Good luck on the recuperation

Unlucky on the hospital catering

I had some surgery last year at the same hospital that I worked in the kitchen of many years ago, and their catering has vastly improved.

I imagine someone high up in the health authority has been convinced of the rehabilitative benefit of excessively good nutrition rather than meeting minimum requirements.

It's a shame that this isn't a bit more uniform across the whole of the country.

[entirely]

On the economic side, the idea of hiding a cure because they make more out of selling the treatment - just doesn't make sense economically

Because if every other company is covering up a cure - it means the one company that releases the actual cure gets a decades long patent and immediately takes all the money away from all their competitors
 

I take your point here, but there is a huge difference between "hiding a cure" and being happy having a "decades long patent" on something that alleviates symptoms (which may have arisen from an attempt to find a cure).

 

I'm not sure you do entirely get the point

If a company such as AstraZeneca researches a cure for something and ends up with a good treatment for it - that might have taken about $1bn to get to market.

If they have a 20 year patent that means they must make at least $50 million a year to get their R&D money back

If a different company, such as Pfizer were researching the same cure and get beaten to the treatment by AZ - they'll keep on researching the cure.

If they get a cure 5 years after AZ got their treatment it means Pfizer will patent their cure for 20 years.

And AstraZeneca has 15 years left on a patent which is basically worthless - because who is going to pay for the treatment when they can just pay for the cure

In this model the profit maximisation is for AZ to patent the treatment - and still carry on researching the cure.

That's obviously hugely simplified - but it's basically the reason why research will never get stifled.

If it works (for a middle class western customer) - it will make a profit

And if your pharma company doesn't make that profit - one of your competitors will.

.... On his advice my other half had chemo back in the UK, she had 4 drugs, 3 were artificial copies of natural remedies. If the drugs companies can't make money out of something they are unlikely to pay for research to prove that it works.

There is always not enough money to research everything, but the usual criteria for ranking isn't how much money it might make but how likely it is to work

If it works - pharma companies can make money out of it

We know this because - you've already stated that they do it

Anything that is naturally curative in nature is more convenient and often more effective once a company has worked out a way to mass produce it and put it in a shop

On the economic side, the idea of hiding a cure because they make more out of selling the treatment - just doesn't make sense economically

Because if every other company is covering up a cure - it means the one company that releases the actual cure gets a decades long patent and immediately takes all the money away from all their competitors
 
The only time when not making money stops research is when the entire market for a disease - are poor

This is why there's a whole branch called "neglected tropical disease" - these are all the diseases that it is not profitable for private companies to research because it wouldn't be guaranteed to get their research money back - so they rely on charitable foundations and government grants. it's worth noting the majority of all scientific research done worldwide is government grants and not private companies - for example even if zero pharma companies spent money on cancer research it would still be one of the most researched areas because of all the government grants that go towards it.

Unless anyone is planning on moving to deepest African then they're not really going to be affected by that

Anything that can be sold to comfortable middle class westerners will always be researched because it will always make money

And we definitely know this - because the Wellness alternative health industry makes more money than Big Pharma does

I've been taking Vitamin D for a while, it is supposed to combat Alzheimer's but you have to take at least a certain mg per day and you need to take it together with Vitamin C too as they work together. My Dr didn't know that  

Although there definitely is a general problem with doctors not generally keeping up to date with new research - there is no study (as of yet) to confirm this link

This sums it up

https://www.nia.nih.gov/health/alzheimers-and-dementia/what-do-we-know-about-diet-and-prevention-alzheimers-disease

In particular the paragraph

But despite early findings of possible benefits for brain health, no vitamin or supplement has been proven to prevent Alzheimer’s in people. Overall, evidence remains weak because many studies were too small or too brief to be conclusive.

Which is to say various vitamins and supplements might help - but statistically there isn't enough evidence to back that up yet - that would be why the average GP wouldn't necessarily know anything about it

[Probably not for much longer, apparently...lol]

..
I turned 60 in December ...
..

Well I'm okay then - I only turn 50 next week.

..
 can confirm that from 50 onwards is all downhill so far.
..

oh.... I see...   :|             Probably not for much longer, apparently...lol

 

..
I turned 60 in December ...
..

Well I'm okay then - I only turn 50 next week.

..
 can confirm that from 50 onwards is all downhill so far.
..

oh.... I see...   :|

Not strictly a politician, but wanted to highlight the stupid pronouncement of some senior official at Scope, the Charity.

He has been referring to the suspension and then dismissal of the Eastenders actor, Jamie Borthwick. Who has been dismissed for the one-off use of the offensive ableist word "mongoloid". Regardless of the fact that not only was it a one-off, it was not in any way connected to his employment as an actor on Eastenders.

If we are all liable to summary dismissal for using one unwise word, not sure how many people would be in employment. But language changes over time. Words that were once in common usage are now deeply offensive. Which, IMHO, requires education. Not dismissal. But it was the attitude of Scope that particularly rankled. The quote started with:-

"Attitudes and language like this are never acceptable".

So. A word that once had medical connotations relating to Down syndrome. That, over time, became synonymous with an offensive slur that it ceased to be acceptable. Something that not everybody always appreciates.

If only I could think of another word referring to people with Down syndrome. That, similarly, is now no longer acceptable. Which, presumably, that man at Scope believes "are never acceptable".

Scope. Known for 90 years as the Spastic Society. Might have hoped for a little more understanding.

This makes it sound like it's a word that's only recently changed meaning

For comparison spastic was being used in a medical sense well into the 1990s

Whereas mongoloid stopped being a medical term in the 1950s

Whether people should have a 1 strike and you're out rule is another issue but this actor was born in the 1990s - he has only ever known it as an offensive term. It's possible his parents have only ever known it as an offensive term.

Paparrazi shot of Tikay reviewing modern music

Click to see full-size image.

Ralph (karabiner) sent me some lovely photos from Wollaton Park Golf Club where's he's been a member for a very long time I believe.

The Course sits is overlooked by the beautiful Wollaton Hall & is famous for the herds of Deer that roam around freely. 

Has there always been a golf course there?

I took these about 10 years ago

Click to see full-size image.

Click to see full-size image.

Did I just not notice a massive golf course next to it?

The golf club about to celebrate it's centenary, but it is a big park.

Thanks, my family also come from Nottingham - which is another reason that maybe I should have noticed.

But, to be fair, I wasn't ever really looking

Ralph (karabiner) sent me some lovely photos from Wollaton Park Golf Club where's he's been a member for a very long time I believe.

The Course sits is overlooked by the beautiful Wollaton Hall & is famous for the herds of Deer that roam around freely. 

Has there always been a golf course there?

I took these about 10 years ago

Click to see full-size image.

Click to see full-size image.

Did I just not notice a massive golf course next to it?

I tried to claim a refund about a year ago after my train back from London to Nottingham was delayed by over an hour.

I must have spent about an hour trying to submit my application online and giving card details etc. - it's a very complicated process - but it turned out to be a complete waste of time as nothing ever materialized.

Exactly. They deliberately make it complicated so that you just give up.

Bastards.

It depends on who the operator is.

When I used to commute by train, before COVID, I semi regularly put in delay repay compensation claims.

With SouthEastern they had a form online

Your sign in to the site meant it remembered some of your details

The browsers auto complete filled in most of the rest

So for every claim you pretty much just had to put in the start and end of your journey and click submit.

About a week later they did a bank transfer for the compensation amount into your bank account.

I don't know if they're the only ones who made it that easy though because I've only done it a couple of times with any of the other operators and they were long enough ago that they might have changed their system by now.

Tiny update: I asked the diabetes nurse about the bloods and she said that people who are treating their diabetes with insulin have to do the blood test every day. That's usually, but not always, type 1 diabetes.

The test they're using for mine is based on blood regenerating every 3 months so from now on they only need to test it every 3 months. I think there's a different test as well - that could be why weekly maybe(?)

Or it could be the same as mine but they're just a bit more concerned perhaps(?)

Well damn, I've just been diagnosed with type 2 diabetes as well.

So far they haven't mentioned diet, only to take Metformin. They also said my blood pressure and cholesterol were the high end of normal so because of the diabetes diagnosis I've got drugs for those as well.

But this is literally all within the last few weeks, so they still have time to add something about food.

Hopefully everything stabilises out nicely for you, and I, and a new stasis level comes around soon.

Ha, got high cholesterol and blood pressure was borderline too.  They offered me statins, but was of the view that restricted diet + Metformin + statins was too much at once.   They gave the impression, statins were up to me, as my readings weren't that bad.

Metformin has been a ball ache as I have a long commute and find I am half way to work before I realise I haven't taken it, but am getting better at remembering.

Going to see how my cholesterol is after the diet and take it from there.  With a bit of luck I won't need any of the drugs in 6 months.  If cholesterol is still high, will probably take the statins.

Weird question, but how much do you test your blood?  Turns out one of the other blokes at work was also diagnosed recently.  He has been told to test his blood twice a day; me once a week.  His sounds more extreme though.  Reading around, different sources say entirely different things, so might just do twice a week or something not too extreme.

I had a blood pressure and blood test, a month later I had another one - that confirmed the diabetes diagnosis and was when they said to start on the Metformin

 2 weeks after that they had a blood pressure follow up and that's when they suggested the bp medicine and Statins - but they suggested to delay starting the Statins for a couple of weeks afterwards

That is about now - and I have another bloods appointment today

So, I think, that means they're still in the process of deciding what the appropriate framework should be and there's no immediate crisis likely (maybe?).

I use a recurring alarm on my phone to tell me to take the drugs, but also my wife checks at least 4 times a day that I'm going to take the one's coming up and have taken the one's just gone 😄

Well damn, I've just been diagnosed with type 2 diabetes as well.

So far they haven't mentioned diet, only to take Metformin. They also said my blood pressure and cholesterol were the high end of normal so because of the diabetes diagnosis I've got drugs for those as well.

But this is literally all within the last few weeks, so they still have time to add something about food.

Hopefully everything stabilises out nicely for you, and I, and a new stasis level comes around soon.

I think people might be getting hung up on the specifics of this case rather than the general principle.

If a court finds you "not guilty" - then you are "not guilty"

That might include all the actually guilty people who there wasn't enough evidence to "prove" they were guilty - but it also includes all the people who were found not guilty - because they actually didn't do it.

The actually innocent people can still spend their life savings on the court procedures to get them out of prison - and they're still 93% likely to not get any of that money back.