If you have ...

Makes you think, for a moment.

Taken from here

....

Dusty Brown to the rescue.

Our wonderfully sensible health advisors have told British people to stay indoors in case the nasty dust from that Icelandic volcano makes our eyes itchy, or gets into our lungs and makes us ill, maybe even more ill than we were before.

Looks like some people didn't take any notice, they preferred to soak up the sun - protected from it's dangerous rays by that thick cloud of dust. (picture Mail)

It would be interesting to know what health advice the Icelandic government is giving its' people, especially when you see how much of the stuff they've got to put up with.

Pictures Mail

Oh, and after the French got all shirty with Dan Snow and his well-meaning attempt to rescue stranded holidaymakers by taking a group of inflatables across The Channel - it's Super Dusty Brown to the rescue, because the Navy will be landing in France instead, a decision made at a special meeting by his special chums Mandy and Adonis.

Is this to be Mr Brown's Falklands moment?

Maybe they really thinks this little plan is good enough to make all those stranded holidaymakers and their families so grateful that they'll vote Labour, because this wonderful plan will make us all forget the last 13 years?

Oh, and do they really think France (and the EU) will let the British Navy into Dunkirk? History tells us that the French don't particularly like things like that happening, because it brings back bad memories. But maybe, because we're all friends now, nobody will mind and they'll give it the go ahead.

....

Christians and agnostics are dirty - official

Department for Health has ruled that

female Muslim staff will be permitted to cover their arms on hospital wards to preserve their modesty.

Presumably, before either rolling their nice clean sleeves back down to preserve their modesty, or pulling on the nice disposable sleeves the hospitals will buy, they'll scrub their arms really carefully.

Ah, maybe not.

Leicester University said some Muslim females ‘had difficulty in complying with the procedures to roll up sleeves to the elbow for appropriate handwashing’, while Sheffield University reported a case of a Muslim medic who refused to ‘scrub’ as this left her forearms exposed.

It would be interesting to know how a clean piece of fabric covering arms and hands that haven't been washed is going to either improve or enhance patient safety, especially as nurses etc wear their uniforms when travelling to and from work.

The latest guidance is at odds with previous DoH guidance guidance, which said that

... all staff should be ‘bare below the elbow’ after long sleeves were blamed for spreading bacteria, leading to superbug deaths

Those rules were a waste of time then.

It would seem that jewellery will not longer be forbidden either, as long as it's worn on the arms - where patients are likely to come into contact with it, because

Sikhs can wear bangles, as long as they can be pushed up the arm during direct patient care

Presumably they'll be expected to wash their hands both before and after pushing their bangles up their arms?

Mrs Rigby wonders why, if all these rules can be varied according to an individual's background and personal preferences, patients are required to remove wedding rings etc before even the most minor of surgery.

Surely, these days, washing hands or putting a piece of sticking plater over ear rings would be enough to stop germs from migrating from something as aseptic as gold.

The decision was reached by a working party

comprising two Health Department officials, a member of the Health Protection Agency, two female Muslim hospital chaplains, an Imam and two members of MSCP (that's Muslim Spiritual Care Provision in the NHS)

It's hardly surprising that

"Lord Carey, one of seven bishops to sign a letter supporting Mrs Chaplin at her tribunal, said the Government was guilty of ‘double standards’"

and

"campaigners for the rights of Christian nurses to wear crosses said the Health Department had failed to consult them adequately"

The revised rules were quietly issued on March 26 2010.

Shirley Chaplin lost her appeal relating to the wearing of a crucifix on 6th April 2010 - 11 days after the DoH announcement.

Oh, and separately, thanks to Old Holborn for letting us know that the Met allows Islamic protesters to throw shoes

Scotland Yard has bowed to Islamic sensitivities and accepted that Muslims are entitled to throw shoes in ritual protest — which could have the unintended consequence of politicians or the police being hit.

Protesters can still be charged with "violent disorder" if they throw stones, plastic juice bottles etc, but not if they throw footwear, of any description, including nice soft things such as

ski-boots and clogs

It would seem that no special announcement was made, it the 'concession' was slipped in quietly following the arrest of more than 70 Muslim protesters outside the Israeli Embassy in London

Judge Denniss agreed that the act of shoe-throwing should not be considered in a charge of violent disorder against the student because it was “a symbolic” political gesture.

Got to smile though, because although the Police offered ... a facility allowed for people to bring old pairs of shoes

... they didn’t realise we were going to throw the shoes so hard

Makes you wonder who'll be the first to, accidentally of course, get a stone in their shoe.

....

Anthrax - Blackpool, England

I had no idea this news had broken when I made the earlier post, odd coincidence really. Sorry to "go on" about it ...

From BBC @ 15:00 today, HPA and NHS Blackpool :-

Anthrax Case in Blackpool Confirmed by HPA

The Health Protection Agency (HPA) and NHS Blackpool can confirm they are investigating the death of a drug injecting heroin user in Blackpool. The investigation has confirmed that the cause of death was anthrax following positive test results.

This is the second case of anthrax seen in an injecting drug user in England, the first announced in London on 5 February.  Similar cases have been seen in Scotland since December 2009 with nineteen cases having been confirmed and one in Germany. Similarities to the cases in Scotland suggest that the heroin, or a contaminated cutting agent mixed with the heroin, is the likely source of infection.

Dr Arif Rajpura, Director of Public Health from NHS Blackpool, said:” While public health investigations are ongoing, it must be assumed that all heroin in the North West carries the risk of anthrax contamination. I urge all heroin users to be extremely alert to the risks and to seek urgent medical advice if they experience signs of infection such as redness or excessive swelling at or near an injection site, or other symptoms of general illness such a high temperature, chills or a severe headache or breathing difficulties, as early antibiotic treatment can be lifesaving.

“Heroin users are strongly advised to cease taking heroin by any route, if at all possible, and to seek help from their local drug treatment services. This is a very serious infection for drug users and prompt treatment is crucial.

“Drug injecting is an extremely risky and dangerous practice and users are vulnerable to a wide range of infectious diseases, both from the action of piercing the skin, as well as contaminants in the drugs that they use.” 

Symptoms (from HPA) :-

What are the symptoms in humans?

There are two main forms of anthrax infection: cutaneous and inhalation.

In cutaneous (skin) anthrax, a lesion appears on the skin, often on the head, neck, forearms or hands. This lesion starts as a small bump and develops into a characteristic ulcer with a black centre. It is rarely painful, but if untreated the infection can spread to cause blood poisoning. If untreated, the disease can be fatal in 5% of cases, but with prompt antibiotic treatment recovery occurs.

Inhalation anthrax is normally much less common. Symptoms begin with a flu-like illness followed by respiratory difficulties and shock after 2-6 days.

Injection anthrax - since December 2009, a signficant number of drug users in Scotland have been found to have anthrax infection. it is thought that they contracted the infection from using heroin contaminated by anthrax spores. Further information

Intestinal anthrax is a very rare form of food poisoning, and results in severe gut disease, fever and blood poisoning.

Inhalation and intestinal anthrax are serious and can often be fatal. They can be treated effectively with antibiotics if identified early enough, but this can be difficult as the initial symptoms are similar to other illnesses.

and here, also from HPA :-

Anthrax in drug users appears to be very rare; prior to the current outbreak in Scotland, only one previous case had been reported in Norway in 2000.

Q5. How long can you have the infection before developing symptoms?

This is dependent on the dose and route of exposure and may vary from one day to eight weeks. However, symptoms usually develop within 48 hours with inhalation anthrax and 1-7 days with cutaneous anthrax. It is not known exactly how long symptoms can take to develop following the use of contaminated heroin, however in most cases during the current outbreak, symptoms started within 1 to 7 days of taking heroin.

Q6. What are the symptoms?

Early identification of anthrax can be difficult as the initial symptoms are similar to other illnesses.

Symptoms vary according to the route of infection:

Anthrax in drug users

Drug users may become infected with anthrax when heroin or the cutting agent mixed with heroin has become contaminated with anthrax spores. This could be a source of infection if injected, smoked or snorted. The clinical presentation is likely to vary according to the way in which the heroin is taken and might include:

• Swelling and redness at an injection site, which may or may not be painful
• Abscess or ulcer at an injection site often with marked swelling (oedema)
• Septicaemia (blood poisoning)
• Meningitis
• Symptoms of inhalational anthrax (see below)

Cutaneous anthrax - Local skin involvement after direct contact.

• Commonly seen on hands, forearms, head and neck. The lesion is usually single
• 1-7 days after exposure a raised, itchy, inflamed pimple appears followed by a papule that turns vesicular (into a blister). Extensive oedema or swelling accompanies the lesion – the swelling tends to be much greater than would normally be expected for the size of the lesion and this is usually PAINLESS
• The blister then ulcerates and then 2-6 days later the classical black eschar develops
• If left untreated the infection can spread to cause blood poisoning

Inhalation anthrax - symptoms begin with a flu-like illness (fever, headache, muscle aches and non-productive cough) followed by severe respiratory difficulties and shock 2-6 days later. Untreated disease is usually fatal, and treatment must be given as soon as possible to reduce mortality.

Intestinal anthrax is contracted by the ingestion of contaminated carcasses and results in severe disease which can be fatal. This is found in some parts of the world where the value of an animal dying unexpectedly outweighs any fears of contracting the disease.

Q7. Can anthrax be treated?

Cutaneous anthrax can be readily treated and cured with antibiotics. Mortality is often high with inhalation and gastrointestinal anthrax, since successful treatment depends on early recognition of the disease.

Prompt treatment with antibiotics and, where appropriate, surgery is important in the management of anthrax related to drug use.

Q8. How is anthrax spread?

A person can get anthrax if they inject, inhale, ingest or come into direct physical contact (touching) with the spores from the bacteria. These spores can be found in the soil or in contaminated drugs. It is extremely rare for anthrax to spread from person-to-person. Airborne transmission from one person to another does not occur; there have been one or two reports of spread from skin anthrax but this is very, very rare.

Q9. How do drug users become infected with anthrax?

Heroin or the cutting agent mixed with heroin may become contaminated with anthrax spores from the environment. This could be a source of infection if injected, smoked, or snorted.

(Q&As courtesy of Health Protection Scotland)

The swine flu hotline no longer exists.
.

Underage.

Underage pregnancies (my bold) :

Over the past eight years, no fewer than 15 girls found they were expecting when they were aged just ten. A further 39 found out they were pregnant when they were 11.

Since 2002 there have been 63,487 pregnancies among under-15s in England and Wales: a total of 23 conceptions every single day among girls too young to legally have sex.

And how many of the adults who are supposed to keep these children safe, whether 'single parents' or not, have been prosecuted for allowing their children to be in a situation where they could get pregnant?

A quick search of the 'DirectGov' site leads to the Children and Young Persons Act 1933, which says right at the beginning, with regard to Prevention of Cruelty and Exposure to Moral and Physical Danger. Getting pregnant before you've finished growing has to count as being exposed to physical danger, even if being sexually active whilst still a child is no longer 'immoral'.

It's hard to understand why, in these days where every adult male is a sexual predator and a kiddy fiddler, parents aren't taking more care of their children - after all, children are the central tenets of almost every government policy.

It's so easy to get very angry about statistics like these, and angry about the useless adults who are meant to be caring for their children, but one of the junior members of the wider Rigby family once put the whole thing into context.

This 'junior' had more sense than the rest of us put together and said it's because children are raising children, and don't know how to be adult role models. How can, say, a girl who gives birth at 13 be a good role model to her own child when that child reaches school age when she'd still probably be in full time education herself.

It was also pointed out that if a girl gets pregnant at 10, 13, 14 and so on then she'll only be 20, 26 or 28 by the time her child reaches the same - and might even think it's funny or cool to become such a young grandparent because it might mean getting your picture in the newspaper.

Richmond Council doesn't like Lynn Barber

.
In an article in the Telegraph outlining why"Lynn Barber, the writer and interviewer, has withdrawn from a literary festival after the local council refused to use a publicity photograph which showed her smoking a cigarette", Mrs Rigby noticed that a spokesman for Richmond Council said this :-

As a local authority we are responsible for encouraging good health habits in the area ...

Mrs Rigby thought local councils already had enough to do, what with running car parks, enforcing anti-litter laws, policing rubbish collections and so on, without taking on a job that should be the responsibility of the local health authority.

Or maybe some councils are trying to make themselves look very busy, to explain why they cost so much to run?
.