Sorry, I didn't make my point clear. I was replying to a poster who questioned why he would be given an op at 99, when this would have placed an undue stress on his body. The point I was making was that it was initially reported by BP that he had a 'cardiac procedure'. This could include angiograms, stenting, pacemaker fitting, pacemaker wire replacements etc. none of which are operations, just routine procedures. It was only later, that the media starting referring to it as an operation, which goes against BPs initial statement. Similarly, the media tend to confuse heart attacks and cardiac arrests which are again, 2 vastly different medical conditions.
I agree, it has not been stated that he had a pacemaker wire replaced, but at the time, alongside reports of an unidentified infection, (whereas they have reported specifically chest infections and urinary tract infections for PP in the past) and a longstanding heart condition (Bradycardia or AF which likely would have required a pacemaker at his age) it was a clinical likelihood on my part, given the information at the time. I apologise that I should have made this clearer.
Ultimately, the point I was making is that as BP referred to it as a procedure, it was unlikely to be anything major which would have required considerable reserves that PP no longer had, and that the press had been using poetic licence in describing it as an op.
