Wednesday, May 09, 2007


Treliske diagnosed John Brandrick with inoperable pancreatic cancer and told him he had 12 months to live. The letters from the hospital were shown on local television last night and they were pretty definite about his chances, or lack thereof. He gave away clothes, his car, stopped paying the mortgage and started living every day as though it was his last. Which, from what I heard of an interview with him, involved travelling around the county and eating out a lot; nothing hugely excessive or outrageous.

The kicker, it wasn't pancreatic cancer.

He's still alive but very much in debt and at risk of losing his house. And peeved.

On the one hand, it makes me wonder what sort of situation he was intending to leave his family in, on his death. But maybe the idea was that they'd sell the house & the equity (if any) would have covered debts accrued? Perhaps if he has dependents, they would have been provided for? Don't know, haven't seen the question asked or answered.

Treliske say his symptoms & all the tests pointed towards the cancer they went on to diagnose. They say that: "Whilst we do sympathise with Mr Brandrick's position, clinical review of his case has not revealed that any different diagnosis would have been made at the time based on the same evidence."

He is actually suffering pancreatitis.

On the face of it, it seems bizarre to be angry that you're alive - but then I suppose having dealt with the diagnosis and accepted it, it must have been a shock. Yes, it would make you angry to have gone through something like that to find it was incorrect.

But better than the alternative.

No comments: