Jump to content

Recommended Posts

wordsworth Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> niall Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > it was revealed that it had to be administered

> > through the eyeball to have the required

> > protection?

>

>

> Is there something wrong with you?


Either way the answer is still yes, particularly since the eyes heal so well and so quickly!

JohnL Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Does the OP really mean would we be prepared to

> lose an eye for protection ?

>

> If just an injection I think something like a

> lumbar puncture would be more scary for me but

> people still have them every day.


You shouldn't lose an eye with the right equipment and admin Mr J!

SpringTime Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> JohnL Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Does the OP really mean would we be prepared to

> > lose an eye for protection ?

> >

> > If just an injection I think something like a

> > lumbar puncture would be more scary for me but

> > people still have them every day.

>

> You shouldn't lose an eye with the right equipment

> and admin Mr J!


True - but wondered if that was the suggestion of the original post.


Anyway back to watching a few episodes of "Fear the Walking Dead" - how did I get stuck in series four.

niall Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> it was revealed that it had to be administered

> through the eyeball to have the required

> protection?



Yes.


I'm more squeamish about having cataracts removed, which is not far off according to my optician ....

Sue Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> niall Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > it was revealed that it had to be administered

> > through the eyeball to have the required

> > protection?

>

>

> Yes.

>

> I'm more squeamish about having cataracts removed,

> which is not far off according to my optician ....



Fgs

Sue Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> niall Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > it was revealed that it had to be administered

> > through the eyeball to have the required

> > protection?

>

>

> Yes.

>

> I'm more squeamish about having cataracts removed,

> which is not far off according to my optician ....


I know a few people who have had this done Sue and have to say it looks pretty gloopy for a couple of days but then shortly after they've behaved as though a miracle has happened. Good luck with it - be more than worth the bother!

SpringTime Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Sue Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > niall Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > it was revealed that it had to be

> administered

> > > through the eyeball to have the required

> > > protection?

> >

> >

> > Yes.

> >

> > I'm more squeamish about having cataracts

> removed,

> > which is not far off according to my optician

> ....

>

> I know a few people who have had this done Sue and

> have to say it looks pretty gloopy for a couple of

> days but then shortly after they've behaved as

> though a miracle has happened. Good luck with it -

> be more than worth the bother!



Thanks, it probably won't be for at least a year unless they suddenly get much worse 🙂

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • "That’s very insulting! You are basically calling 17 million people that voted to leave the EU ‘thick’. " I'm certainly calling them wrong. And many of those 17 million agree with me now and have expressed regret. Many others were indeed thick, and remain so. You can see them being interviewed all the time. As for insulting, the losing side in that referendum have being called every name under the sun "enemies of the people" etc etc - so spare me the tears about being insulted But for clarity. there is a certain type of individual who even now thinks Brexit was a good idea, tends to side with Trump and holds views about immigrants - and yes I am happy to calll those people thick. - and even worse Jazzer posts a long and sometimes correct post about the failings of modern parties. I myself think labour are woefully underperforming. But equally it has been less than a year after 14 years of mismanagement and despite some significant errors have largely steadied the ship. You only have to speak to other  countries to recognise the improvement there. They have cut NHS waiting times, and the upside of things like NI increases is higher minimum wage - something hard-bitten voters should appreciate. They were accused of being too gloomy when they came in and yet simultaneously people are accusing them of promising the earth and failing to deliver - both of those can't be true at the same time Fact is, this country repeatedly, over 15 years, voted for austerity and self-damaging policies like Brexit despite all warnings - this newish govt now have to pick up the pieces and there are no easy solutions. Voters say "we just want honest politicians" - ok, we have some bad news about the economy and the next few years  - "no no not that kind of honesty!!! - magic some solutions up now!" Anyone who considers voting for Reform because they don't represent existing parties and want "change" is being criminally negligent in ignoring their dog-whistles, their lack of diligence in vetting, their lack of attendance (in Westminster now and in eu parties is guises past) and basically making all of the same mistakes when they pushed for Brexit - basically, not serious people   "cost of things in the shops and utility bills keep on rising, the direct opposite of what they promised." - can we see that promise? I don't recall it? Because whatever voters or govts want, the cost of things is not exactly entirely in their gift. People were warned prices would rise with Brexit and e were told "we don't care - it's a price worth paying!". Turns out that isn' really true now is it - people DO care about the cost of things (and of course there are other factors - covid, trump, tariffs, wars etc.    What the country needs is a serious, mature electorate who take a high level view of priorities and get behind the hard work needed to achieve that. There is zero chance of that happening so we are doomed to repeat failures for years to come, complaining about everything and voting for policies which will make things worse here we have labour 2024 energy manifesto commitments - all of it necessary long term investment - calling for immediate price cuts with no money in the kitty seems unrealistic given all of the economic headwinds   https://www.energy-uk.org.uk/general-election-2024-all-manifesto-energy-pledges/#Labour_Party
    • Regardless of “Blighty” it’s the combination of “we” “R” and “Blighty” we means there is a them  cancerian may or may not recognise a dog whistle.  If he doesn’t, we are trying to point one out.  If he does then they are trying to gaslight us into pretending they are just a lovely fundraising group with no agenda 
    • I’m on Darrell Road and have noticed this recently - your daughters are not alone! It seems to only be at night. Would you agree? High pitched and consistent. I’ve been wondering if it’s a street lamp, or a fox deterrent system.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...