=^..^= Posted April 18, 2005 Share Posted April 18, 2005 How much rumour can there be on one thread ? As yet I cant say how true this is Rumoured to have been HIV positive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul H Posted April 18, 2005 Share Posted April 18, 2005 This might be slightly off subject but here goes… While I can’t find it hard to criticise the staff at Nobles Hospital who do a fantastic job that I couldn’t do in a million years, I am becoming concerned about hygiene at the new hospital. In recent months I know of no less than six people who have developed serious infections after minor operations at Nobles. Thankfully, all but one has made full recoveries after receiving courses of antibiotics but one guy remains seriously ill. He only went in to have an in-growing toe nail sorted out and now is in danger of having to have it amputated! Does anyone else know of this sort of thing going on? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxman8180 Posted April 19, 2005 Share Posted April 19, 2005 I really don't want ot fan these rumours any further but I would like to take this opportunity to clarify a couple of things....... Firstly, there is absolutely no problem with someone who is HIV+ working in the medical profession, be it a hospital or local surgery. I do believe that they have to declare their condition to the employer, who will ensure that proper precautions can be taken. Now if they haven't declared such, then that could be just cause to take this action. Would you let them take care of you in a Hospital, I dont think so. it would be like giving inmates in a prison loaded guns <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Obviously, you have your own point of view, but seeing as you asked the question. Absolutely, yes, I would allow myself to be treated by someone who was HIV+. This isn't some airborne disease like Ebola, which can be transmitted by touch, breath, sneezing etc. HIV+ can only be passed on through the exchange of significant bodily fluids. (i.e. they would have to have a major open wound which bled into a major wound on your body -- highly unlikely.) To compare it to someone carrying a loaded gun, is primitive at best. Perhaps this Island is more backwards than I dared believe. Perhaps you would like some further information on the subject. There are plenty of sites on the interweb. If you don't want to search, then look HERE for some good info. Also, you don't die from AIDS. Once you have acquired this syndrome it whittles down your immune system until it offers little protection. The cause of death can then be something as simple as a common cold. So yes, of course this is a serious condition by which many people across the world are affected. It's just lucky that ignorance isn't as deadly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ans Posted April 19, 2005 Share Posted April 19, 2005 Nice post Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rog Posted April 19, 2005 Share Posted April 19, 2005 One aspect of AIDS that is invariably overlooked is that it precisely that it does impact the immune system of the sufferer the result there is a significantly increased risk that the sufferer will contract another illness and convey it to a third party whereas a person who has an intact immune system may well not even contract the illness in the first place or slough it off at a very early stage. This is especially the case with TB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxman8180 Posted April 19, 2005 Share Posted April 19, 2005 Quite right, but we are talking about being HIV+, not yet having moved onto 'full blown' AIDS. With medication this can be as long as 10 years. Yes, your immune system is weaker and, therefore, you may be at more risk of contracting and spreading infection. But there are many other reasons for having an increased risk of infection (such as lifestyle, eating habits) and we don't automatically bar these people from a 'normal' life. If proper precautions are in place at the hospital, there should be little in the way of increased risk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carter Posted April 19, 2005 Share Posted April 19, 2005 As yet I cant say how true this is, but I have heard that two of the overseas nurses that were taken on and started work prior to the results of their medical have now been paid off and will be paid the full amount of the three years left on their contract. Forgot to add, reason being a serious medical condition, one that we dont want here <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Can't believe attitudes like this still prevail, iv'e been a nurse for 21 years now and have only just had an HIV test.....result? I'm not saying...does it matter that much? Would our values change if a really pretty girl was seducing you, and insisted on riding bare back? The nurses should never been allowed to start work in the first place, when you are offered a post in the NHS it is subject to a medical, it a confidential process between Doctor/Occ. Health Nurse, your employer would only ever be informed if the prospective employee could not fullfill the job description (Then only with your consent) If they can't fullfill the job description, other posts can be explored or the offer of the post withdrawn. The two nurses have been treated appallingly, have been allowed to start work, make friends etc and have then just suddenly told to leave. Gross breach of confidentiality i'd say....if its all true that is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rog Posted April 19, 2005 Share Posted April 19, 2005 I would have thought that if anything hepatitis would be a far more likely reason to consider terminating the contract of a nurse than HIV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted April 19, 2005 Share Posted April 19, 2005 Hepatitis B would be my guess as well. But that's all it is, a guess. Chris Smith (soon to be ex) MP has been HIV positive for the last 17 years. I also think the point about being more infectious due to HIV is a very good one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carter Posted April 19, 2005 Share Posted April 19, 2005 I would have thought that if anything hepatitis would be a far more likely reason to consider terminating the contract of a nurse than HIV. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Iv'e known many nurses with Hepatitis and indeed HIV, you simply work in an envirionment thats safe for all, just like those with a back injury. We do get protection for Hepatitis. Iv'e had the pleasure of catching.... Scarlet Fever Scabies x2 Headlice Just part and parcel of the job. Iv'e been very lucky in not catching hepatitis, on many occasions rubber gloves were the last thing on your mind when a situation arose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ykstarr Posted April 19, 2005 Share Posted April 19, 2005 for god's sake - what a ridiculous thread. do the unfounded, made up rumours never stop with you crumlin? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crumlin Posted April 19, 2005 Author Share Posted April 19, 2005 for god's sake - what a ridiculous thread. do the unfounded, made up rumours never stop with you crumlin? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> No. But I do have a high % of winners Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxman8180 Posted April 19, 2005 Share Posted April 19, 2005 Your VP must be raging then. But if you include biggoted sentiments like you have in this thread, your voice will be drowned out even more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crumlin Posted April 19, 2005 Author Share Posted April 19, 2005 Prevention is the first step to safety Which one is Acid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxman8180 Posted April 19, 2005 Share Posted April 19, 2005 I'm sure there must be a point somewhere? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.