As far as I know no gas was used in ww2.That's what I thought too, but Google is telling me phosgene (apart from Zyklon B, of course).
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Aviators have a saying:
"These things will not save your life: the sky above you, the runway behind you, the fuel you left in the truck, and anything that happened yesterday."
You have an absolute right under GDPR to see your medical records.No you don't.
I would suggest you do some doctor shoppingIn 2016 I had a report on a series of ECGs from a very helpful professor in London which proved that the NHS were lying, without any shopping around at all, so when I was facing an unnecessary anaesthetic for a cystoscopy that I didn't need I tried the same again. This time I went all round the private sector and just got told to go to the NHS or that I needed a referral from the NHS. They've been warned off for pulling the rug out from under the NHS's feet.
As regards your problems with the NHS, I can't comment as I live in Ireland.Most countries have the same issues. It isn't really about medics even, as the Post Office scandal shows, it's just human nature. If you'd been there yourself you'd know.
involve your Member of ParliamentI assume you're unaware that MPs have no power over the PHSO then? The ombudsman is ostensibly there to police the MPs, so you can't have the PHSO and MPs each policing the other. The PACAC Committee supposedly oversees the PHSO, but they don't actually do anything beyond a token meeting once a year. When I wrote to my MP I got no reply, and the stock line from the PACAC Chair is that they don't get involved in individual cases. I've been going at this for eight years, just how much is there that you think I (and all the others in a similar position) haven't already done in that time? I know someone who has been going at this for over 20 years, spent north of ?100k on legal fees, had coverage on national TV, and still got nowhere. Have you ever heard the term 'duty of candour'? That was his doing, but it still hasn't got any of us anywhere. Like I said, even Scotland Yard were thwarted. Nothing came of the Gosport Inquiry, even though Nurse Spilka testified that they were euthanising patients just because they were regarded as "difficult". I've lost count of the times I've seen that in my records. I've been told I'm "notoriously difficult" to my face.
The case of the missing MDT record suggests individual malfeasance or a serious flaw in the NHS records systemThe main issue behind my complaint in 2015 was the denial of my heart arrhythmia, I just mentioned the MDT report because you seemed to think that records are there just for the asking, and because I had a scan of that ICO letter to hand. You don't get given anything they don't want you to have. Even the ombudsman has publicly panned the NHS for forging records. I can see where mine have been forged.
Much more like vestibular or auditory nerve malfunction.The neurologist who told me that it can't be a brain problem because I get 'headaches' (his word, not mine) sent me to ENT. They said it can't be an ear problem. He sent me to physiotherapy twice. They rejected me twice. Second time I saw him he referred me to an ophthalmologist. She said it's not an eye problem.
you might actually get some insight from SpecsaversI've been to the opticians twice, the second time to ask for a referral to a neuro-ophthalmologist, but she refused and told me to go to the NHS.
May I ask what symptoms do you attribute to having had a general anaesthetic?A feeling of extreme pressure in head was the immediate symptom on waking, along with violent dizziness.
If this question is too personal or intrusive, ignore it.I'm happy to publish just about anything and everything relating to my healthcare, because people who are too coy to do so are just providing the NHS with protection.
Definitely worth a complaint.I never thought of that.
If you don't ask, you'll never know. Not "the NHS" (which is mostly accountants nowadays) but the doctor who made the statement.When I do ask I never know either, and I don't know who the doctor was, they're all locums, so you never get the same one twice, and they never introduce themselves. The usual response to verbal questions is "I don't know, nothing to do with me, go away and ask someone else", and written questions sent by recorded delivery get ignored.
The person most likely to know the answer is surely the GP who requested the test.If the NHS have suddenly been overcome by an urge to answer my questions, they have dozens of unanswered ones to be going on with already.
@vfhpmrThanks, but that's for diabetics who are having an anaesthetic. I didn't have diabetes then, and I think that the test will show I don't have it now.
I know you Specifically asked for NHS...
But this is all i could find.
I already have researched it for myself and found nothing, hence my posting this thread. Do you have any evidence that the NHS answer any of my questions when I ask them?I thought so too, but I haven't yet said as much to the GP who referred me for a fasting blood sugar test on the premise that it might explain the symptoms I've been experiencing since waking from a general anaesthetic 3.5 years ago. I thought I'd wait until I've checked whether I can find any evidence for it first.I think asking another doctor or researching the question yourself would make a lot more sense than asking strangers on the internet.
Well, that was weird...I thought so too, but I haven't yet said as much to the GP who referred me for a fasting blood sugar test on the premise that it might explain the symptoms I've been experiencing since waking from a general anaesthetic 3.5 years ago. I thought I'd wait until I've checked whether I can find any evidence for it first.
Here's a recent video from slow mo guy. Thanks to them, we can watch the exciting phenomena from a safe place.Re the eggs in that video: I once made the mistake of assuming that they won't go pop without the shell.
Inside a Microwave at 80,000fps - The Slow Mo GuysQuoteGav and Dan pop some CDs in the microwave and watch the light show at a 3200th of real-time. Don't try at home.... for the sake of your microwave.
which suggests that wnen car occupants wear seatbelts, more pedestrians wander into the road.Part of seatbelt legislation often requires children to be in the back seat, so some of those who would have died in the front seat now die in the back seat. And as far as I know, pedestrians are not defined as persons wearing seatbelts.
The reason more die is because motorists aren't driving as carefully, the same reason that more children died in back seats after they were made to wear seatbelts. Or are you going to suggest that children wearing seat belts are more likely to wander in front of the car?
children have a tendancty to catapult out of adult seatbelts, i think this is why childrens booster seat where introduced
the decline in road deaths after child booster seats were introducedI know why booster seats were introduced, you haven't produced any evidence that children's seat belts reduced road deaths.
Flow increases, speed decreases, density increaces, crashes increaces. Density increaces accidents.Irrelevant. Smeed's Law has nothing to do with short term variations in flow rate, it relates to long term variation in the number of vehicles per head of population.
So if it is undetectable we can not make statements about seatbelts creating reckless deathwish drivers.It isn't undetectable, and drivers aren't being reckless.
Reckless drivers do not cause deaths then, nor deaths by dangerous driving cause deaths either, amazing! And playing with words, mmm them difficult words. Causing problems in arguments.
Well this is clear codswallop, using words in the hope people don't think the words mean what they mean?
But uk road deaths show a very steady deline from 1990 onwards?Yes, because traffic density is increasing.
Not withstanding that children have a tendancy to catapult out of adult seatbelts, i think this is why childrens booster seat where introduced.So children bounce around inside the car more when they're belted than when they aren't? I don't think so.
This means nothing without any explanation of what it relates to, and what its relevance is supposed to be.
Relationship-of-speed-volume-density-LOS-and-total-crash-rates.png (210.28 kB . 850x525 - viewed 95 times)
Because given a seatbelt drivers according to you start being more reckless. Or do reckless drivers not cause road deaths?Again:
Petrol use was the same for both the law & no law cohorts, the difference between them is the seatbelt law. I can't make any sense of the rest of your post. Death rates have shown an accurate correlation with traffic density in almost every country it's been measured over decades, but not to other confounding variables.Yes of course, the oil crisis only picked on the countries that introduced compulsory seat belts and left all the others alone didn't it. Silly me.Well surely the scarcity of petrol has an effect. It was an example as to the factors that are not represented on the graph. For example cars increace so do road deaths actually go down or is there more opportunity? The increace in road deaths correlates with the ammount of 2nd cars, used probably at this point in history by married women who where house wives during the day.