Zulma Lobato He had health problems again. Due to severe abdominal pain, she called 911 Emergency and the ambulance took her to the hospital in Vicente López, province of Buenos Aires. There the doctors indicated a CT scan, an abdominal ultrasound and prescribed painkillers.
Once the studies were completed, the results did not indicate that there was an extremely serious disorder, according to her representative Lautaro Reyes on the TN Show portal, but Zulma fears that the symptoms are related to her kidney problem. It must be remembered that In December 2019, the media had a kidney removed.
Zulma was hospitalized and kept under observation. Then, according to Reyes, she “sent her home” and she “is resting, but she’s going to have to be careful because she’s missing a kidney.”
Zulma Lobato’s complex surgery
In December 2019, affected by serious health problems, Zulma Lobato underwent surgery in which a kidney had to be removed. This operation forced her to spend several days in intensive care. As soon as she was discharged, she was delighted with the result. “I lived again, they saved me”he declared then.
Zulma Lobato has gone through difficult situations. According to what she herself said, after the rape suffered at Munro train station, she became a carrier of HIV. In a note to Paparazzi magazine, she explained: “I was very down and had lost about 30 kilos, I was very thin. I asked my doctor to get HIV tested because I was not well, something was happening to me. He soon gave me the bad news.”
The trial that Zulma Lobato won against a television channel
In July 2022, Zulma Lobato won a “damages” lawsuit against Crónica TV. The dispute arose from what happened in 2011, when she went to participate in the cycle Facts and protagonists which was broadcast on said channel, hosted by Anabela Ascar, and before going on the air she felt ill. Although the media was biased, they recorded it without their consent.
As stated in the case, both Zulma and the doctors who were treating her asked that these images not be recorded, but the cameras were not turned off and the material was broadcast.
The judge’s ruling held that the images “did not concern a matter of public interest, as the actress suffered an episode in which her health was compromised”. it is not known what socially relevant interest its diffusion may have“.
After arguing that “it is clear that the honor, private life and image” of the actor were harmed during that broadcast, the National Chamber of Civil Appeals Section A decided “to confirm the contested sentence in everything that decides and was the subject of an appeal and complaint, with the costs of the appeal being borne by the appellant”.
Therefore, the court ruled that the station should “pay the plaintiff the sum of $300,000 plus interest and expenses.”
Source: Clarin
