Tuesday, October 23, 2007

[smoking] you're nicked, me old china

What’s wrong with these paragraphs about new technology which helps detect whether you've been smoking or not?
Dr. Reddy was looking for a quick, convenient method to detect whether a person smokes. Current tests involve breath, blood or saliva samples, but the pulse cooximeter simply involves placing a clip-like device on a fingertip.

The pulse cooximeter reads percentages of poisoned blood through a light that is shined through the finger nail.
Nothing wrong with it? I want to know why – why you wouldn’t take my word whether I smoke or not? Why must I be made to submit to the indignity of a test to prove whether I’m a liar or not?

What is it to you if I smoke or not? What is any of it to do with you? How much did the research cost? Who funded it? Why not spend it on research which counts, such as finding cures for human ailments?

Do you see any distinction between a naughty child and an adult who does what he feels to be best for him?

Does the word “draconian” hover somewhere near the back of the mind in reading this stuff? I also want to know why you said "shined" instead of "shone".

10 comments:

BobG said...

Another invasion of privacy; either insurance companies or governments with socialized medicine will be interested in this to spy on people.

Welshcakes Limoncello said...

Well, I agree that the money could be better spent but how many people are honest with their doctors about how much they smoke or drink? - so few, in the latter case, that GPs have given up asking, I gather.

Sen. Peter Higham Paul said...

Bob - right you are.

Welshcakes - what if they're not? It's their funeral.

Welshcakes Limoncello said...

It is possible a doc would need to know to make a diagnosis.

Crushed by Ingsoc said...

What bugs me about this persecution of smokers is the fact that 82% of each packet, is tax.

This means I PAY £45 a week to the exchequer, just for smoking.

This is over two grand a year.

I think I pay my contribution to the costs of any smoking related illnesses I may one day get!

Longrider said...

I was asked about smoking when I went to see my GP about my gammy knee. In what way was this relevant for a diagnosis? It seems to be pretty routine these days and bugger all to do with what is actually wrong with the patient.

Sen. Peter Higham Paul said...

Of course he needs to know, Welsh, and he should ask. But if the patient refused, is the doctor going to then get two orderlies to come in and hold the patient down and take the scan this way? Do you see your GP in this light?

You're intelligent enough, with all due respect, Welshcakes, to know exactly what this issue is really all about but you won't admit this.

Crushed and Longrider - yes.

jams o donnell said...

Can I point oout that the pulse cooximeter was not developed for the sole purpose of determining whether somkers are lying or not. The technology was developed to measure blood Carbon Monoxide levels in other circumstances so the funds spend developing the equipment are not wasted The application to smokers is simply a spin off.

Swearing Mother said...

And another thing, why he didn't use a hyphen in the word co-oximeter?

Maybe they just want to be able to tell if a person smokes or not so that insurance companies can check out whether a declared non-smoker really is a non-smoker, and if found to be telling an untruth, refuse to pay out. They'll go to any lengths to avoid paying a claim, won't they.

The bastards.

jmb said...

Now swearing mother has the right answer for you people. Because that's the crux. If they don't want to insure people who are smokers then they have to know if you are telling the truth. As said, it will replace current tests. It's not the testing that's new, they are just trying to save money.

One of the cardiologists at my old hospital refused to take patients if they were smokers and refused to quit. She knew they were just undoing all her treatment if they continued.