Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
PRESIDENT CRISTINA FERNANDEZ has been diagnosed with thyroid cancer, but test results showed that it remains limited to a lobe in the right side of her neck and has not spread into her lymph nodes, her spokesman said.
Fernandez, 58, will undergo surgery on 4 January and then take 20 days of medical leave, during which Vice President Amado Boudou will run the country. Meanwhile, she will keep up her normal routine, spokesman Alfredo Scoccimarro suggested, noting that she will appear at several events today as planned.
Scoccimarro said the cancer was discovered during a routine exam on22 December, and that Fernandez received the results from follow-up tests hours before the announcement.
This kind of thyroid cancer is highly survivable, with more than 95 percent of patients living at least 10 years after detection, according to the US National Institutes of Health.
The usual treatment is to surgically remove as much of the cancerous material as possible, and then follow up with radioactive iodide treatments, taken orally. This substance helps to destroy any remnants of the cancerous gland and provide for clearer images showing any additional cancer, the NIH said on its Web site.
After surgery, patients usually must take medicine — levothyroxine sodium — for the rest of their lives to replace a hormone that the thyroid glands produce. Blood tests every six to 12 months to measure thyroid levels also are recommended.
Fernandez is only the latest South American leader to be diagnosed with cancer. Presidents Fernando Lugo of Paraguay, Hugo Chavez of Venezuela and Dilma Rousseff of Brazil all have undergone treatments recently.
Presidential doctors Luis Buonomo and Marcelo Ballesteros said the operation will be led by Dr Pedro Saco, chief of the surgery department at Hospital Austral and chief of the Head and Neck Service of the oncology institute at the University of Buenos Aires. Saco also trained in cancer centres in Houston and New York, the hospital said.
Thyroid surgery is not without risk: the NIH says a nerve that controls the vocal cords can be damaged, and doctors sometimes accidentally remove the parathyroid gland, which helps regulate blood calcium levels.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Sentence is still too lenient. 4 times the legal limit, kills one person and paralysis for another.
I listened to the mother of Kate being interviewed on Newstalk and thought she was a lovely, brave woman going through a terrible time. She did not think it would serve any purpose a drunk driver going to prison. She asked that no one get into a car being driven by someone who had been drinking.
We would all be safer if you drink but not drive.
“Out of line with other decided cases” – which clearly must have been too lenient as well! So judges perpetuate their inadequate sentencing because of precedent.
It seems to be the very flawed system on which our entire legal system operates. Basically an original mistake gets extended forever.
This again leaves a huge question mark over the severity of the sentence handed out yesterday to the ex fireman who had consensual sex with a 16 year old and got 7 years in prison. Murdering one person and paralysing another is only four years.
You can’t have consensual sex with a minor. They cannot give consent. This, however, is a disgrace and no deterrent. Judges are totally out of touch with the real world.
If I had too much to drink, killed someone with a weapon and claimed it was an accident? What sentence would I get, If any and the judicial system is a joke in this country.
As I said yesterday completely incompetent Judges…..joke
How the Fcuk is that allowed?
Politicians allow it, they have a bar in their workplace and consume alcohol while working.
They should have doubled his sentence for having the neck to appeal. Outrageous decision.
This country and its judicial system are an absolute joke. What kind of an example does this give. 4 years for what he did. His first sentence was too lenient in my eyes.
An embarrassment
Wonder if I paralysed a judges daughter would I just get the 1 year?
Hold on went from seven to four years. He should of been dragged out and shot.
Can this also set a precedent,for appeal, for that drink drivers sentence last week? On the basis of this, what sentence should have been imposed on the idiot in Donegal. The judiciary in this country is a shambles.
The problem seems to be that there is no central authority issuing guidelines so you have each judge in their own little fiefdom sentencing people according to their own interpretation of the law. We really need minimum sentences and a system where if a judge feels that a particular case warrants a lesser sentence due to mitigating circumstances the case is referred to a higher court.
There should be a mandatory minimum sentence for anyone who kills or maims another person by driving while drunk. Say 12 years and lifetime ban from driving with no chance of appeal, this would act as a good deterrent.
€206877
This is how much the state will save by this appeal. Its in the states interest to grant these appeals. This is why we have laughable sentencing laws. The state is far more interested in money than its citizens. We have seen this again and again. Money trumps life.
http://www.iprt.ie/prison-facts-2
How much will the paralysed women receive for care help?
If only Dexter Morgan was real
Is that judge off his nut? If anything the original sentence was too lenient!
It shows the courts are getting more comfortable with this type of crime hence the low sentence
So they’re trying to extend the sentence in that Donegal case while reducing the sentence in this one? Does our legal system have any clue what it’s doing?
Another nonsense sentence for causing such devestation due to being an idiot behind the wheel driving drunk. These judges are clearly blotto when they hand down these terms.
Who cares what you said.
F*ck off troll.
10 years . End of story
Sentencing in this country especially for drink driving road accidents are a disgrace.
A central tenet of democracy is that the branches of Government must be independent of each other. The executive enacts legislation and the judiciary interprets the wording of a given statute when it is tested by way of using it to prosecute a crime. The judges’ interpretation becomes a precedent for other cases of a similar nature into the future. This is called “common law” and is equally as binding as legislation, and is used throughout the land. Sentencing is limited by a variety of factors: legislation, “mandatory sentencing”, and the concept of “fairness.” This chap’s sentence has to be proportionate to those who previously did similar and with a similar outcome. The Victim Impact Statement serves no function other than to give the victims a voice (make them “feel better”.)
Excuse the language but that’s a FN joke. No justice here at all.
have your say