Monday - July 27, 2009

Post Traumatic Stress is diagnosed far too liberally, claims trauma expert .

Brilliant.

Ordinary laymen, and ladies too, have guessed that for a long time.  Now comes the dawn? Better late then never but the question is, will anyone listen?

Post Traumatic Stress Disorder has become a “fashionable diagnosis” that is far too liberally diagnosed, according claims a trauma expert who treated victims of the King’s Cross Tube fire.

By Richard Alleyne, Science Correspondent
27 Jul 2009
The Telegraph

Dr James Thompson, a trauma psychologist, made the comments on BBC’s Panorama programme investigating the growing army of sufferers.

The programme claims that the NHS now treats an estimated 220,000 people a year suffering with post-traumatic stress disorder, a diagnosis once reserved for those coming back from war zones.

The disorder is adding enormously to the burgeoning multibillion personal accident industry business, it said.

Those being diagnosed include people who have had a minor traffic accident, bullying in the workplace, even in the schoolyard.

In the programme, titled The Trauma Industry, Dr Thompson suggested it was part of the growing “victim culture”.

“It has become a fashionable diagnosis because it has the key feature that is about what the world did to you,” he told the programme.

“And that is always attractive to all of us. Now you can teach yourself PTSD on the internet within five minutes.”

Soldiers, policemen, ambulance workers and firemen are among those most likely to end up suffering from PTSD, along with members of the public who are attacked, involved in a car crash or affected by a disaster.

Victims of the disorder, which may emerge months or even years after a traumatic experience, may find themselves suffering from flashbacks and nightmares, disturbed sleep, aggressive behaviour, an inability to concentrate and a tendency to panic easily.

After the 1987 King’s Cross tube fire, in which 31 people died, mental health professionals drew up a list of 670 people who were at risk from PTSD, of whom only 100 had been directly involved. The rest were emergency staff and railway officials who had witnessed horrific scenes in the burning station as well as relatives of those who died.

SOURCE

Posted by peiper     on 07/27/2009 at 01:15 PM   
Filed Under: • Amazing Science and Discoveries • Corruption and Greed • Health-Medicine • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • UK •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Friday - July 24, 2009

Can the US President save the patient?

Always interesting (almost) to read the comments and questions and see how foreign journalists are covering the USA.

So many of you at BMEWS have commented on health care and recently Wardmom (love that lady) really opened up on the subject, that I don’t have anything to add. So I’ll leave it to you ppl.

I find this to be a very interesting read and I do agree about the profit motive as I have personally seen and posted under comments somewhere else,
at least one reason for sky high medical pricing.  And I also believe it’s true that many doctors and hospitals are gouging the public. 

When I turned 50, the group ins. plan I’d had for years started charging $1,000 a month. It was going up every month it seemed They were losing members in the plan and were forcing ppl to quit the plan, which of course we had to do.

Barack Obama is staking his leadership on health care reform. Alex Spillius reports

By Alex Spillius
Jul 2009

AMERICAN health care has always been a bit of mystery to the rest of the developed world. Just why does the richest country on earth have an immunisation rate worse
than Botswana’s? Why do 38 other countries have lower infant mortality rates? And why are there 47 million people out of a population of 300 million without medical insurance?

Barack Obama, perhaps unwittingly, turned to Alice in Wonderland to try to explain the issue to his public, which can find the system as confusing as the rest of us.

“If there’s a blue pill and a red pill and the blue pill is half the price of the red pill and works just as well, why not pay half price for the thing that’s going to make you well?” he asked, before providing part of the answer. “The system right now doesn’t incentivise that.”

American doctors tend to prescribe the expensive pill because they are paid more to do so. They may also be over-inclined to remove tonsils, as the President highlighted, because “the doctor may look at the reimbursement system and say to himself, ‘You know what, I make a lot more money if I take this kid’s tonsils out’.”

As a consequence, costs have soared into the realms of fantasy: a sixth of the US economy, $2.4 trillion (£1.45 trillion), was spent on health last year.

Health care reform is Obama’s biggest domestic priority, so great that he cleared the airwaves for a prime-time press conference from the White House on Wednesday evening devoted almost entirely to the issue. He has made it his job to ensure Americans can wake in their beds safe in the belief that they have a health care system that is reliable and affordable. And the President knows that if he doesn’t get this right, he may find
he isn’t sleeping in the White House after 2012.

The goal of reforming America’s private sector-dominated system has consumed Democrats since the Second World War. All along, they have craved something akin to the National Health Service and they regard it as a deep source of national shame that so many millions are poorly cared for.

Yet as Britain was legislating for care from the cradle to the grave in 1945, the Murray-Wagner-Dingell bill, an attempt to introduce universal coverage, was failing in the US. It was defeated largely by the American Medical Association, the powerful doctors’ group, which vowed to “resist the enslavement of the medical profession” and demanded $25 from each member to pay for a highly effective lobbying of Congress.

The Democrats, however, scored a significant victory in 1964 when President Lyndon Johnson, exploiting the mass sympathy created by John
F Kennedy’s assassination, managed to push through Medicare and Medicaid, two programmes that belie the myth that there is no free care in the US. In fact, all those over 65 are covered by Medicare, while Medicaid covers about 40 per cent of the poor, most of them children. Another scheme, the State Children’s Health Insurance Program, assists children from families of modest income who earn too much for Medicaid. Hospital emergency rooms are also obliged to treat anyone who walks in, no matter how trivial the complaint. As a result they are always packed with sore throats and ankle sprains.

In the boom years, the system worked well – it still does, in fact,
from many patients’ point of view.
It represented the best of America: dynamic, entrepreneurial and driven by consumer needs rather than the diktats of central authority. Now its bad elements have come to represent the worst: bloated, excessive, over-driven by profit and mired in bureaucracy.

The US spends an annual $6,000 more per capita than any other industrialised nation on health care, but by almost every measure, its people are unhealthier. The reasons are manifold: insurance is not mandatory, so for a decade premiums for those who do want to be covered have risen three times faster than wages. Rapidly emerging new technologies have driven up costs, while doctors, as the President noted, are rewarded for services provided and not for the health of their patients.

Fear of litigation, physicians argue, has made them cautious and liable to over-prescribe and over-test. A mild complaint about poor sleep in the doctor’s surgery will see you walk out with a large prescription. A bad back? Let’s get you a scan. Didn’t show much? Let’s do an MRI. How about a spinal fusion operation, which won’t really work?

Then there are horror stories that the President says fill his letter box every day. Principal among the system’s ills is the fact that a lost job means lost insurance, because most people’s coverage is purchased by their employers.

The system is also replete with traps: insurance commonly only kicks in after two weeks with a new employer. This wasn’t much help to a glass-cutter from Virginia who, four days into a new job, woke up in hospital with a broken neck and a bill for $15,000 after a game of American football went badly wrong.

It wasn’t much help for Jim Howe’s daughter, either, who nearly died in a car crash four years ago, just days before his insurance came into effect. “The family had gone without coverage before, when I had been unemployed for short periods, but nothing had ever happened to any of us,” he said. Subsidised insurance of $1,200 a month was unaffordable when he was out of work. “It is
always just a crap shoot. You hope for the best.”

Thirteen operations and $300,000 in fees later, his daughter is on the verge of bankruptcy and her credit rating – which will affect her ability to get a mortgage – is in tatters.

By Obama’s own admission, if he was starting from scratch, he would want what is called a “single payer system”, a version of the NHS funded from the sole source of income tax. America’s multi-level structure is, however, far too complicated to demolish.

SEE THE REST HERE

doctors, as the President noted, are rewarded for services provided and not for the health of their patients.

OK, I need someone to explain this to me.  Aren’t things like payments predicated on “services provided?” I might be a bit dense here but ... doesn’t Drew for an example, get rewarded for services he provides whether its as a tech or a window cleaner?  Is Obama suggesting then, that a doctor should not be paid unless he can cure the patient?  If not, is he supposed to provide service free? 

Posted by peiper     on 07/24/2009 at 02:54 AM   
Filed Under: • Economics • Health-Medicine •  
• Comments (6) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Monday - July 06, 2009

Man left dying in his home as paramedic carried out 16-minute risk assessment outside. elf n safety?

Jeez what a story this is. I can’t make any comments. Words just don’t come to mind.

To think we have a minimum of another year in this place.

By Tom Kelly
Last updated at 4:19 PM on 06th July 2009

Heart attack: Roy Adams died after a paramedic spent 16 minutes on a health and safety check outside his house

A grandfather was left dying in his home while a paramedic waited outside for 16 minutes as he carried out a health and safety assessment.

The family of Roy Adams believe he might have survived if those ‘vital minutes’ had not been squandered.

The 61-year-old police chauffeur, who suffered a suspected heart attack, did finally receive treatment, but died on the way to hospital after suffering breathing difficulties.

Mr Adams telephoned 999 from his home in Morden, south London, complaining of chest problems.

On the advice of the operator, he left both the communal door to the block of flats and the door to his own apartment on the latch to enable the ambulance crew to get in quickly.

But when the rapid response medic arrived six minutes later he decided against going straight into Mr Adams’s home.

It is believed that, because the doors were open, he feared that the flat was being burgled.

Instead the medic carried out an on scene risk assessment and called the police for back up.

After waiting for 16 minutes he went into the property to find Mr Adams - who was alone in the property - dying on the floor unable to breathe.

He was taken to hospital but died before he arrived.

His daughter Catherine Adams, a security worker, said: ‘I keep picturing him in agony on the floor taking his dying breaths as he could hear the paramedic outside.

‘He must have been thinking: “Please, just come in, just come in”.

‘It’s heartbreaking. I can’t understand why the medic waited so long and why he thought carrying out a risk assessment was more important than saving my father.’

Miss Adams went on: ‘What risk did my father pose? It is ludicrous.

‘Why would you stand outside carrying out this risk assessment when you know an old man is inside with a serious medical emergency?’

‘My dad had been instructed to put the doors on the latch by the operator. 

‘Vital minutes were wasted. He might well have survived if the medic had gone in and treated him as soon as he arrived, but now we will never know.

We haven’t been given any explanation from the ambulance service. I find it baffling.

‘We’ve got to get answers. We’ve got to find out. We don’t want any other family to have to go through what we are going through.

‘My dad was a pillar of the community.

‘He spent his life serving others, but when he desperately needed help he was made to wait for heath and safety reasons.

‘The image of him lying there desperate for help as the paramedic waited outside keeps going round and round in my head.

During his 17-years as a police chauffeur, Mr Adams drove Scotland Yard Commanders around London and also had responsibility for taking witnesses to court in major cases.

He also drove police vans during fraud squad raids.

A talented amateur singer, he had appeared at the Albert Hall with the London Welsh Male Voice Choir.

He was devoted to his two daughters and three grandsons, and remained good friends with his ex wife.

His death on June 29 was caused by coronary artery disease.  A London Ambulance Service spokesman said: ‘We were called at 00.14 am to a residential address in Morden.

‘The first member of our staff to arrive at the address carried out a full on-scene risk assessment and requested police assistance due to safety concerns.

‘He then took the decision to enter the property, maintaining telephone contact with our control room.

‘One patient – a man – was taken to hospital.’

‘We are currently looking into the circumstances surrounding the incident.’

The London Ambulance Service said an on scene risk assessment is a ‘mental check list’ which paramedics are required to go through when they arrive at an emergency.

It includes questions like: Does the scene look safe? Are there any obvious risks? Will I require extra help? Will I need a stretcher? Will I need extra equipment? Are there any steps or other obstacles that could cause a problem?  The assessment is not written down.

A London Ambulance Service spokesman said: ‘We have a duty of care to treat patients but we also have to look after our staff.

‘In this case the medic conducted the on scene risk assessment and had safety concerns and decided to call for back up.’

SOURCE

Not to worry though. I’m certain someone will issue an apology and say their condolences and heart felt feelings go out to the family. Hoping most likely that the family will accept that BS in place of a law suit.

Posted by peiper     on 07/06/2009 at 02:26 PM   
Filed Under: • Health and Safety • Health-Medicine • UK •  
• Comments (8) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Friday - June 19, 2009

PATIENT IS OKAY, NO THANKS TO AMBULANCE THAT WENT THE WRONG WAY.  DOH!

Maybe the driver couldn’t read road signs.  Or couldn’t read? Who knows.

Has to be last post from me today.  Can’t stay up anymore.

cheers.

AMBULANCE PATIENT TAKEN FOR A RIDE.  THE WRONG WAY.  2WICE!

WINCHESTER CHRONICLE
By Andrew Napier »

A HAMPSHIRE man was twice taken the wrong way to hospital by ambulance crews, due to faulty sat navs.
Leslie Palmer, 79, endured a 45-minute trips both times when it should only have taken 20 minutes.

But separate ambulance crews in separate vehicles told his wife of 55 years, Jean, that they had to use sat nav as that was the rule.
Mr Palmer was taken from his home in Bishop’s Waltham with an infection on June 3, with Mrs Palmer, 77, accompanying him to go to the Royal Hampshire County Hospital in Winchester, 11 miles away.

Mrs Palmer explained that the first time she knew something was wrong was when the driver said they were in Charles Watts Way, Hedge End - the opposite direction - and now 19 miles away from the hospital.

‘’I heard the man inside tell the driver ‘get on the motorway’ but it was much longer than it should have been,’’ she explained.
Mrs Palmer, a retired nanny, said that an ambulance was again called for her retired banker husband on the evening of June 5 and again the ambulance set off on a bizarre route at 6.50pm.

‘’We were soon going through lanes I had never seen before. We were on little roads no bigger than the ambulance and my husband’s head was shaking around and we thought we were going to end up in a farm yard at any minute.”
Mrs Palmer said that the ambulance eventually popped up out of the lanes at Fishers Pond at 7.30pm but still five miles from the hospital.

‘’Luckily my husband was not seriously ill, but I am concerned that if he had been more serious the delay could have made it much worse.
‘’It’s an utter nonsense. Taxi drivers have to know the roads, why can’t the ambulance driver know the roads - I cannot believe it.’’

An ambulance spokeswoman said staff had the use of satellite navigation systems to travel to all locations and crews did have the option to override the system if they were familiar with the route.
She said the service covered a vast area and that some crews would have to use the system if they didn’t know the area.

‘’It is likely that there was an anomaly with the settings (of the sat nav) which has been checked. We would like to confirm that this is an unusual occurrence and would like to reassure the public that we will do everything we can to avoid a similar occurrence.

SOURCE

Posted by peiper     on 06/19/2009 at 09:41 AM   
Filed Under: • Health-Medicine • UK •  
• Comments (0) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Doctors told to give priority to gypsies because these ppl are now designated as, a race.

Just as the wife was getting over her cold I caught it from her.  Not very nice past 24 hours and now, it looks like she’s getting it back. What a sight we make if anyone could see and hear us.  Coughing and sneezing and wheezing and honking and going thru Klennex in copious amounts.  And I don’t think I’m up to much posting today.  Can’t seem to get warm or else go from too warm to too cold.  Bah.  Colds are a pain from head to wherever. Pick a place. We probably have some discomfort there.  sneeze-cough.

I was greeted by this article first thing today and have broken a rule of not posting the same story at two places.  But the nature of this total outrage just BEGS to be posted.  Some of you have your own blog sites I know, and I hope you will pass this stupidity on.

So then, based on race you can qualify for things that native born Brits who are taxed can not qualify for.  Like extra time with your doctor and waits at the office.

Speaking of waits.  My wife who is a native born Brit is losing the hearing in one ear and the other ain’t so good either. She has an appointment at the hosp. clinic and the wait is ten weeks.

Just where does this stupidity end and when will it end?  My guess is never to the last and things are always open on the first. The idiots that control things can ALWAYS find something.

This is another one of those articles I had to make myself post. I have run across many stupid things and have posted them but this surely must take a prize of some kind.  Damn it all this is a lifestyle.  If I decided it had appeal and wanted to join a group of these folks, would my race designation change? 

Gypsies and travellers should be given priority in NHS hospitals and GP surgeries, according to Government guidance.

By Ben Leach
Published: 9:44AM BST 18 Jun 2009

They should be given longer consultations, and should be seen by GPs when they walk in without an appointment, even if doctors are fully-booked.

The average length of a consultation is five or ten minutes but travellers will be given 20 minutes and allowed to bring relatives into the consulting rooms.

The guidelines have been introduced because, under race laws, gypsies and travellers are defined as minority ethnic groups and the NHS is obliged to consider their special needs and circumstances.

Yet no special treatment is promised for other groups such as those from the Asian sub-continent or Africa, the Daily Mail reported.

The guidance forms part of the Primary Care Service Framework, drawn up by the NHS Primary Care Commissioning - an advisory service for local health trusts - to help all PCTs understand the Department of Health’s policy.

It will go on trial for between three and five years, Although PCTs do not necessarily have to follow the guidelines, they could be breaking human rights law and the Race Relations Act of 2000 if they do not.

Tory health spokesman Andrew Lansley said: “No one should get priority treatment in the NHS apart from our Armed Forces, to whom we owe a special debt of gratitude.

“Decisions about who should be treated first should be based on a patient’s medical needs, not their ethnic group.”

A spokesman for the Department of Health said: “We are aware that gypsies and travellers have experienced tremendous difficulties in accessing primary care.

“Partly as a result, community members experience the worst health inequalities of any disadvantaged group.

“The framework suggests fast-tracking for two reasons. First, as a matter of urgency, inroads need to be made into the health problems of gypsies and travellers.

“Second, if mobile community members are not seen quickly, the opportunity could be lost as they move on or are moved on. This should not be to the detriment of service provision to the settled community.”

SOURCE

Settled community my achin’ ass.

Posted by peiper     on 06/19/2009 at 07:15 AM   
Filed Under: • Government • Health-Medicine • Insanity • Outrageous • UK •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Monday - June 15, 2009

Weasel Words From Washington

Rep. Pete Stark, a leading congressional author of health reform legislation, called Thursday for a 2 percent income tax surcharge to pay for the health insurance program he predicted Congress and President Obama would enact later this year.

“If you wanted me to bet how would I pay for this, I would tell you not to bet against a surtax,” the Fremont Democrat said. “None of us like to talk about that.”

Stark predicted that when it comes down to paying for health care reform, “it’ll be, ‘Swallow hard, take the tough vote.’ “

Stark, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee’s health panel and a member of his party’s liberal wing, argued against paying for health care by taxing employees for employer-paid health coverage, or by ending the income tax deductions that employers now take for the cost of providing health insurance to their employees.

Yeah right. Surcharge. Surtax. Same difference. It’s still a tax increase, just what we all need in the middle of an ongoing and worsening recession. Thanks for nothing. Liars.

Posted by Drew458     on 06/15/2009 at 09:24 AM   
Filed Under: • Government • Health-Medicine •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Tuesday - May 12, 2009

Council says ‘you’re not disabled enough for meals on wheels’. How’s this for contrast to next story

Elderly couple live on cornflakes and sandwiches after council says ‘you’re not disabled enough for meals on wheels’
By ANDY DOLAN
Last updated at 3:23 PM on 12th May 2009

An elderly couple who are too frail to leave their home have been refused meals on wheels after a council ruled they were not disabled enough to qualify for the service.

Wallace Rowley, 91, and wife Lillian, 89, live on cornflakes for breakfast, ham sandwiches for lunch and a cup of Horlicks in the evening because they are unable to cook for themselves.

The only hot meal they receive during the week comes courtesy of a neighbour who provides them with occasional ready meals which she warms up for them.

Today, a former councillor who is backing the couple said it was ‘obscene’ that elderly people could be left ‘starving to death in their own homes’ because they did not meet ‘restrictive’ eligibility criteria.

The pensioners, who have been married for 68 years, asked for help from Coventry City Council in December as their failing health was leaving them increasingly weak and unable to cook.

Mrs Rowley suffers from crippling rheumatoid arthritis in her arms and legs which means she can barely carry a plate, open the microwave door or push the button to start the kettle boiling.

Her husband has high blood pressure - causing dizzy spells and fainting which could be potentially dangerous in a kitchen if he were to attempt to cook - and ulcerations on his legs, meaning he can only stand for minutes at a time in any case.

Both need Zimmer frames but claim a council worker who assessed them said they ‘were not disabled enough’ to qualify for meals on wheels because they were capable of dressing themselves.

Mr Rowley, a former factory worker who served with the Royal Warwickshire Regiment during World War II in Northern Ireland and Holland, said: ‘I am old and haggard and fought for my country but I feel like I’ve been thrown on the scrapheap.

‘We’ve paid our national insurance contributions all our lives but when we need help in our old age, the state turns its back on us. We’re desperate and feel abandoned.’

He said the social worker who was sent to assess them at their bungalow in Potters Green, Coventry, laughed when they explained their predicament and joked about sending somebody to teach them to cook baked potatoes.

Mrs Rowley, a retired cleaner, added: ‘If I keep eating microwave meals and sandwiches, I’ll go mad.

‘All we can do now is look at these four walls. It’s not safe for us to cook as we don’t have the strength in our arms and legs.’

Guidelines for Coventry City Council social care were tightened in 2005 to exclude meals on wheels for people whose needs were rated ‘moderate’ or ‘low’.

A social worker now has to class the couple as having a ‘critical’ or substantial need for help.

Former Labour councillor Brian Patton, who has taken up the Rowleys’ plight, said the move was purely to save money.

He said: ‘It’s obscene in this day and age that you could have elderly and disabled people starving to death in their own homes who have money and can afford to pay for services but can’t get them because the eligibility criteria is too restrictive.’

Neighbour Lynn Brooker, 46, who brings the couple meals such as cottage pie or roast chicken, said the council had treated the Rowleys ‘appallingly’.

She added: ‘They can’t even get a meal out the oven without dropping it.

‘I just can’t believe they don’t qualify for help.’

The Rowleys have one son Les, 57 - a web developer who lives on his own 15 miles away in Leamington Spa, Warwickshire - and no grandchildren.

Leslie doesn’t have a car but takes meals when he visits each weekend.

Today he said: ‘Social services have let mum and dad down. It’s an outrage that old people can be left to rot in their own homes. What exactly is social services for?’

The council recently raised the cost of the meals by 40 per cent to £4.10 a meal as part of multi-million pound budget cuts.

It said the couple wanted to try meals on wheels out of choice, not necessity.

A spokesman said: ‘A social worker visited Mr and Mrs Rowley and found that both were able to meet their own needs for shopping and hot food and wanted to try home meals as a choice.

‘The outcome was that their needs were assessed as moderate, and did not meet the criteria in terms of being critical or substantial.

‘If their circumstances change through health problems, then a further assessment could take place.’

FOR PHOTOS GO HERE

Something isn’t quite right about this.  I feel sorry for them.  Their son is 57 and has no car. ? Visits them on wkends.  They say they have all these ailments but someone assessed them and found that they were able to go shopping. ??? How they manage that?
Hey, if the old boy is 91 I can well believe he needs help and his wife too.  Even if things weren’t really,really as bad as they say they are, I’d rather give a hand to help them then give the cash to politicians so they can live in a lifestyle I can’t afford. Of course not. How can I afford it when I’m helping to pay for theirs?

Posted by peiper     on 05/12/2009 at 10:34 AM   
Filed Under: • Daily Life • Health-Medicine • Miscellaneous • UK •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Thursday - April 30, 2009

Heart attack patient told to be quiet by paramedic.  Great system huh? Medic told to retrain.

Yeah. Can you believe this? Retrain?
Toss the bum out on his ear.
Take a look at this.

Heart attack patient ordered to clean up own vomit
A paramedic ordered a heart attack patient clean up his own vomit and be quiet as he writhed in agony on a hospital floor, a disciplinary hearing heard.

Last Updated: 8:03PM BST 29 Apr 2009

Ambulance man Colin Shields failed to carry out basic checks and did not recognise the tell-tale signs of a heart attack - mistaking the patient’s symptoms for toothache.

He was given 10 months to retrain or face being struck off on Tuesday after the Health Professions Council ruled his fitness to practice was impaired.

The panel heard the victim dialled 999 because he was suffering severe jaw and lower back pain - classic symptoms of heart attack.

But when Shields arrived at his home in Manchester he failed to carry out even the most basic medical checks, and did not provide the patient - a diabetic - with any treatment.

It was only when the man demanded to be taken to hospital that Shields drove him to the nearby Manchester Royal Infirmary, the panel heard.

Shields did check the patient’s medical history, so did not know he also suffered from high blood pressure and high cholesterol, making him a prime candidate for a heart attack.

Laura Napley, for the HPC, said: “Mr Shields did not carry out any medical assessment of the patient, made him walk to and from the ambulance unaided and did not complete a patient report form.

“At the hospital, Patient A followed Mr Shields into a treatment room and was told to sit on the bed and wait for a doctor.

“Due to his intense pain, the patient said he preferred to lie on the floor. When he subsequently vomited, Mr Shields told him to be quiet and clean up the mess.”

Doctors later found he had suffered a massive heart attack and was minutes from death when they started treatment.

Shields admitted most of the allegations against him, saying he was ‘distracted’ on the day of the incident, July 30 2007.

The HPC panel, sitting in central London, ruled his fitness to practice was impaired and imposed a Conditions of Practice Order which requires Shields to complete training if he wishes to continue in the profession.

MORON MEDIC

Have to wonder what kind of training if any this medic-moron got.
Don’t they have to take any sort of test?
Scary stuff this.

Posted by peiper     on 04/30/2009 at 03:38 PM   
Filed Under: • Daily Life • Education • Health-Medicine • Scary Stuff • Stoopid-People • UK •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Sunday - April 26, 2009

Swine Flu

What the HELL does Fox News Mean By This????

Fox News does a Q & A post on the swine flu:

Q. Is the same swine flu virus making people sick in Mexico and the U.S.?

A. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said the Mexican virus samples match the U.S. virus. The virus is a mix of human virus, bird virus from North America and pig viruses from North America, Europe and Asia.

A COMBINATION ? ?? ???? Are they saying this is an engineered virus? WTF? Trying to spread a panic here? Somebody ought to get flogged. And then fired.

I checked with CDC and they say nothing of the sort:

Swine Influenza (Flu)

Swine Influenza (swine flu) is a respiratory disease of pigs caused by type A influenza that regularly cause outbreaks of influenza among pigs. Swine flu viruses do not normally infect humans, however, human infections with swine flu do occur, and cases of human-to-human spread of swine flu viruses has been documented. See General Information about Swine Flu.

From December 2005 through February 2009, a total of 12 human infections with swine influenza were reported from 10 states in the United States. Since March 2009, a number of confirmed human cases of a new strain of swine influenza A (H1N1) virus infection in the U.S. and internationally have been identified. An investigation into these cases is ongoing. For more information see Human Swine Flu Investigation.

More from CDC: Residents of States with Swine Influenza Cases

CDC has identified human cases of swine influenza A (H1N1) virus infection in people in the U.S. CDC is working with local and state health agencies to investigate these cases. We have determined that this virus is contagious and is spreading from human to human. However, at this time, we have not determined how easily the virus spreads between people. As with any infectious disease, we are recommending precautionary measures for people residing in these areas.

* Cover your nose and mouth with a tissue when you cough or sneeze. Throw the tissue in the trash after you use it.
* Wash your hands often with soap and water, especially after you cough or sneeze. Alcohol-based hands cleaners are also effective.
* Try to avoid close contact with sick people.
* If you get sick, CDC recommends that you stay home from work or school and limit contact with others to keep from infecting them.
* Avoid touching your eyes, nose or mouth. Germs spread that way.

There is no vaccine available at this time, so it is important for people living in these areas to take steps to prevent spreading the virus to others. If people are ill, they should attempt to stay at home and limit contact with others. Healthy residents living in these areas should take everyday preventive actions.

People who live in these areas who develop an illness with fever and respiratory symptoms, such as cough and runny nose, and possibly other symptoms, such as body aches, nausea, or vomiting or diarrhea, should contact their health care provider. Their health care provider will determine whether influenza testing is needed.

And MORE from CDC, some Q&A:

Is this swine flu virus contagious?
CDC has determined that this swine influenza A (H1N1) virus is contagious and is spreading from human to human. However, at this time, it not known how easily the virus spreads between people.

What are the signs and symptoms of swine flu in people?
The symptoms of swine flu in people are similar to the symptoms of regular human flu and include fever, cough, sore throat, body aches, headache, chills and fatigue. Some people have reported diarrhea and vomiting associated with swine flu. In the past, severe illness (pneumonia and respiratory failure) and deaths have been reported with swine flu infection in people. Like seasonal flu, swine flu may cause a worsening of underlying chronic medical conditions.

How does swine flu spread?
Spread of this swine influenza A (H1N1) virus is thought to be happening in the same way that seasonal flu spreads. Flu viruses are spread mainly from person to person through coughing or sneezing of people with influenza. Sometimes people may become infected by touching something with flu viruses on it and then touching their mouth or nose.

How can someone with the flu infect someone else?
Infected people may be able to infect others beginning 1 day before symptoms develop and up to 7 or more days after becoming sick. That means that you may be able to pass on the flu to someone else before you know you are sick, as well as while you are sick.

… and finally, a little good news:

Can I get swine influenza from eating or preparing pork?
NO. Swine influenza viruses are not spread by food. You cannot get swine influenza from eating pork or pork products. Eating properly handled and cooked pork products is safe.

Well, thank God for that at least.

Posted by Drew458     on 04/26/2009 at 09:58 PM   
Filed Under: • Health-Medicine •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Saturday - April 25, 2009

Pregnant mother is refused free NHS maternity dental care.  WOW. Gotta read this.

When you figure it out, let me know cause it seems way bizarre.

You would think if the woman was on NHS to begin with, and seeing she had a serious problem, somebody should have done something to help.

But I suppose people are quite busy you know. Yeah. Raising money for people who need it in OTHER COUNTRIES!

True, all ended well it appears.  But she never should have been refused considering her condition.

Pregnant mother is refused free NHS maternity dental care after staff said bump, ultrasound and doctor’s notes are NOT proof.

By Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 3:08 PM on 25th April 2009

A mother-to-be has been turned down for free dental treatment - because the surgery will not accept that she is expecting. 

Sarah Luisis, 27, who is five months pregnant, has been told she needs to provide more proof that she has a baby on the way.

That is despite the fact that she has a big bump, a doctor’s certificate, antenatal notes and ultrasound pictures of her unborn child.

Miss Luisis, of Hornchurch, Essex, is desperate to see a dentist after enduring weeks of agony with bleeding gums.  But the only way she can afford crucial treatment is through maternity cover from the NHS.  But the mother of one was turned away from St John’s dental practice in Romford because she did not have a Maternity Exemption Certificate.

She said: ‘I filled in a form to get the certificate when I found out I was pregnant and sent it off.  But I’ve discovered that the form was never received in Newcastle where the certificates are issued.

‘I now have to fill in another form but that could take up to four weeks to be approved.’ She added: ‘I’ve got a letter from my doctor confirming my pregnancy, my antenatal notes, ultrasound scans and I’m very big for five months anyway.  ‘You’d think that would be enough.’

Miss Luisis’s gums are so bad she wakes up with a mouth full of blood every morning and she fears she has an infection.

She has been on the waiting list to see a dentist for the past ten weeks.  ‘I was recently told that an appointment had finally become available,’ she said.

‘But it was devastating to be told I’d not be treated because I didn’t have the Maternity Exemption Certificate proving that I’m pregnant.’

The part-time admin worker says she cannot afford the £40 fee for the initial appointment, and the cost of further treatment could run into hundreds of pounds.

A spokesman for the dental surgery said: ‘This is not our policy. It comes from the health authority.

‘The PCT have said to us, “We will not pay you if you don’t have this information”.

‘It’s not up to us, and we used to take people’s word.’ In statement today, Miss Luisis said: ‘I am a UK tax/national insurance payer who works full time and already supports one child.  ‘I am more than capable of paying for my own child when its born as I have plans in place for child care and I intend on going back to work shortly after.

‘People seem to of missed my point entirely, its not a case of being able to afford treatment, its the principle. I am entitled to it so why am I being refused?

‘I was never advised I could claim it back. The option I was given was, go private or we wont see you.

‘Who knows what the treatment may of come to; £40 was to be seen, not for treatment.

‘People are forgetting the current climate, my partner is self-employed and his work is suffering, everyone is struggling it doesn’t mean we cant afford a baby but it does mean that we don’t have ‘spare’ money to pay for something I shouldn’t have to.’

She added: ‘Hainault Gentle Dental Care have now offered to see me without my Maternity Exemption Certificate.’

DENTAL MOONBATS

Posted by peiper     on 04/25/2009 at 11:07 AM   
Filed Under: • Health-Medicine • UK •  
• Comments (0) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Tuesday - March 24, 2009

Overweight and claim thousands in benefits - can’t work. Who do they blame? Anyone but themselves

THERE ARE 14 POUNDS TO ONE STONE.  SO YOU GUYS CAN WORK IT OUT IN POUNDS FOR THESE HIPPOS.

Naturally their weight is the taxpayer problem. What else would we expect?
I wish em luck and hope somehow they’ll get themselves out of this MESS.  I hope for their sake they can finally get help.  But it doesn’t look good, does it?

This has to be my final post for today .... will try my best to catch up on emails tomorrow if I can.
Thanks.

They weigh 80 stone, claim thousands in benefits - and can’t work. Who do they blame? Anyone but themselves
By JENNY JOHNSTON
Last updated at 10:21 AM on 24th March 2009

DAILY MAIL

This family say they are unable to work because they are too fat. They blame their GP, the Government, even Simon Cowell - but not themselves

There’s something a little surreal about listening to a family with a combined weight of nearly 80 stone falling over themselves to explain how little they eat. ‘Some days I barely eat at all,’ declares Emma Chawner, daughter of the house and, at 17 stone, its lightest occupant.

‘I don’t have breakfast most days. Sometimes I don’t have lunch either, and might only have a salad roll for tea. I’m always eating lettuce and apples and stuff.’

Her dad Philip (’22 stone, but I used to be 26’) nods in agreement. ‘I’m the same. Cornflakes for breakfast, a roll for lunch and one of those microwave meals for my dinner.’

A Weightwatchers one, Dad!’ interjects elder daughter Samantha (circa 18 stone). For her part, Samantha says she ‘is always eating salads’.

Only Mum Audrey (20ish stone, but understandably reluctant to be specific) seems off message. She has been asleep on the sofa for most of our interview, but wakes up in time to raise the issue of Easter eggs.

She points out that her girls get one each every year. Both leap in with clarifications. ‘Only a little one, Mum,’ says Emma. ‘Tiny. Like those little mini eggs,’ says Samantha, holding her thumb and finger about two millimetres apart.’

She admits there might be crisps and chocolate in the kitchen cupboards, ‘but they aren’t for us. They are for our niece. You have to have those things in the house for children, don’t you?’

Now a cynic might say that there is some overegging of the pudding going on here, so to speak. And the little trio of bottles standing by the armchair of the Chawner family living room, is certainly suspect. There is Lucozade, tomato ketchup and, for good measure, the heartburn remedy Gaviscon, a veritable holy trinity of overconsumption, surely?

Normally, it would be of no consequence what the Chawners eat, or whether their ample girths reflect their diet. But the family’s eating habits - indeed entire living habits - became a matter of national debate recently when they granted an interview in a weekly gossip magazine about how their weight has been a barrier to any of them finding work.

‘Too fat to work’, screamed the headline, while the article called them real-life Tellytubbies and accused them pretty much of sponging off the State while slobbing round on the sofa all day, eating pies.

Now, of course, they are declaring misrepresentation in extremis. They don’t eat pies, apparently. In fact, the way they tell it, the family budgie would struggle to survive on what they do actually eat. And the raking in of public funds? Nonsense!

‘They said we got £22,000 a year in benefits, but Mum totted it up and it isn’t quite that much,’ says Emma.

How much do you get, then? ‘I can’t remember, but it isn’t that much. All the figures were wrong, anyway. They said Dad was 24 stone, but that was rubbish. You are 22 stone, aren’t you Dad?’

The facts that aren’t in contention are these. There are four adults living in this Blackburn terrace home. None of them work, so their rent and living expenses are covered by the State. They are all medically obese.

s their size relevant to their reliance on benefits? They say yes. Both adults claim they have weight-related health issues which have rendered them disabled.

Philip, 53, suffers from diabetes and heart problems. Audrey, 57, has asthma and epilepsy (which no doctor would link to obesity, but she seems convinced that there is a connection).

Their daughters have health issues of their own, despite being only 21 and 19. Emma is already on medication for problems with acid reflux. Samantha claims she is losing the sight in one eye. ‘I’ve got a mole behind my eye which is growing. It might lead to cancer.’

She points out, however, that she is not on any medication. ‘Yet!’ insists her father, with an astonishing glee in his voice.

The girls claim they are both fit and well, despite their size. Samantha insists that she goes to the gym. Both trained as hairdressers, but have never had a paid job. Why? Again, it’s a matter of size.

‘People don’t want to employ large hairdressers, simple as that,’ says Samantha. ‘They won’t say it to your face, but that’s how it is. I’ve been in salons and done good interviews, but look around and it’s all skinny minnies. We’re discriminated against.

‘We’re the victims in all of this. It’s not our fault we can’t work. We’ve been accused of sitting around watching telly all day, well, it’s just not true.

‘We’ve both applied for hundreds of jobs. It’s not our fault no one wants to employ fat people. Someone should be helping us, not accusing us.’

The issues thrown up here are about as controversial as they come, so it’s not surprising that people have been getting het up about the Chawners, and all they represent.

What is surprising, though, is the level of vitriol they have inspired.

When I arrive, I walk straight into evidence of it. The family laptop is open on the dining table and there is an air of hysteria in the room. Emma has fled upstairs, in tears, after discovering a message on her Facebook site saying, ‘I hope you die’.

Her sister Samantha is stomping about, arms flailing, shouting: ‘I’m not having this. It’s disgusting.’

It’s all too much for Mum. ‘If Emma has one of her panic attacks, we are done for,’ says Audrey, raising her arm but letting it flop back down. Philip’s attempts to intervene seem equally ineffective. ‘How do you send a message back?’ he asks, peering at the keyboard. ‘I’m not sure how this works.’

What’s immediately striking is how stationary Audrey and Philip are amid all the commotion. In fact, during the 90 minute interview that follows neither of them moves once from their respective chairs. Just before Audrey actually falls asleep there is a curious moment when she tries to pass one of her daughters a magazine, but cannot reach, so gives up.

‘We love TV,’ Philip had told the magazine. ‘It’s on from the moment we get up. Often I’m so tired from watching TV I have to have a nap.’

Still the girls provide enough animation for both of them. Both keep leaving the room, for fag breaks, and to have whispered discussions about future media deals. There is a documentary maker present during the interview.

Posted by peiper     on 03/24/2009 at 12:12 PM   
Filed Under: • Health-Medicine • Odd-Strange • UK •  
• Comments (2) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Friday - March 20, 2009

Well-meaning ‘snoops’ are being recruited by the Government . It’s for our own good.

I had posted something the other day to which our Dr. Jeff said;

“Gawd, monitoring the trash.  What will they think of next?  Re-educating people who like soda pop?  Too much sugar is bad for you, can’t have that going on.

Well Doc, as it happens .......
Your question could not have been timed better.

‘Snoops’ to nag their friends to live healthier lives
Well-meaning ‘snoops’ are being recruited by the Government to nag their colleagues, family and neighbours into living healthier lives.

By Kate Devlin, Medical Correspondent
Last Updated: 8:18AM GMT 20 Mar 2009

Public health “mentors” will be enlisted by the NHS to offer ‘on the spot’ advice in their local neighbourhood when they see people smoking, eating or drinking too much.

The Government hopes that the volunteers will help to get across its messages on healthy living in a new and influential way but the plans have been criticised as evidence of the creeping ‘nanny state’.

Speaking at the Royal Society of Arts yesterday , Alan Johnson, the Health Secretary, said mentors could be “amazingly successful” and that he hoped that they could revolutionise the nation’s health.

The mentors, who as volunteers are not paid, are expected to work to influence the people around them, offering advice to workmates, family and friends about how they should change their unhealthy habits.

Eating a third fried breakfast of the week in the office canteen, having a drink ‘for the road’ at your local pub or chain-smoking another cigarette while waiting for the bus could all see the mentors spring into action to offer the Government’s advice.

A spokesman for the Department of Health said that it was hoped that mentors would spread the word among “people they come in contact with on a daily basis, including their friends and neighbours, and also be able to point them to NHS services, such as smoking cessation services”.

Ministers are concerned that some people are turned off by its traditional methods of advising on public health, including large-scale advertising drives such as the recent £75 million Change4Life campaign.

But critics warned that the public was increasingly being “nannied” over their health. The latest example of this was a nursery in Essex where toddlers were told to badger their parents to stop smoking.

The same NHS trust has also been accused of using taxpayers’ money to bribe pregnant women into giving up cigarettes, offering them £100 if they stop smoking.

Martin Dockerell, from Action on Smoking and Health (ASH), the anti-smoking charity, said: “If you get the mentoring scheme right and if you manage to turn things around so it seems that healthy behaviour is not abnormal then that can be very powerful.

“If, however, you are trying to be the only mum on the estate whose kids don’t go to McDonalds, or the only 19-year-old who doesn’t drink in the park, then that is not going to work.”

MORE RIGHT HERE

Posted by peiper     on 03/20/2009 at 08:31 AM   
Filed Under: • Government • Health-Medicine • UK •  
• Comments (2) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Sunday - March 01, 2009

Warning on new IVF laws as single women told they can ‘name anyone’ as father on birth certificate.

Be interesting to see how this plays out in the future.  Not sure I understand it though.  What I mean is, are they serious?

Warning on new IVF laws as single women told they can ‘name anyone’ as father on birth certificate
By FIONA MACRAE
Last updated at 6:38 PM on 01st March 2009

Single women undergoing IVF will be able to name anyone they like as their baby’s father on the birth certificate from next month.

The regulations - which were last night branded ‘absurd’ - mean that women could nominate another woman to be her child’s ‘father’.

The ‘father’ does not need to be genetically related to the baby, nor be in any sort of romantic relationship with the mother.

Critics have sounded a warning about the ability of single women who have successful IVF treatment to nominate a person as the ‘father’

Critics said it meant a woman could list her best friend on the birth certificate.

The second parent, who will have to consent to being named, will take on the legal and moral responsibilities of parenthood.

This would give them the right to launch a custody battle if their tenuous relationship with the mother broke down - and to be pursued for child support payments.

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) said that the regulations, part of the controversial embryology bill passed by parliament last year, will give lesbian couples in civil partnerships who undergo IVF the same rights as married heterosexual couples.

An unmarried man whose girlfriend undergoes fertility treatment will also find it easier to claim full parental rights.

But the changes, due to come in on April 6th, mean that the 2,000 women a year who have IVF using donated sperm could name almost anyone they like as the child’s father.

Critics said that the change that the lead to the role of father being downgraded to the one of godfather and warned that the child would be the one to lose out.

Baroness Ruth Deech, a former chair of the HFEA, said the practice would lead to the ‘falsification of the birth certificate’.

She said: ‘This is putting the rights of the parents way above those of the child. It is absurd that anyone can be named as the father or the second parent.’

Dr Trevor Stammers, a GP and lecturer in healthcare ethics, said questioned the strength of the relationships or friendships between the mother and ‘father’.

He said: ‘There is no doubt from sociological evidence accumulated over the past few years that children do best in a two-parent married family with heterosexual couples being the married parents.

‘It probably will be the child that is the loser but by the time we find that out, in 15 or 16 years, a huge amount of damage will have been done.’

Geraldine Smith, Labour MP for Morecambe, said a birth certificate should be a true record of a child’s genetic heritage.

She added: ‘I don’t think the State should collude with parents to conceal the true genetic identity.’

David Jones, a professor of bioethics, liked the role of second parent to that of godparent.

He added: ‘This sounds like social engineering on the hoof.  This is now arbitrary.’

The HFEA said it was unlikely for the actual sperm donor to be named on the birth certificate because the sample is normally obtained from a sperm bank.

A spokesman said the welfare of the child would always come first and any person nominated as a second parent would undergo counselling to ensure they understood the implications.

Liberal Democrat MP Evan Harris, one of the most enthusiastic supporters of the new embryology laws, said: ‘This is a big step and is unlikely to be taken by someone who does not take their responsibilities seriously.’

DAILY MAIL

Posted by peiper     on 03/01/2009 at 02:48 PM   
Filed Under: • Daily Life • Health-Medicine • UK •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Tuesday - February 10, 2009

Cure for the Obama hangover?

The Obama Hangover is the pain a moderate Obama backer is now feeling after having been promised the moon and realizing they have instead . . . been mooned. It’s got to be humiliating watching your Mr. Hope & Change fumble these first few weeks like a leprous teen would his girlfriend’s bra.

That’s a quote from Doug Giles. I’m not too familiar with him, but you have to admit he has a way with a simile.

Here’s his ‘cure’:

1. Tell yourself that God still loves you (He doesn’t like you much) even though you’re a culpable dork for this debacle.
2. Go to iTunes and download The Who’s song, “We Won’t Get Fooled Again.” Listen to that about fifty times.
(note: I posted a YouTube live performance at my own blog Something’s Rotten some time ago. Thought of it immediately)
3. Block the MSM and MSNBC on your remote.
4. Start watching Fox News.
5. Read everything Townhall.com posts every day ‘til Christ returns.
6. Repeat step #2.
7. Read Saul Alinsky’s book Rules for Radicals to understand Barack’s verbiage and where he intends to drive this nation.
8. Read Newt’s book, Real Change, Bernie’s book, Slobbering Love Affair, Delingpole’s book, Welcome to Obamaland and Barton’s book, Original Intent.
9. Get a sledgehammer and hit yourself with it.
10. Go look for all our cherished traditional American convictions that made our country great that your threw away and then once again esteem them.
11. Throw away your buttsmacker lip balm.
12. Say “yeah, right” one thousand times.
13. Repeat step #9.
14. Realize that the government is not your friend.
15. Repeat step #2.

We’re in for a rough ride folks. Especially if this Porkulous bull… bill passes. The bill includes national healthcare. After which, going to the doctor will be like Oliver asking for more gruel: “Please Sir. May I have some… healthcare?”

UPDATE:

I almost forgot. The new Obambi logo:

Posted by Christopher     on 02/10/2009 at 07:59 PM   
Filed Under: • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists • Health-Medicine •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

DISCLAIMER

THE SERVICES AND MATERIALS ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE HOSTS OF THIS SITE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICE OR ANY MATERIALS.

Not that very many people ever read this far down, but this blog was the creation of Allan Kelly and his friend Vilmar. Vilmar moved on to his own blog some time ago, and Allan ran this place alone until his sudden and unexpected death partway through 2006. We all miss him. A lot. Even though he is gone this site will always still be more than a little bit his. We who are left to carry on the BMEWS tradition owe him a great debt of gratitude, and we hope to be able to pay that back by following his last advice to us all:

1. Keep a firm grasp of Right and Wrong
2. Stay involved with government on every level and don't let those bastards get away with a thing
3. Use every legal means to defend yourself in the event of real internal trouble, and, most importantly:
4. Keep talking to each other, whether here or elsewhere

It's been a long strange trip without you Skipper, but thanks for pointing us in the right direction and giving us a swift kick in the behind to get us going. Keep lookin' down on us, will ya? Thanks.

THE INFORMATION AND OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS WEBSITE ARE DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THIS WEBSITE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL PARTIES IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ACCESSED BY PERSONS FROM THAT COUNTRY AND ANY PERSONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLESS THEY CAN SATISFY US THAT SUCH USE WOULD BE LAWFUL.

Copyright © 2004-2015 Domain Owner