X-rays can be used to diagnose gall stones although ultrasound
>>>is probably preferred nowadays.
>>>
>>>Harold
>>>
>>Thanks for the correction. You had me worried for a few minutes. I was
>>about to ask you how they were detected. I did [have] an ultrasound for
>>neck artery "inspection."
>>
>
>
>I believe that's a different sort of ultrasound than the simple
>pulse-echo used to analyze your gall bladder or pregnancy. They call
>it Doppler and I understand it's for good reason.
>
>Harold
>
I have blockage in the left artery, but not enough to demand attention
worthy of the risk for the procedure used to correct the problem at this
time. I had a second test this past June which showed little change.
I recall distinctly the "swish, swish" sound made during the test.
--
Rambler III
"All actions have consequences: consequences are unpredictable: therefore take no action." British foreign service adage
H G Walker aka Rambler III
I'll read your references later.
I labored to say
"I suspect that the disabled, widowed, and orphaned were more likely provided for by church and neighbors..."
While searching Indiana Census records, I do not recall finding any listings for orphanages and poor houses in counties of interest until the 20th century. Inmates in prison, yes. From newspaper clippings I learned that during and after the Civil War, the pensions of widows and orphans were supplemented by funds solicited and contributed within the township. Others were supported on provided with shelter by relatives. Those with mental deficiencies are listed as living with their families.
[As an example: My GGgrandfather Thomas Thomas deeded a house and a few acres to the widow and children of my Guncle Walter Walker who received a mortal wound at Lovejoy's Station. Walter's daughter married Mr Thomas' grandson is the connection other than being neighbors.]
Frances Kemmish
If you look at records of the proceedings of civil authorities, you are
likely to find provision made for taking care of the town's poor. Often,
this included payments to people in the town to feed , clothe and hose them.
Fran
Frances Kemmish
>
>> H G Walker aka Rambler III <Walker...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in
>> message
>>
>>> If Great Britain is such a great place to live, why is it that few if
>>> any Americans of means emigrate there? It seems the flow is in the other
>>> direction, if not to the United States, then to Canada.
>>>
>> Funny you should say that. Under the terms of the US Immigration
>> and Nationality Act (and its amendments), immigrant aliens born in the
>> UK admitted to the USA for permanent residence, for the fiscal
>> years noted, were as follows:
>> 1991 13,903
>> 1992 19,973
>> 1993 18,783
>> 1994 16,326
>>
>>
>> Under the UK's Immigration Act of 1970, persons from the USA
>> seeking to work or settle in the UK were as follows:
>> 1992 27,000 (to the nearest hundred)
>> 1993 26,500
>> 1994 31,600
>>
>> Source: The Statesman's Year-Book, 1997-98.
>>
>> numbered 6,050 from the USA and 5,290 from the UK.
>>
>> Source: Britannica Book of the Year 2002
>>
>> Philip Eden
>>
> I don't mean to quibble, but in the first you indicate "permanent
> residence", in the latter you indicate "...to work...." Of the number
> that are admitted to work, what is their period of residence?
>
The latter indicates "...work or settle...". I would imagine that
"settling" is included in the meaning of "permanent residence". An
application for permanent residence in the USA includes an application
for permission to work too.
Fran
Frances Kemmish
> If you look at records of the proceedings of civil authorities, you are
> likely to find provision made for taking care of the town's poor. Often,
> this included payments to people in the town to feed , clothe and hose
> them.
>
House them, I meant to say.
sa...@non.com
<Walker...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>Dr Robin Bignall wrote:
>
>>
>>Oh, and I'm having X-rays and tomography next Tuesday, for a kidney
>>problem. Maybe H G Walker could try an inane comment about that, too.
>>
>Why not say "CAT scan" if that's what you're getting?
Perhaps he's not getting a CAT scan. He might just be having a
Tomogram. Not lilkely, in this day and age, but within the realm of
possibility.
Larry
Jacqui
"Clothe and hose" made perfect sense to me. :)
Jac
Robert Bannister
> Hedberg wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 05 Feb 2003 23:16:57 GMT, H G Walker aka Rambler III
>> <Walker...@worldnet.att.net> wrote: [...]
>>
>>> As I said in a different post, I was advised I had several small
>>> gall stones about three years ago. I researched the procedure and
>>> the "survivors," and I decided the 1-in-100 odds were against me.
>>> I've never won a lottery, but I thought I might be the unlucky
>>> winner of this one, so I turned down this elective surgery.
>>>
>>> Idiot I may be, but a fool I ain't.
>>>
>>
>> Well, I won't characterize what you are for turning down the
>> surgery, but I will say that in my experience, passing one gall
>> stone is far more painful, far more debilitating, and far more
>> likely to cause long-term health problems (you only have one
>> pancreas and you need it) than is the typical modern surgery for
>> removing that little sucker. Having your gall bladder removed
>> probably has about as much net danger as does eating a Big Mac.
>> Unless your stones are quite large, and therefore less likely to
>> embark on a one-way journey down the common duct, and you have
>> removed the reason for them being there in the first place, it
>> could very well be but a matter of time before you have your gall
>> bladder removed. If it becomes medically necessary to remove it
>> (rather than just advisable) you may be in for a real treat as you
>> may not then be a good candidate for "the scope." They may have to
>> cut you from here to there rather than just sucking the bugger out
>> through a straw. Remember the other famous picture of Landslide
>> Lyndon?
>>
>> Harold
>>
> Thanks for your advisory. At my next annual in June, I'll ask Dr
> Hughes to have another evaluation. The previous scan took three
> X-rays to verify that I had "several small gall stones."
I think they usually try a medicine to dissolve the stones before they
embark on surgery - unless your consultant is a surgeon, of course.
--
Rob Bannister
Skitt
Yeah, but it rhymed the other way.
--
Skitt (in SF Bay Area) http://www.geocities.com/opus731/
I speak English well -- I learn it from a book!
-- Manuel (Fawlty Towers)
Hedberg
"Tomography" includes NMR examinations too, doesn't it?
Harold
Hedberg
<rob...@it.net.au> wrote:
> > Thanks for your advisory. At my next annual in June, I'll ask Dr
> > Hughes to have another evaluation. The previous scan took three
> > X-rays to verify that I had "several small gall stones."
>
>I think they usually try a medicine to dissolve the stones before they
>embark on surgery - unless your consultant is a surgeon, of course.
I don't think that they can dissolve gall stones with medicine. First
is the problem of getting it in there. I don't think there's an easy
way to ingest medication and have it go through the gall bladder.
Then is the problem with what happens to the product if you were able
to break up or reduce the size of the stones. This would make the
material much more likely to pass from the gall bladder into the ducts
and that's where you run into trouble. I am told that small stones
and calcareous slush are much more of a problem than are large and
well-defined stones.
Harold
Dr Robin Bignall
wrote:
[..]
> > Thanks for your advisory. At my next annual in June, I'll ask Dr
> > Hughes to have another evaluation. The previous scan took three
> > X-rays to verify that I had "several small gall stones."
>
The small ones are the worst. They can travel down the tubes and block
them.
>I think they usually try a medicine to dissolve the stones before they
>embark on surgery - unless your consultant is a surgeon, of course.
One standard way is to use some form of ultrasound to break them up into
bits small enough to be flushed away. My surgeon (the good one) did not
recommend this at all, because they might just become small enough to cause
blockage. His advice was to leave them alone if they're not causing
problems.
Dr Robin Bignall
Maybe you were right first time, Frances!