King Charles Diagnosed With Cancer

[Day]

Saying that, I know, but I don't know why this topic has descended into an NHS topic.

Royalist or not, surely we can all understand why the King of the country would receive priority health care unlike our own friends and family?

Having lost my sister in law recently to cancer, just 42 years old, I am not sat here without experience of watching someone die having been through the NHS system, months of appointments, misdiagnosis before they realised it was cancer and then left cancer cells in her kidney which spread to the rest of her body.

She wasn't royalty, she wasn't the Queen of the country, her death whilst making front page news of the local paper, was not a national story. She was just a regular person that unfortunately due to mistakes lost her life, as many have and will continue to do so.

King Charles, for the record I am no royalist, never watched a wedding, ceremony, couldn't even tell you the full words to the national anthem. He's the King, it's blindly obvious why his health would take priority, avoiding the regular process which all starts being on hold at 8am trying to get a doctors appointment.

He's the King, figurehead of the country. He's probably never had to load a dishwasher, wash his own clothes or hoover his own living room.

Do I believe anyone should be born into that position, no, but the hierarchy in this country exists and it is what it is.

The state of the NHS is another topic in itself, which in fairness due to our political rules on this forum probably can't take place as we ultimately know why all the difficulties exist and with a growing population, will only get worse.

The King of the country has got cancer though, that's the big story here. 

I wish him well and catching it early means the treatment will work. 

[Ram-Alf]

17 minutes ago, David said:

King Charles, for the record I am no royalist, never watched a wedding, ceremony, couldn't even tell you the full words to the national anthem. He's the King, it's blindly obvious why his health would take priority, avoiding the regular process which all starts being on hold at 8am trying to get a doctors appointment.

He's the King, figurehead of the country. He's probably never had to load a dishwasher, wash his own clothes or hoover his own living room.

Thomas Jefferson..."all men are created equal" he's right, Creating a human in the main takes a sexual act, So it's pretty much the same for all of us.

It's who or where you're born, I'm no royalist either, I had a giggle when Fergie went "toe sucking" or randy Andy said he doesn't perspire, No tears when Dianna lost her life, And now the soap opera of Harry and his wife, The tabloids love all this as they think the public love all this, As for my knowledge of the above...you had to be on the Moon under a duvet and a moon rock not to have heard all the stories.

There's a perversion and jealousy in this land of ours when it comes to wealth and social status or should I say the "feudal system" 😉

 

 

[Grumpy Git]

42 minutes ago, David said:

................................................... wash his own clothes or hoover his own living room.

Nope, you've got me there!

Edited February 7 by Grumpy Git

[Day]

2 minutes ago, Ram-Alf said:

Thomas Jefferson..."all men are created equal" he's right, Creating a human in the main takes a sexual act, So it's pretty much the same for all of us.

It's who or where you're born, I'm no royalist either, I had a giggle when Fergie went "toe sucking" or randy Andy said he doesn't perspire, No tears when Dianna lost her life, And now the soap opera of Harry and his wife, The tabloids love all this as they think the public love all this, As for my knowledge of the above...you had to be on the Moon under a duvet and a moon rock not to have heard all the stories.

There's a perversion and jealousy in this land of ours when it comes to wealth and social status or should I say the "feudal system" 😉

There is jealousy over wealth and social status, absolutely there is. I just don't have any within me.

We're on a football forum, spending our free time following and discussing a bunch of players that earn more in a month than many of us will in a year.

We're making that choice. We're going to work, some on minimum wage or slightly above, paying taxes, then using what's left over to buy tickets to watch these players kick a leather bag of air about.

If I had that jealousy within me, I'm not sure how I could justify being not just a Derby County fan, but a football fan.

[BaaLocks]

21 hours ago, Bob The Badger said:

You're describing the US model.

If you see the latest BUPA advert that is exactly where they want it to go - promoting things like access to GPs, palliative care, specialists access. It's abhorrent to watch as it indicates the plan coming together, underfund the NHS to the point it is no longer able to serve and then leave private companies to fill the gaps created by that underfunding. I don't think anyone denies that private health providers have a purpose - plastic surgery, electives etc. that we could never expect the taxpayer to fund. But when private healthcare providers are promoting core services as a subscription / insurance based service we know the tipping point has been reached.

In other news, over the last ten years private health providers have donated more than £800k of funds to the Conservative party over the past ten years. Not related to the above, of course.

Edited February 7 by BaaLocks

[Bob The Badger]

19 hours ago, Stive Pesley said:

This one dropped off the front page pretty quick eh?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-68167593

Mrs Badger is a Doctor of Nursing and has spent 25 years working in oncology, mainly colorectal and head and neck and she gets really frustrated by stories like this. Not this specific one, as I don't know if she has seen it, but as her best friend died of ocular melanoma, I will share it with her - but in general.

There was a story not that long ago about a person who had been offered a treatment and declined it. Then a few months later he decided to take it but the doctors determined it  was no longer suitable and wouldn’t work

The local news story was all about somebody being denied treatment by the NHS and had to raise money to go to Germany to get it. There was outrage because all they reported was doctors saying it wasn't suitable, not that he'd been urged to take it months earlier.

He got his treatment and died anyway.

And there have been others that she wasn’t personally involved in when she has been incredulous because important elements were left out.

Sooooo, I have no clue about this guy, but I’m leery of blaming anybody. Once cancer hits your liver, it’s really difficult to eradicate.

And FWIW, she thinks it's quite possible Charles has rectal cancer as that would show up on prostate testing. Of course, she cannot be sure as I doubt anybody can outside of his medical team.

[Bob The Badger]

1 hour ago, David said:

Saying that, I know, but I don't know why this topic has descended into an NHS topic.

Royalist or not, surely we can all understand why the King of the country would receive priority health care unlike our own friends and family?

Having lost my sister in law recently to cancer, just 42 years old, I am not sat here without experience of watching someone die having been through the NHS system, months of appointments, misdiagnosis before they realised it was cancer and then left cancer cells in her kidney which spread to the rest of her body.

She wasn't royalty, she wasn't the Queen of the country, her death whilst making front page news of the local paper, was not a national story. She was just a regular person that unfortunately due to mistakes lost her life, as many have and will continue to do so.

King Charles, for the record I am no royalist, never watched a wedding, ceremony, couldn't even tell you the full words to the national anthem. He's the King, it's blindly obvious why his health would take priority, avoiding the regular process which all starts being on hold at 8am trying to get a doctors appointment.

He's the King, figurehead of the country. He's probably never had to load a dishwasher, wash his own clothes or hoover his own living room.

Do I believe anyone should be born into that position, no, but the hierarchy in this country exists and it is what it is.

The state of the NHS is another topic in itself, which in fairness due to our political rules on this forum probably can't take place as we ultimately know why all the difficulties exist and with a growing population, will only get worse.

The King of the country has got cancer though, that's the big story here. 

I wish him well and catching it early means the treatment will work. 

100% agree.

When some on the left were up in arms because Trump got preferential treatment when he got covid, I was like wtf, he's the President?

Whereas my heart says everybody should be treated equally, my brain says that the sheer fact that he signs off on laws in our country and is head of State means we really should throw as many resources at it as possible.

And I'm not at all in favour of a monarchy, but we have to be sensible.

I actually quite like Charles and hope he makes a speedy recovery. 

[ariotofmyown]

1 hour ago, David said:

If I had that jealousy within me, I'm not sure how I could justify being not just a Derby County fan, but a football fan.

I'm not sure it's a jealousy thing really.

I respect the ability, sacrifices and talent of professional footballers. They have also ended up working in a very popular industry and bring joy (and a lot of misery) to 1000s and millions of people. Whilst there are some phyiscial limitations on who can become a rich footballer, it's reasonably open to everyone to at try and reach that level if they so wish.

The royals are totally different to this. It's a rigged system, closed to most people unless you fancy running the risk of having children with genetic issues due to inbreeding.

Footballers have earnt their money fairly and whilst I wish we had a more equal system, capitalism is probably the best thing on offer for now.

Royals are given their wealth by nothing but birth. Then they are also given power too, then still are given public money, even though their wealth is enormous. Victoria and Albert brough Sandringham as they petitioned the government for more cash as they could afford to carry out their royal duties!

At least we could tell then to sell off most of their ill-gotten properites and use them to house the homeless?

[Day]

2 minutes ago, ariotofmyown said:

I'm not sure it's a jealousy thing really.

I respect the ability, sacrifices and talent of professional footballers. They have also ended up working in a very popular industry and bring joy (and a lot of misery) to 1000s and millions of people. Whilst there are some phyiscial limitations on who can become a rich footballer, it's reasonably open to everyone to at try and reach that level if they so wish.

The royals are totally different to this. It's a rigged system, closed to most people unless you fancy running the risk of having children with genetic issues due to inbreeding.

Footballers have earnt their money fairly and whilst I wish we had a more equal system, capitalism is probably the best thing on offer for now.

Royals are given their wealth by nothing but birth. Then they are also given power too, then still are given public money, even though their wealth is enormous. Victoria and Albert brough Sandringham as they petitioned the government for more cash as they could afford to carry out their royal duties!

At least we could tell then to sell off most of their ill-gotten properites and use them to house the homeless?

I hear you, don't really disagree with any of it. As I say I'm not a royalist so not here to defend the system. The debate over how much they cost v how much revenue they generate through tourism will rage on long after you and I are still on the planet. 

You can find counter articles written with guesstimates all day long, how do you know if say one Japanese tourist that visited Buckingham Palace, bought a Corgi stuffed toy would have still came over and bought a London bus stuffed toy even if we didn't have a King or Queen.

I've just become tolerant for lack of a better word of this is how it is and just be grateful in that we do at least have some democracy with a vote that counts unlike some countries. Looking at you Russia.

When I spoke of jealousy over wealth and social status, that's wide ranging from say a mate that's got the fancy car, right up to the likes of Elon Musk with 55bn to throw away destroying a social media platform.

I have 2 mates that go through more TV's than Curry's as they try to outdo each other for the biggest and latest technology to the point where their living rooms look ridiculous. 

Could be argued that's more competitive than jealousy though, either way I don't have it in me. Truth be told, given a choice to be the King or continue my own life? I'm carrying on as I am, the idea that your whole life is controlled is not an appealing one, even the money is nice. 

I reckon with 55bn though I could restore Twitter to his former glory and can this daft Mars colony idea. 

 

[Wolfie]

29 minutes ago, ariotofmyown said:

Royals are given their wealth by nothing but birth.

You could argue that so are the rest of us. Every one of us on here has been born into relative privilege, compared with the vast majority of people in the world.

[BaaLocks]

54 minutes ago, David said:

I have 2 mates that go through more TV's than Curry's as they try to outdo each other for the biggest and latest technology to the point where their living rooms look ridiculous. 

Maybe you're judging the gift of life by slightly less material outputs than the number of televisions you possess? Good on you if that is the case, the older I get the more I try to focus in that arena. And I've yet to go to a funeral where the eulogy focused on how many cars or houses the deceased managed to accrue in their life.

As for Charles, or Charles Philip Arthur George, Duke of Cornwall, Duke of Rothesay, Earl of Carrick, Baron of Renfrew, Lord of the Isles, and Prince and Great Steward of Scotland. to give him his full title, I wish him a full and speedy recovery. I don't blame him for trying to access the best of healthcare available to him and, as a person, he strikes me as someone who does somewhere - underneath it all - see the anachronism that is monarchy. But, as others suggest, he's largely making the most of what the randomness of life has delivered him. It's not his fault he was born to be king, no more than it's some Brazilian kids fault they were born in a slum. Sorry, got a bit off track there but still - when you're on a roll you're on a roll.

Edited February 7 by BaaLocks

[Grumpy Git]

4 hours ago, Ram-Alf said:

 

 

I prefer this version:

 

Edited February 7 by Grumpy Git

[Bob The Badger]

1 hour ago, Grumpy Git said:

I prefer this version:

 

Helluva bukkake party at the bottom.

 

[Tamworthram]

10 hours ago, ariotofmyown said:

I'm not sure it's a jealousy thing really.

I respect the ability, sacrifices and talent of professional footballers. They have also ended up working in a very popular industry and bring joy (and a lot of misery) to 1000s and millions of people. Whilst there are some phyiscial limitations on who can become a rich footballer, it's reasonably open to everyone to at try and reach that level if they so wish.

The royals are totally different to this. It's a rigged system, closed to most people unless you fancy running the risk of having children with genetic issues due to inbreeding.

Footballers have earnt their money fairly and whilst I wish we had a more equal system, capitalism is probably the best thing on offer for now.

Royals are given their wealth by nothing but birth. Then they are also given power too, then still are given public money, even though their wealth is enormous. Victoria and Albert brough Sandringham as they petitioned the government for more cash as they could afford to carry out their royal duties!

At least we could tell then to sell off most of their ill-gotten properites and use them to house the homeless?

Despite all their privileges and wealth (I don’t really think they have any power) would any of us want to swap places with them? I know I wouldn’t. 

[Chester40]

On 05/02/2024 at 20:35, Stive Pesley said:

Yeah lucky is definitely the wrong word. You don't get private health care through luck. You pay for it

Two years ago I was waiting to have a bowel resection for suspected cancer, and the op didn't happen until June. The NHS was and still is running on fumes when it comes to this stuff. I now have private health care because I learned the hard way that the NHS is a lottery if you want to get the best care, and there is not much more important than the health of yourself and your loved ones. I always swore I would never get private health care as well, on principle.

But I agree that  this is going to stick in the craw of anyone awaiting cancer treatment on the NHS, or anyone who has lost loved ones because they didn't get treated soon enough

As for King Chazza - I hope he gets the successful outcome we've all paid for

 

 

Take your point....

But the NHS is under strain not because of King Charles getting cancer....but the deluge of 'mental health' issues, parents wanting diagnosis instead of looking towards their own parenting first, people wanting compensation for car accidents,  millions of missed appointments,  the obesity crisis etc etc

[Eddie]

12 minutes ago, Chester40 said:

Take your point....

But the NHS is under strain not because of King Charles getting cancer....but the deluge of 'mental health' issues, parents wanting diagnosis instead of looking towards their own parenting first, people wanting compensation for car accidents,  millions of missed appointments,  the obesity crisis etc etc

Aging population, with insufficient care places available - patients cannot be discharged unless there is somewhere for them to go. This leads to 'bed-blocking', so if the original patient cannot be discharged, then the next one cannot be admitted. Couple that with a shortage of staff (there are something like 120,000 vacancies which cannot be filled because there's no-one to fill them) and the lowest percentage of critical care beds compared to other developed countries - and you have a very sick NHS indeed.

[Ewe Ram]

17 minutes ago, Chester40 said:

Take your point....

But the NHS is under strain not because of King Charles getting cancer....but the deluge of 'mental health' issues, parents wanting diagnosis instead of looking towards their own parenting first, people wanting compensation for car accidents,  millions of missed appointments,  the obesity crisis etc etc

There’s a small army at the NHS looking out records for patient claims. It’s a wonder any clinician dare begin to treat anyone for fear of being sued