'Dead' Venezuelan Man Wakes Up Under Autopsy Knife

[Logan13]

Let's hear it for socialized medicine............
'Dead' Venezuelan Man Wakes Up Under Autopsy Knife
Carlos Camejo, a Venezuelan man who had been declared dead but woke up in the morgue in excruciating pain after medical examiners began their autopsy, poses for the camera in La Victoria September 17, 2007. Camejo, 33, was declared dead after a highway accident and taken to the morgue, where examiners began an autopsy only to realize something was amiss when he started bleeding. They quickly sought to stitch up the incision on his face.
CARACAS (Reuters) - A Venezuelan man who had been declared dead woke up in the morgue in excruciating pain after medical examiners began their autopsy.

Carlos Camejo, 33, was declared dead after a highway accident and taken to the morgue, where examiners began an autopsy only to realize something was amiss when he started bleeding. They quickly sought to stitch up the incision on his face.

"I woke up because the pain was unbearable," Camejo said, according to a report on Friday in leading local newspaper El Universal.

His grieving wife turned up at the morgue to identify her husband's body only to find him moved into a corridor -- and alive.

Reuters could not immediately reach hospital officials to confirm the events. But Camejo showed the newspaper his facial scar and a document ordering the autopsy.

[Coop77]

I saw that yesterday. Since when do they cut your face in an autopsy?

[mcpeepants]

Let's hear it for socialized medicine............
'Dead' Venezuelan Man Wakes Up Under Autopsy Knife
Carlos Camejo, a Venezuelan man who had been declared dead but woke up in the morgue in excruciating pain after medical examiners began their autopsy, poses for the camera in La Victoria September 17, 2007. Camejo, 33, was declared dead after a highway accident and taken to the morgue, where examiners began an autopsy only to realize something was amiss when he started bleeding. They quickly sought to stitch up the incision on his face.
CARACAS (Reuters) - A Venezuelan man who had been declared dead woke up in the morgue in excruciating pain after medical examiners began their autopsy.

Carlos Camejo, 33, was declared dead after a highway accident and taken to the morgue, where examiners began an autopsy only to realize something was amiss when he started bleeding. They quickly sought to stitch up the incision on his face.

"I woke up because the pain was unbearable," Camejo said, according to a report on Friday in leading local newspaper El Universal.

His grieving wife turned up at the morgue to identify her husband's body only to find him moved into a corridor -- and alive.

Reuters could not immediately reach hospital officials to confirm the events. But Camejo showed the newspaper his facial scar and a document ordering the autopsy.

what's that have to do with socialized medicine? it more of issue of medical technology, the doctors and paramedics skills and how your body responds among other factors.

[RA]

You hear about the guy in the uk that cant get medical treatment until he stops smoking?

what's that have to do with socialized medicine? it more of issue of medical technology, the doctors and paramedics skills and how your body responds among other factors.

[Red Ketchup]

You hear about the guy in the uk that cant get medical treatment until he stops smoking?

And the problem is????

In the UK if you get a smoking related illness, they fix you once. If you don't stop smoking and the illness comes back, then you go to the bottom of the list for treatment until you quit smoking.

I wish they did that here.

Red

[NotSmall]

You hear about the guy in the uk that cant get medical treatment until he stops smoking?

lol - Yeah cos thats the same as autopsying a guy whos still alive!

[godkilla]

i went to the hospital last year for something life threatening and waited two days in an emergency room bed to get transfered to a real bed. while i was there some fat mofo who ate himself into chest pain/heart attack had to wait only minutes in a bed before geting transfered immediately upstairs. thats when i pulled out the iv's and drove myself to another hospital on the other side of town.

[RA]

HE HAS A BROKEN ANKLE! They refuse to set it until he stops smoking.....so much for govt healthcare.

And the problem is????

In the UK if you get a smoking related illness, they fix you once. If you don't stop smoking and the illness comes back, then you go to the bottom of the list for treatment until you quit smoking.

I wish they did that here.

Red

[Red Ketchup]

HE HAS A BROKEN ANKLE! They refuse to set it until he stops smoking.....so much for govt healthcare.

Ha ha ha!

Well, thats pretty extreme then...

But I still think that hospitals should prioritize patients according to how they take care of their bodies... regardless of if the hospital is socialized or for profit. (Well, except for life threatning trauma of course!)

Red

[RA]

I see what your saying. My wife is an ICU nurse and I have to rub her neck/back when she gets home because she helped turn 400lb fatties all day...

I just dont know if I agree with denying someone healthcare based on how they live...it limits freedom and Im against that.

Ha ha ha!

Well, thats pretty extreme then...

But I still think that hospitals should prioritize patients according to how they take care of their bodies... regardless of if the hospital is socialized or for profit. (Well, except for life threatning trauma of course!)

Red

[kfrost06]

The last thing we need is the government dictating to us how to treat our bodies and withholding treatment as a result. That is socialized care for you. Sorry sir we will not treat your broken bone because you took steroids and you don't deserve to be healed. Excuse me while we abort another baby.

[RA]

I did a quick search. Heres the story...

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1896569/posts

[NotSmall]

I did a quick search. Heres the story...

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1896569/posts

No sympathy whatsoever.

He says he tried his hardest to stop - um... just don't fucking light one!

[RA]

So you agree that they can dictate to you how you live your life? So the hospital should deny you treatment because you eat steak sometimes? Or, as frost said, you use/used steroids ? Dictating what someone else can do with their life...not good.

No sympathy whatsoever.

He says he tried his hardest to stop - um... just don't fucking light one!

[RA]

Im also completely against govt run healthcare in the US. Possibly you boys that have it and it works have great honest politicians in your country but we dont have a huge supply of those. In the end if we leave it up to the govt it will end up costing more and we will get less out of it because you have to run the money through the govts corrupt "filter"

[NotSmall]

So you agree that they can dictate to you how you live your life? So the hospital should deny you treatment because you eat steak sometimes? Or, as frost said, you use/used steroids? Dictating what someone else can do with their life...not good.

What if they're acting in his best interests?
"Doctors at the Royal Cornwall Hospital in Truro have refused to operate because they say his heavy smoking would reduce the chance of healing, and there is a risk of complications which could lead to amputation."



That article is written with a clear bias, look at the opening statement:
"A man with a broken ankle is facing a lifetime of pain..."
BOO HOO - With his habit it shouldn't be too long an ordeal for him at least...

[NotSmall]

Im also completely against govt run healthcare in the US. Possibly you boys that have it and it works have great honest politicians in your country but we dont have a huge supply of those. In the end if we leave it up to the govt it will end up costing more and we will get less out of it because you have to run the money through the govts corrupt "filter"

Actually I would rather have private health care.

[RA]

What if they're acting in his best interests?
"Doctors at the Royal Cornwall Hospital in Truro have refused to operate because they say his heavy smoking would reduce the chance of healing, and there is a risk of complications which could lead to amputation."

LOL...

That might not be the biggest load of shit Ive ever heard but its close...not fixing a broken ankle because the guy smokes and it reduces the chance of healing..

You actually believe that?

[Kärnfysikern]

Free healthcare doesnt mean hospitals run by the goverment. There is no reason that the tax money cant be given to private companies that in turn runs the hospital. IMO that is the best solution, no stupid bureaucracy and still free of charge. Alot of schools are run that way in sweden and it works very well.

I agree with Red though that people need to take responsbility for themself. I dont think fatties or smokers should get denied healthcare though, but they should not get it for free.

[NotSmall]

LOL...

That might not be the biggest load of shit Ive ever heard but its close...not fixing a broken ankle because the guy smokes and it reduces the chance of healing..

You actually believe that?

I'm not a doctor so I'll take the word of the boys down at my local hospital in Truro!

[RA]

Free healthcare doesnt mean hospitals run by the goverment. There is no reason that the tax money cant be given to private companies that in turn runs the hospital. IMO that is the best solution, no stupid bureaucracy and still free of charge. Alot of schools are run that way in sweden and it works very well.

I agree with Red though that people need to take responsbility for themself. I dont think fatties or smokers should get denied healthcare though, but they should not get it for free.

Interesting idea..Id have to look at that more but thats not what people like Hillary Clinton are proposing. If you could take the govt out of the money loop but make the company strictly accountable for its actions...maybe.

People should take responsiblity for themselves. Doesnt that go against the free healthcare idea?

[Kratos]

LOL...

That might not be the biggest load of shit Ive ever heard but its close...not fixing a broken ankle because the guy smokes and it reduces the chance of healing..

You actually believe that?

I know surgeons here that won't do some types of spine fusions unless the patient quits smoking. Worse yet is if they do a 3 level neck fusion they insist on fusing from front and back. A lot of musle trauma associated with posterior cervical. Bones and smoking don't get along well. Most times the patient just lies and says they quit smoking, then get a non-union and need surgery again.

[Kärnfysikern]

Interesting idea..Id have to look at that more but thats not what people like Hillary Clinton are proposing. If you could take the govt out of the money loop but make the company strictly accountable for its actions...maybe.

The right wing wants to implement something like that here atleast partialy. But the social democrats are fighting it very hard. I dont know why they are fighting it so hard though, because it was the social democrats that opened up the possiblity of private run schools and that has been a success. So succesfull infact that some socialists wants to shut it down since its unfair to those that are in the regular crappy schools

People should take responsiblity for themselves. Doesnt that go against the free healthcare idea?

The responsibilty and healthcare isnt such a big issue for me so I dont mind that much if some of my tax money goes to healthcare for fat bastards or smoking morons. Idealy I would like there to be "conditional" free healthcare. People with lifestyle related diseases should not get off completely free.
But it would be so hard to implement it in any reasonable way, so it might be best to just keep it free.

[kfrost06]

Smoking does effect healing and that is especially true with bones however it's a very slippery slope when healthcare providers dictate who gets treatment because of their habits. People that do not exercise heal slower and again that is especially true with bones. Should only healthy people be treated for broken bones? How about a better idea, functioning members of society, the ones that have a job and health insurance get treated and the lazy blood sucking parasite welfare recipients get passed over. That makes more sense to me and if they do not like it they could always get a job with insurance.

[Kärnfysikern]

Thats why I think it is in practice impossible to implement a healthcare system where personal responsibility plays any part.

But I think the US system where your ****ed if you dont have health insurance sucks bigtime. Healthcare is a right, not a privilege. I think funding the healthcare with taxes makes as much sense as paying for infrastructure or defense with tax money.

[Logan13]

Thats why I think it is in practice impossible to implement a healthcare system where personal responsibility plays any part.

But I think the US system where your ****ed if you dont have health insurance sucks bigtime. Healthcare is a right, not a privilege. I think funding the healthcare with taxes makes as much sense as paying for infrastructure or defense with tax money.

No, healthcare is not a "right".
A driver's license is not a "right"
A hunting license is not a "right".
You do not have the right to marry anything or anyone you want.
Please give me an example of a child (with competant parents) who was refused emergency room medical care because his parents had no insurance.
Everyone thinks that society owes them something........

[ftony]

That's bullS#it ,I could see if the illness ,and or injury was related to smoking,OK.However its clearly not,He should be given a waiver to sign releasing the hospital from any litigation in the event of complications ,and let the man decide if he wants to risk the amputation....wtf

[Red Ketchup]

No, healthcare is not a "right".

See thats a major difference between thinking in the USA and most of the rest of the civilised developped world.

In the US, healthcare is a privilege to whoever can afford it.

In most of the rest of the developped world, it's a basic human RIGHT.

Red

[NotSmall]

See thats a major difference between thinking in the USA and most of the rest of the civilised developped world.

In the US, healthcare is a privilege to whoever can afford it.

In most of the rest of the developped world, it's a basic human RIGHT.

Red

lol

Somewhere their priorities got screwed, healthcare is not a right but yet the right to own a gun is held on high - glad I don't live there!

[RA]

See thats a major difference between thinking in the USA and most of the rest of the civilised developped world.

In the US, healthcare is a privilege to whoever can afford it.

In most of the rest of the developped world, it's a basic human RIGHT.

Red

Im not sure what you guys think but no one is denied healthcare. If you show up at the ER they treat you...insurance or not.

[RA]

The right wing wants to implement something like that here atleast partialy. But the social democrats are fighting it very hard. I dont know why they are fighting it so hard though, because it was the social democrats that opened up the possiblity of private run schools and that has been a success. So succesfull infact that some socialists wants to shut it down since its unfair to those that are in the regular crappy schools

OMG, that sounds just like Dems in the US. They want to drag everyone down to the same level so were all miserable.(like communism)

[RA]

lol

Somewhere their priorities got screwed, healthcare is not a right but yet the right to own a gun is held on high - glad I don't live there!

Maybe we should hold on to those guns in case you boys need us to bail you out again.

[kfrost06]

Maybe we should hold on to those guns in case you boys need us to bail you out again.

[ftony]

Im not sure what you guys think but no one is denied healthcare. If you show up at the ER they treat you...insurance or not.

From what I know.They are only obligated to stabilize you...

[kfrost06]

It is remarkable easy to get health insurance in the USA, you simply need a full time job, is that too much to ask for? Like John F. Kennedy said, "ask not what your country can do for you but what can you do for your country". When you apply your self in the US you are rewarded for your efforts, if you sit on your ass and beg for handouts and proclaim everyone owes you, well, you then become what we call, Democrats. We have an extremely low unempolyment rate, around 4%. That means there is a job out there if you want one, if you want a better life then work for it. Kinda like working out, right? You want a better body then you have to put some effort into it otherwise don't bitch about being overweight.

[Logan13]

See thats a major difference between thinking in the USA and most of the rest of the civilised developped world.

In the US, healthcare is a privilege to whoever can afford it.

In most of the rest of the developped world, it's a basic human RIGHT.

Red

That's the difference between a socialist gov't and a capitalist gov't. What you and other socialists do not understand is exactly what the "poor" in the USA have in comparison to what the "poor" in your contry's have. Here's a little perspective for you:
The following are facts about persons defined as “poor” by the Census Bureau, taken from a variety of government reports:

46 percent of all poor households actually own their own homes. The average home owned by persons classified as poor by the Census Bureau is a three-bedroom house with one-and-a-half baths, a garage, and a porch or patio.

80 percent of poor households have air conditioning. By contrast, in 1970, only 36 percent of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning.

Only six percent of poor households are overcrowded; two thirds have more than two rooms per person.

The typical poor American has more living space than the average individual living in Paris, London, Vienna, Athens, and other cities throughout Europe. (These comparisons are to the average citizens in foreign countries, not to those classified as poor.)

Nearly three quarters of poor households own a car; 31 percent own two or more cars.

97 percent of poor households have a color television; over half own two or more color televisions.

78 percent have a VCR or DVD player.

62 percent have cable or satellite TV reception.

89 percent own microwave ovens, more than half have a stereo, and a more than a third have an automatic dishwasher.

As a group, America’s poor are far from being chronically undernourished. The average consumption of protein, vitamins, and minerals is virtually the same for poor and middle-class children and, in most cases, is well above recommended norms. Poor children actually consume more meat than do higher-income children and have average protein intakes 100-percent above recommended levels. Most poor children today are, in fact, super-nourished and grow up to be, on average, one inch taller and ten pounds heavier than the GIs who stormed the beaches of Normandy in World War II.

While the poor are generally well-nourished, some poor families do experience temporary food shortages. But, even this condition is relatively rare; 89 percent of the poor report their families have “enough” food to eat, while only two percent say they “often” do not have enough to eat.

Overall, the typical American defined as poor by the government has a car, air conditioning, a refrigerator, a stove, a clothes washer and dryer, and a microwave. He has two color televisions, cable or satellite TV reception, a VCR, or DVD player, and a stereo. He is able to obtain medical care. His home is in good repair and is not overcrowded. By his own report, his family is not hungry, and he had sufficient funds in the past year to meet his family’s essential needs. While this individual’s life is not opulent, it is far from the popular images of dire poverty conveyed by the press, liberal activists, and politicians.

Of course, the living conditions of the average poor American should not be taken as representing all of the nation’s poor: There is a wide range of living conditions among the poor. A third of “poor” households have both cell and land-line telephones. A third also telephone answering machines. At the other extreme, approximately one-tenth of families in poverty have no phone at all. Similarly, while the majority of poor households do not experience significant material problems, roughly a third do experience at least one problem such as overcrowding, temporary hunger, or difficulty getting medical care.

Much official poverty that does exist in the United States can be reduced, particularly among children. There are two main reasons that American children are poor: Their parents don’t work much, and their fathers are absent from the home.

In both good and bad economic environments, the typical American poor family with children is supported by only 800 hours of work during a year — the equivalent of 16 hours of work per week. If work in each family were raised to 2,000 hours per year — the equivalent of one adult working 40 hours per week throughout the year — nearly 75 percent of poor children would be lifted out of official poverty.

As noted above, father absence is another major cause of child poverty. Nearly two thirds of poor children reside in single-parent homes; each year, an additional 1.5 million children are born out of wedlock. If poor mothers married the fathers of their children, nearly three quarters of the nation’s impoverished youth would immediately be lifted out of poverty.

Yet, although work and marriage are reliable ladders out of poverty, the welfare system perversely remains hostile to both. Major programs such as food stamps, public housing, and Medicaid continue to reward idleness and penalize marriage. If welfare could be turned around to encourage work and marriage, the nation’s remaining poverty could be reduced.

Another important factor boosting poverty in the U.S. is our broken immigration system which imports hundreds of thousands of additional poor people each year from abroad through both legal and illegal immigration channels. One quarter of all poor persons in the U.S. are now first generation immigrants or the minor children of those immigrants. Roughly one in ten of the persons counted among the poor by Census is either an illegal immigrant or the minor child of an illegal. Immigrants tend to be poor because they have very low education levels. A quarter of legal immigrants and fifty to sixty percent of illegals are high-school dropouts. By contrast, only nine percent of non-immigrant Americans lack a high school degree.

As long as the present steady flow of poverty-prone persons from foreign countries continues, efforts to reduce the total number of poor in the U.S. will be far more difficult. A sound anti-poverty strategy must not only seek to increase work and marriage among native born Americans, it must also end illegal immigration, and dramatically increase the skill level of future legal immigrants.

[NotSmall]

Maybe we should hold on to those guns in case you boys need us to bail you out again.

LMFAO! - You were a few years late the last time!

(Hence the reason you feel the need to jump in feet first ever since maybe...)

[Kärnfysikern]

Im not sure what you guys think but no one is denied healthcare. If you show up at the ER they treat you...insurance or not.

Yeah I know no one is denied healthcare.
But its just wrong that some peoples lives are ruined economicaly if they lack insurance and need healthcare. I bet sweden spends a smaller % of GNP on healthcare then the US.

How are insurance rates handled if your suffering from some kind of chronic disease. Like mutiple sclerosis. What happens if you get cancer and doesnt have insurance? How big will the bill be after the treatment is done?

[Kärnfysikern]

That's the difference between a socialist gov't and a capitalist gov't. What you and other socialists do not understand is exactly what the "poor" in the USA have in comparison to what the "poor" in your contry's have. Here's a little perspective for you:
The following are facts about persons defined as “poor” by the Census Bureau, taken from a variety of government reports:

blablablablabla.......

A socialist wants the goverment to run everything, the state to own everything ect. I can assure you I dont want that and Im willing to bet Red doesnt want it either. Free healthcare in a country doesnt mean the country is a socialist country. Im not a socialist in any sense of the word.

Poverty hardly exist in Sweden so you cant try to claim the poor in the us has it better than the poor in Sweden.

What does anything you wrote have to do with healthcare btw?

[Kärnfysikern]

No, healthcare is not a "right".
A driver's license is not a "right"
A hunting license is not a "right".
You do not have the right to marry anything or anyone you want.
Please give me an example of a child (with competant parents) who was refused emergency room medical care because his parents had no insurance.
Everyone thinks that society owes them something........

So what is a right according to you?
What about freedom?
What about equal oppertunity to education?

Free helthcare is a easy system to implement and its cheaper for society as a whole.

I just checked and in the us 13.9% of GNP(or is it GDP i never remember what its called on english) goes to healthcare, in sweden its 9.2%. So what do you think is better?