Plastic surgery

I think nessecary plastic surgery, only extreme cases should be NHS. Or if it was causing you other pain in some way, like I once saw this programme with this girl on it, and she basically HAD to have a breast reduction, 'cause it was crippling her etc. I think that's alright.
However, other stuff which is basically vanity should be private and should be paid for yourself. After all, you pay for make up and hair products don't you? It's the same.

Nine_Inch_Nails:

*Blue Star*-The Fiend:

I don't see how it can be necessary

If your face came off with a fire, that kinda stuff

Yeah like Mel Gibson....he got beat up when he was like 15, by some gang, and his face was horribly disfigured.

Or that little boy who came here to Pittsburgh from Iraq to have plastic surgery because he was really disfigured

I think there is rational plastic surgery and irrational plastic surgery.

Rational : If a child is born without a face (yes it is possible), they would need surgery for reconstruction.

Irrational : Bigger boobs.

I have seen some women who are addicted to plastic surgery, and to be quite honest, they were the most grotesque looking bunch I have ever seen.

Handguns For Hearts:

I think there is rational plastic surgery and irrational plastic surgery.

Rational : If a child is born without a face (yes it is possible), they would need surgery for reconstruction.

Irrational : Bigger boobs.

I have seen some women who are addicted to plastic surgery, and to be quite honest, they were the most grotesque looking bunch I have ever seen.

I agree. The rational kind is what i meant by nessecary.

Woman need to realize that if men dont find you attractive because your breasts are less Than a DD, theyre the ones who arent good enough, not the woman

I would never in my life get plastic surgery for bigger breasts or anything.
It's silly, wrong and selfish.

Nine_Inch_Nails:

I think nessecary plastic surgery, only extreme cases should be NHS. Or if it was causing you other pain in some way, like I once saw this programme with this girl on it, and she basically HAD to have a breast reduction, 'cause it was crippling her etc. I think that's alright.
However, other stuff which is basically vanity should be private and should be paid for yourself. After all, you pay for make up and hair products don't you? It's the same.

I couldn't have put it any better my self.

Baby Alien:

I would never in my life get plastic surgery for bigger breasts or anything.
It's silly, wrong and selfish.

Why?
If they pay for it theirselves, then I think it's fine.
Maybe getting plastic surgery is what that person needs to be happy in life.
Sure, that sounds very vain. But it is true for many people.

Invalid.:

Baby Alien:

I would never in my life get plastic surgery for bigger breasts or anything.
It's silly, wrong and selfish.

Why?
If they pay for it theirselves, then I think it's fine.
Maybe getting plastic surgery is what that person needs to be happy in life.
Sure, that sounds very vain. But it is true for many people.

There are people who need it more.
If there is a surgeon making a women's breasts larger and at the same time someone needs it much more then it's just wasting time and the people who need it more should wait because some vain person needs to have bigger breasts.

It felt wrong for me to get my surgery done on the NHS but it was classified as a deformity....

Baby Alien:

There are people who need it more.
If there is a surgeon making a women's breasts larger and at the same time someone needs it much more then it's just wasting time and the people who need it more should wait because some vain person needs to have bigger breasts.

Well, there is a bit of a difference bewtween a cosmetic surgeon and a cardiothoasic/paediatiric/general surgeon.

It isn't like a woman with cosmetic issues is 'stealing' time from a kid with heart problems; they are not related. Cosmetic surgery goes in in private clinics, far away from hospital wards so your argument is not correct.

If they are paying for it themselves I don't see any problem with it, their life, their body, ect.

But obviously if they have something like a nasty scar they want to get rid off or need a breast reduction then thats different. Paying for it themselves wouldn't be fair as its necessity not vainity.

Incubus:

If they are paying for it themselves I don't see any problem with it, their life, their body, ect.

But obviously if they have something like a nasty scar they want to get rid off or need a breast reduction then thats different. Paying for it themselves wouldn't be fair as its necessity not vainity.

I have a nasty scar- It meanders right across my abdomen from end to and generally looks quite unsightly what with all the dips, scratches and bumps. Does that mean I get it removed for free?. Does it balls. Its not like I have to go to much trouble to keep my stomach covered at all times...

Basically, I think it is all about putting it in perspecitive, as I have already said. Big boobs and scars aren't life threatening by any means; but heart conditions and the like are. If you had to choose between operating on a heart condition or a breast reduction, which would you put as priority?. I know which I would choose...

Well if it is nessisery then why not but just so u can say you've done it well what's the fucking point?<----- rehtorical

Bloodraine:

Incubus:

If they are paying for it themselves I don't see any problem with it, their life, their body, ect.

But obviously if they have something like a nasty scar they want to get rid off or need a breast reduction then thats different. Paying for it themselves wouldn't be fair as its necessity not vainity.

I have a nasty scar- It meanders right across my abdomen from end to and generally looks quite unsightly what with all the dips, scratches and bumps. Does that mean I get it removed for free?. Does it balls. Its not like I have to go to much trouble to keep my stomach covered at all times...

Basically, I think it is all about putting it in perspecitive, as I have already said. Big boobs and scars aren't life threatening by any means; but heart conditions and the like are. If you had to choose between operating on a heart condition or a breast reduction, which would you put as priority?. I know which I would choose...

I was in a car accident about a year ago. I got left a seriously nasty scar along the left side of my face and I've had two operations to remove it. Now that wasn't life threatening by any means but I got it done for free. Now maybe I should have been left to pay to have my face look like it did before I had a run in with a drunk driver but I personally don't think so.

And I'm fairly sure if there was someone in serious need of a heart operation they would be put before someone with getting a breast reduction.

Incubus:

I was in a car accident about a year ago. I got left a seriously nasty scar along the left side of my face and I've had two operations to remove it. Now that wasn't life threatening by any means but I got it done for free. Now maybe I should have been left to pay to have my face look like it did before I had a run in with a drunk driver but I personally don't think so.

And I'm fairly sure if there was someone in serious need of a heart operation they would be put before someone with getting a breast reduction.

Well no, not when you consider they'd be on two different waiting lists. Cardiothorasic surgeons don't do breast implantrs, and vice versa for Cosmetics doing heart ops. So while person A with big boobs and a bit of a sore back is first in the queue for a totally free, on-the-NHS boob job plus aftercare, meds and a bed, person B who happens to be a wee little girl with a heart that has just about packed in is sitting 1651873 places back in the queue because there just isn't enough funding for her operation.

Perhaps your hospitals are funded differently to mine, but in England there are different departments which get different funding levels, and there is no 'putting before others' when it comes to patients. See what I mean?. It is my belief that a Cardiology department should get the priority over a Cosmetic surgery one, primarily for one reason. You can live with a scar and a sore back. You can't live with a sick heart.

Bloodraine:

Incubus:

I was in a car accident about a year ago. I got left a seriously nasty scar along the left side of my face and I've had two operations to remove it. Now that wasn't life threatening by any means but I got it done for free. Now maybe I should have been left to pay to have my face look like it did before I had a run in with a drunk driver but I personally don't think so.

And I'm fairly sure if there was someone in serious need of a heart operation they would be put before someone with getting a breast reduction.

Well no, not when you consider they'd be on two different waiting lists. Cardiothorasic surgeons don't do breast implantrs, and vice versa for Cosmetics doing heart ops. So while person A with big boobs and a bit of a sore back is first in the queue for a totally free, on-the-NHS boob job plus aftercare, meds and a bed, person B who happens to be a wee little girl with a heart that has just about packed in is sitting 1651873 places back in the queue because there just isn't enough funding for her operation.

Perhaps your hospitals are funded differently to mine, but in England there are different departments which get different funding levels, and there is no 'putting before others' when it comes to patients. See what I mean?. It is my belief that a Cardiology department should get the priority over a Cosmetic surgery one, primarily for one reason. You can live with a scar and a sore back. You can't live with a sick heart.

Spoken like someone whose never had to live though either, but you have a point.
As for how hospitals are funded over here, I don't have a clue to be honest, but badly if the news reports are anything to go by.
I actually know more about how your hospitals are funded than my own

Incubus:

Bloodraine:

You can live with a scar and a sore back. You can't live with a sick heart.

Spoken like someone whose never had to live though either, but you have a point.
As for how hospitals are funded over here, I don't have a clue to be honest, but badly if the news reports are anything to go by.
I actually know more about how your hospitals are funded than my own

Well trust me, I'd rather keep the scar I have now than have my heart die on me. I'd rather save someone's life than their self-esteem. You might say that is harsh, but when there is enough money for everyone then you can go and have sillicon implants and a nose job on the NHS, I don't care. But until then, I think we should look out for the most needy first.

Bloodraine:

Well trust me, I'd rather keep the scar I have now than have my heart die on me. I'd rather save someone's life than their self-esteem. You might say that is harsh, but when there is enough money for everyone then you can go and have sillicon implants and a nose job on the NHS, I don't care. But until then, I think we should look out for the most needy first.

That's not what I meant, what you seemed to be saying is if someone has a complaint that isn't life threatening the souldn't be wasting the hospitals time, like getting a breast reduction, thats not life threating (as we've already establised) but it is painful and can cause problems later on in life. But what you seemed to be saying was that people who are going through this shouldn't shouldn't get help because its not a threat to their life. I totally disagree with that. Hospitals and doctors are there to relieve pain and help people, all people, whether it be a someone with a broken leg, heart problems or in need of a breat reduction.
Tell ya what, next time you find yourself in agony -say you've broken your leg- and are about to go to hospital and get it set and put in a cast are you really going to stop and say to yourself "well this isn't life threatening and by going into the hospital I'm taking up time and medical equipment, hence taking up money that could be going towards the Cardiology department. After all; I can live with a crippled leg but someone can't live with a sick heart!"? Because I don't think you would, you or anyone else for that matter.

If you want it and it's safe, go for it.

I think that if you have a terrible terrible body image it's a fucking BAD idea.

At one point I was seriously considering 11 plastic surgeries.

Incubus:

Bloodraine:

Well trust me, I'd rather keep the scar I have now than have my heart die on me. I'd rather save someone's life than their self-esteem. You might say that is harsh, but when there is enough money for everyone then you can go and have sillicon implants and a nose job on the NHS, I don't care. But until then, I think we should look out for the most needy first.

That's not what I meant, what you seemed to be saying is if someone has a complaint that isn't life threatening the souldn't be wasting the hospitals time, like getting a breast reduction, thats not life threating (as we've already establised) but it is painful and can cause problems later on in life. But what you seemed to be saying was that people who are going through this shouldn't shouldn't get help because its not a threat to their life. I totally disagree with that. Hospitals and doctors are there to relieve pain and help people, all people, whether it be a someone with a broken leg, heart problems or in need of a breat reduction.
Tell ya what, next time you find yourself in agony -say you've broken your leg- and are about to go to hospital and get it set and put in a cast are you really going to stop and say to yourself "well this isn't life threatening and by going into the hospital I'm taking up time and medical equipment, hence taking up money that could be going towards the Cardiology department. After all; I can live with a crippled leg but someone can't live with a sick heart!"? Because I don't think you would, you or anyone else for that matter.

So next time you have a heart attack and they can't treat you 'cause there isn't enough equipment whilst Mrs. Joe Public is sat upstars waiting for a boob job, you won't mind?

'Cause I know I would. But hey, if you'd be happy with that, fine.

Oh, and I think you were rather getting the wrong end of the stick and beating yourself with it in that last paragraph. In fact both of them. That's not what I meant, either.