On 13/03/14 20:46, Jim Hawkins wrote:
"Peter Able" stuck@home wrote in message
...

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 10:51:19 +0000, Roland Perry
wrote:

In message , at 10:35:44 on Tue, 11 Mar
2014, Graeme Wall remarked:

B----y hell, he wasn't that old. 52 according to the BBC

Mortality rate for a man that age is low, but not insignificant; around
7% of men will die in their 50's.

He didn't, perhaps, have the healthiest of lifestyles...


Has it been revealed what he died of ?


They announced a heart attach quite early on. Now that is pre autopsy,
but heart attacks aren't normally mis-diagnosed that much, surely?

On Thu, 13 Mar 2014 20:52:27 +0000, Tim Watts
wrote:

On 13/03/14 20:46, Jim Hawkins wrote:
"Peter Able" stuck@home wrote in message
...

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 10:51:19 +0000, Roland Perry
wrote:

In message , at 10:35:44 on Tue, 11 Mar
2014, Graeme Wall remarked:

B----y hell, he wasn't that old. 52 according to the BBC

Mortality rate for a man that age is low, but not insignificant; around
7% of men will die in their 50's.

He didn't, perhaps, have the healthiest of lifestyles...


Has it been revealed what he died of ?


They announced a heart attach quite early on. Now that is pre autopsy,
but heart attacks aren't normally mis-diagnosed that much, surely?

There's a fairly standard set of signs and symptoms. To some extent a
heart attack would be the common consequence of varying causes but
"Recliner" has already posted the reference to an aneurysm which would
probably have become evident during routine tests during the time he
was being dealt with at Whipps Cross hospital.

Charles Ellson wrote:
On Thu, 13 Mar 2014 20:52:27 +0000, Tim Watts
wrote:

On 13/03/14 20:46, Jim Hawkins wrote:
"Peter Able" stuck@home wrote in message
...

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 10:51:19 +0000, Roland Perry
wrote:

In message , at 10:35:44 on Tue, 11 Mar
2014, Graeme Wall remarked:

B----y hell, he wasn't that old. 52 according to the BBC

Mortality rate for a man that age is low, but not insignificant; around
7% of men will die in their 50's.

He didn't, perhaps, have the healthiest of lifestyles...


Has it been revealed what he died of ?


They announced a heart attach quite early on. Now that is pre autopsy,
but heart attacks aren't normally mis-diagnosed that much, surely?

There's a fairly standard set of signs and symptoms. To some extent a
heart attack would be the common consequence of varying causes but
"Recliner" has already posted the reference to an aneurysm which would
probably have become evident during routine tests during the time he
was being dealt with at Whipps Cross hospital.

Isn't it true that almost all deaths are ultimately the result of a heart
attack?

On Thu, 13 Mar 2014 17:30:46 -0500, Recliner
wrote:

Charles Ellson wrote:
On Thu, 13 Mar 2014 20:52:27 +0000, Tim Watts
wrote:

On 13/03/14 20:46, Jim Hawkins wrote:
"Peter Able" stuck@home wrote in message
...

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 10:51:19 +0000, Roland Perry
wrote:

In message , at 10:35:44 on Tue, 11 Mar
2014, Graeme Wall remarked:

B----y hell, he wasn't that old. 52 according to the BBC

Mortality rate for a man that age is low, but not insignificant; around
7% of men will die in their 50's.

He didn't, perhaps, have the healthiest of lifestyles...


Has it been revealed what he died of ?


They announced a heart attach quite early on. Now that is pre autopsy,
but heart attacks aren't normally mis-diagnosed that much, surely?

There's a fairly standard set of signs and symptoms. To some extent a
heart attack would be the common consequence of varying causes but
"Recliner" has already posted the reference to an aneurysm which would
probably have become evident during routine tests during the time he
was being dealt with at Whipps Cross hospital.

Isn't it true that almost all deaths are ultimately the result of a heart
attack?

"Heart failure" rather than "heart attack" which now seems to be
reserved for when the heart's own blood supply is compromised. Like
any other pump, a heart can "fail" from the POV of not being able to
function because of external factors as well as just because of an
internal fault.
"Heart failure" WRT certifying death is regarded as a "mode of dying"
("you should avoid completing the medical certificate with a mode of
dying as the /only/ cause of death" [Medical Certificate of Cause of
Death - Notes for Doctors,
http://www.uhs.nhs.uk/media/suhtidea...fordoctors.pdf
reproduced in similar variations by various NHS bodies]) while "heart
attack" doesn't actually get a mention; modern death registrations IME
tend to be fairly specific about which bit has failed where and how
but can still "lead in" to the root cause via something that by itself
would be vague. One in front of me ATM starts with "Respiratory
failure" which is effectively on the banned list in the form
"respiratory arrest" but it is then further qualified with
"Emphysema". OTOH there are effective exceptions such as "Old Age"
which can be used for over 70s if there is in practice an absence of a
more specific cause; in the Queen Mother's case, she managed a single
cause of "Extreme Old Age" while my 89y old grandmother had everything
listed except old age.

Charles Ellson wrote:
On Thu, 13 Mar 2014 17:30:46 -0500, Recliner
wrote:

Charles Ellson wrote:
On Thu, 13 Mar 2014 20:52:27 +0000, Tim Watts
wrote:

On 13/03/14 20:46, Jim Hawkins wrote:
"Peter Able" stuck@home wrote in message
...

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 10:51:19 +0000, Roland Perry
wrote:

In message , at 10:35:44 on Tue, 11 Mar
2014, Graeme Wall remarked:

B----y hell, he wasn't that old. 52 according to the BBC

Mortality rate for a man that age is low, but not insignificant; around
7% of men will die in their 50's.

He didn't, perhaps, have the healthiest of lifestyles...


Has it been revealed what he died of ?


They announced a heart attach quite early on. Now that is pre autopsy,
but heart attacks aren't normally mis-diagnosed that much, surely?

There's a fairly standard set of signs and symptoms. To some extent a
heart attack would be the common consequence of varying causes but
"Recliner" has already posted the reference to an aneurysm which would
probably have become evident during routine tests during the time he
was being dealt with at Whipps Cross hospital.

Isn't it true that almost all deaths are ultimately the result of a heart
attack?

"Heart failure" rather than "heart attack" which now seems to be
reserved for when the heart's own blood supply is compromised. Like
any other pump, a heart can "fail" from the POV of not being able to
function because of external factors as well as just because of an
internal fault.
"Heart failure" WRT certifying death is regarded as a "mode of dying"
("you should avoid completing the medical certificate with a mode of
dying as the /only/ cause of death" [Medical Certificate of Cause of
Death - Notes for Doctors,
http://www.uhs.nhs.uk/media/suhtidea...fordoctors.pdf
reproduced in similar variations by various NHS bodies]) while "heart
attack" doesn't actually get a mention; modern death registrations IME
tend to be fairly specific about which bit has failed where and how
but can still "lead in" to the root cause via something that by itself
would be vague. One in front of me ATM starts with "Respiratory
failure" which is effectively on the banned list in the form
"respiratory arrest" but it is then further qualified with
"Emphysema". OTOH there are effective exceptions such as "Old Age"
which can be used for over 70s if there is in practice an absence of a
more specific cause; in the Queen Mother's case, she managed a single
cause of "Extreme Old Age" while my 89y old grandmother had everything
listed except old age.

Yes, I was confusing heart attack and heart failure.

On Thu, 13 Mar 2014 19:03:36 -0500, Recliner
wrote:

Charles Ellson wrote:
On Thu, 13 Mar 2014 17:30:46 -0500, Recliner
wrote:

Charles Ellson wrote:
On Thu, 13 Mar 2014 20:52:27 +0000, Tim Watts
wrote:

On 13/03/14 20:46, Jim Hawkins wrote:
"Peter Able" stuck@home wrote in message
...

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 10:51:19 +0000, Roland Perry
wrote:

In message , at 10:35:44 on Tue, 11 Mar
2014, Graeme Wall remarked:

B----y hell, he wasn't that old. 52 according to the BBC

Mortality rate for a man that age is low, but not insignificant; around
7% of men will die in their 50's.

He didn't, perhaps, have the healthiest of lifestyles...


Has it been revealed what he died of ?


They announced a heart attach quite early on. Now that is pre autopsy,
but heart attacks aren't normally mis-diagnosed that much, surely?

There's a fairly standard set of signs and symptoms. To some extent a
heart attack would be the common consequence of varying causes but
"Recliner" has already posted the reference to an aneurysm which would
probably have become evident during routine tests during the time he
was being dealt with at Whipps Cross hospital.

Isn't it true that almost all deaths are ultimately the result of a heart
attack?

"Heart failure" rather than "heart attack" which now seems to be
reserved for when the heart's own blood supply is compromised. Like
any other pump, a heart can "fail" from the POV of not being able to
function because of external factors as well as just because of an
internal fault.
"Heart failure" WRT certifying death is regarded as a "mode of dying"
("you should avoid completing the medical certificate with a mode of
dying as the /only/ cause of death" [Medical Certificate of Cause of
Death - Notes for Doctors,
http://www.uhs.nhs.uk/media/suhtidea...fordoctors.pdf
reproduced in similar variations by various NHS bodies]) while "heart
attack" doesn't actually get a mention; modern death registrations IME
tend to be fairly specific about which bit has failed where and how
but can still "lead in" to the root cause via something that by itself
would be vague. One in front of me ATM starts with "Respiratory
failure" which is effectively on the banned list in the form
"respiratory arrest" but it is then further qualified with
"Emphysema". OTOH there are effective exceptions such as "Old Age"
which can be used for over 70s if there is in practice an absence of a
more specific cause; in the Queen Mother's case, she managed a single
cause of "Extreme Old Age" while my 89y old grandmother had everything
listed except old age.

Yes, I was confusing heart attack and heart failure.

I used to get a flea in the ear for lumping together heart attacks and
coronary thromboses but ATM they're together in the First Aid manual;
unfortunately there's a new edition due out so something is bound to
have changed as well as the resuscitation protocol.

"Charles Ellson" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 13 Mar 2014 20:52:27 +0000, Tim Watts
wrote:

On 13/03/14 20:46, Jim Hawkins wrote:
"Peter Able" stuck@home wrote in message
...

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 10:51:19 +0000, Roland Perry
wrote:

In message , at 10:35:44 on Tue, 11
Mar
2014, Graeme Wall remarked:

B----y hell, he wasn't that old. 52 according to the BBC

Mortality rate for a man that age is low, but not insignificant;
around
7% of men will die in their 50's.

He didn't, perhaps, have the healthiest of lifestyles...


Has it been revealed what he died of ?


They announced a heart attach quite early on. Now that is pre autopsy,
but heart attacks aren't normally mis-diagnosed that much, surely?


Not by doctors. Journalists could do a lot better.

"Jim Hawkins" wrote:
"Charles Ellson" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 13 Mar 2014 20:52:27 +0000, Tim Watts
wrote:

On 13/03/14 20:46, Jim Hawkins wrote:
"Peter Able" stuck@home wrote in message
...

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 10:51:19 +0000, Roland Perry
wrote:

In message , at 10:35:44 on Tue, 11
Mar
2014, Graeme Wall remarked:

B----y hell, he wasn't that old. 52 according to the BBC

Mortality rate for a man that age is low, but not insignificant;
around
7% of men will die in their 50's.

He didn't, perhaps, have the healthiest of lifestyles...


Has it been revealed what he died of ?


They announced a heart attach quite early on. Now that is pre autopsy,
but heart attacks aren't normally mis-diagnosed that much, surely?


Not by doctors. Journalists could do a lot better.

Presumably they reported what they were told.

On Fri, 14 Mar 2014 07:50:34 -0000, "Jim Hawkins"
wrote:


"Charles Ellson" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 13 Mar 2014 20:52:27 +0000, Tim Watts
wrote:

On 13/03/14 20:46, Jim Hawkins wrote:
"Peter Able" stuck@home wrote in message
...

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 10:51:19 +0000, Roland Perry
wrote:

In message , at 10:35:44 on Tue, 11
Mar
2014, Graeme Wall remarked:

B----y hell, he wasn't that old. 52 according to the BBC

Mortality rate for a man that age is low, but not insignificant;
around
7% of men will die in their 50's.

He didn't, perhaps, have the healthiest of lifestyles...


Has it been revealed what he died of ?


They announced a heart attach quite early on. Now that is pre autopsy,
but heart attacks aren't normally mis-diagnosed that much, surely?


Not by doctors. Journalists could do a lot better.

Some poisons (e.g. potassium chloride) can cause similar signs but the
circumstances in which someone is found will often give the game away.
Also some poisons are themselves medicines with a rather thin line
between a medicinal dose and a lethal dose cough!Shipman/cough!;
one person's daily dose of heroin is another's first and last dose of
diamorphine, it has been alleged that George V was helped on his way
with morphine and cocaine.

On 14/03/14 08:29, Charles Ellson wrote:
it has been alleged that George V was helped on his way
with morphine and cocaine.

As are lots of people - well, with morphine anyway - and often by
doctors who would profess opposition to assisted dying. The peculiar
claim about George V was that his doctors bumped him off a wee bit early
so that his death would appear first in the morning papers, which were
more prestigious than the evening ones.

Bugger Bognor.

Ian