Three News Items

Three news items. First one via Audrey Silk on Facebook:

If you smoke, you’re out

Patients sneaking a smoke or a chew at Salina Regional Health Center or any of the hospital’s other properties will be sent away.

The hospital implemented new rules Aug. 4 that are meant to strengthen its policy regarding smoking and use of other tobacco products.

In a Thursday news release, the hospital warned that patients who violate the policy will be discharged and considered leaving against medical advice. A nurse will remove the intravenous tube if they have one; tests and treatments will cease and the patient will be instructed to call for a ride home.

The hospital made the changes “effective immediately” for patients. Employees have more time.

Since implementation of the policy, some patients have been sent home, said David Moody, the hospital’s vice president of human resources.

He was not aware Thursday if there are procedures in place to readmit patients if they agree to follow the rules.

“I’ve got to believe it’s one strike and you’re out, but I cannot be sure about that,” Moody said. “I know that in the information provided to the patient, that is made very clear to them up front.”

Next story:

How dozens of patients have been barred from liver transplant operations for refusing to give up alcohol

More than 160 alcoholics refused liver transplants in the past five years

They were not able to show doctors that they could stop drinking

Gary Reinbach, 22, died after being refused a liver transplant in 2009

Professor Rajiv Jalan says teenagers are more susceptible to liver disease

New scheme launched allowing alcoholics to have liver transplants on NHS

And now a story with a happy ending. Professor John Ashton is known for:

In November 2013, Ashton said society had to accept that a third of all children were having sex at 14 or 15. He believed a debate was necessary about lowering the age of consent to 15 so that NHS advice was available. Ashton said that in countries where the age of consent was lower, teenage pregnancies were also lower. David Cameron said there were no plans to change and, whilst David Tucker of the NSPCC supported a debate, he doubted if reducing the age of consent would help. Nick Clegg and shadow public health minister Luciana Berger both opposed the move but called for better sex education.

In July 2014 Ashton became the “most senior doctor” to support assisted dying. He called for a change in the law to allow doctors specialised in end of life care to end the suffering of those suffering “major discomfort.”

In 2004, Ashton stated that the national diet was “a disaster and a public health emergency in the making”

The happy ending:

A prominent Government health adviser has been forced to stand aside for sending abusive messages on Twitter.

Professor John Ashton stepped down as president of the Faculty of Public Health yesterday following a venomous spat on the social media site.

The doctor, who is strongly opposed to e-cigarettes, called one supporter a ‘c***’.

Advertisements

About Frank Davis

smoker
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

34 Responses to Three News Items

  1. Junican says:

    The hysteria shows no sign of abating. But perhaps that is a good thing since it shows that the demons which tobacco control created and let loose are raging through society, the NHS and the economy. The very people, such as ‘Professors’ and ‘Doctors’, who are supposed to be ‘scientists’, are promoting witchcraft and snake-oil.
    These people need to be ridiculed in song. It will happen.

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      Oh but Cousin it is abating and on its way to its Grave!

      Radicals see whats ahead and they fear it while we rejoice it…………….

      Freedom is coming and you have helped pave the way!

      • harleyrider1978 says:

        They’ve simply gone to far Insanity is the end of the line and they crossed it long ago……..

        Oregon City Might Ban Smoking on Sidewalks

        News Talk KIT

        The City of Salem is looking at banning smoking on some public sidewalks. The city council this month asked staff to draw up an ordinance for a vote …

        Even in Oregon the people woke up with the Beach ban after the parks and trails ban came in…………….Its truly going to be over very very soon.

        • harleyrider1978 says:

          Ohio State | Smoking Ban

          Col·lege In·sur·rec·tion

          The Ohio State University has yet to punish anyone under its new smoking ban because absolutely no one is enforcing it.

  2. A nurse will remove the intravenous tube if they have one; tests and treatments will cease and the patient will be instructed to call for a ride home.

    The Salina story and what’s going on in the ‘health’ industry, generally (fake ‘science’/dehumanisation/refusing treatment/LCP(euthanasia)/doctors obeying orders/disseminating propaganda, etc.), seems to be slowly taking us towards what happened in Germany starting in 1939. I wrote this on Underdogs a couple of days ago:

    Before turning to the Jews and other ‘undesirables’ the Nazis killed many handicapped and mentally ill people in their ‘hospitals’ to save money and (probably far more importantly) for ‘Darwinian’ reasons en-route to their ‘master race’.

    Such things could easily happen again. In fact, they are happening. Unborn babies thought to be disabled can be killed up to the moment before birth. Some ‘experts’ are advocating ‘post-birth abortions’ for children with problems up to the age of two.

    There’s some repugnant individuals who think that even healthy newborns should be slaughtered, not that I agree with any of it. It begins,

    Abortion is largely accepted even for reasons that do not have anything to do with the fetus’ health. By showing that (1) both fetuses and newborns do not have the same moral status as actual persons, (2) the fact that both are potential persons is morally irrelevant and (3) adoption is not always in the best interest of actual people, the authors argue that what we call ‘after-birth abortion’ (killing a newborn) should be permissible in all the cases where abortion is, including cases where the newborn is not disabled.

    http://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2012/03/01/medethics-2011-100411.full

    • beobrigitte says:

      the authors argue that what we call ‘after-birth abortion’ (killing a newborn) should be permissible in all the cases where abortion is, including cases where the newborn is not disabled.
      HOW would they proceed to do so? Withholding ventilation and medication?
      This is 2 entirely different things!
      ‘After-birth abortion’ (killing a newborn), even at 23 weeks (some abortions do happen this far into a pregnancy) gestation is not something as easily done as you imply.

      But then, ethics and respect for human life has been thrown out the window, anyway.

  3. Happy ending indeed. In view of this also:

    In November 2013, Ashton said society had to accept that a third of all children were having sex at 14 or 15. He believed a debate was necessary about lowering the age of consent to 15 so that NHS advice was available.

    At least he has a sense of humour. It was a joke, right? Anyway, they’re giving out condoms to twelve year olds these days, so what’s he talking about?

    As it happens, I’m taking this from the same comment as the previous one:

    Leg-iron: “They are also teaching kids earlier and earlier about sex, including gay sex (sic). Kids do not need to know this.” (My ‘sic’)

    Me: “Again, hateful manipulation knowing that the younger and more often they start ‘learning’ the more dysfunctional they’ll be as adults and less likely to be able to settle down to a family life of their own.

    “And ‘safe(r) sex’ is promoted with the aid of CEOs of contraception and abortion ‘providers’ being in the government’s advisory panel on teenage pregnancy. I have just literally stumbled across this statement from one of the major ‘providers’ from 1992:

    “Contraception does not reduce the number of abortions. Countries in the western world have freely available contraception as well as widespread abortion. Ms Jean Malcolm, director of a Brook Advisory Centre, told the Edinburgh and Lothian Post: “It’s partly because of a greater availability of contraception that there are more pregnancies. I suppose it’s almost inevitable.”

    Are these ‘providers’ deliberately swaying policy to give themselves more and more future clients by any chance? Why does the government take advice from those with vested interests? (Rhetorical question.)

  4. Rose says:

    I was wondering how old John Rashton was.

    “Professor John Ashton CBE, born 1947 in Liverpool was a lecturer/senior lecturer/professor of public health at Southampton/London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.”

    “In January 2011, he was appointed a trustee of the National Museums Liverpool, and in November 2012 he was elected as president from 2013 to 2016 of the Faculty of Public Health

    On 12 September 2014 he was suspended from this position following the use of “inappropriate and offensive language” on Twitter.”

    It looks like he’s been at this for a long time.

    Brainwashing in the Anti-Smoking Movement: #1 – Smearing the Opposition

    “If you take part in secondhand smoke policy training in the tobacco control movement, chances are that you will be taught that all opposition to smoking bans is orchestrated by the tobacco industry, that anyone who challenges the science connecting secondhand smoke exposure and severe health effects is a paid lackey of Big Tobacco, and that any group which disseminates information challenging these health effects is a tobacco industry front group.

    Consequently, the a chief strategy of tobacco control is to smear the opposition by accusing them of being tobacco industry moles”
    http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.co.uk/2007/04/in-my-view-brainwashing-in-anti-smoking.html

    In the age of social media it’s very unwise to continue a practice that may have worked well in the past where the aggrieved public had no means of reply.

    Updating it to slander e-cig users was the height of folly.

    http://dickpuddlecote.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/the-public-health-mask-slips.html

  5. There’s just the alcohol story left! As you know, I was an alcoholic for a decade and the specialist who came to assess me for a detox programme (I’d later find out) believed that I had no wish to stop. Maybe because I was drinking whisky at our meeting?

    Anyway, I was detoxed shortly afterwards – 16½ years ago – and have never returned to it with God’s help. If the man who came to see me had refused me a detox based on his presuppositions, I’d probably have been long dead.

    In fact, he was right. I intended to be detoxed as I’d completely run out of money, then return to drinking, but things turned out otherwise.

    The story of people left to die by being refused liver transplants comes from this “collective responsibility” idea you quoted by a Dr Stephen Parnis, who claims smokers, drinkers and the obese have a duty to everyone else who uses socialised ‘healthcare’.

    Human life doesn’t matter as much as value for money and improving the gene pool. Here we go again…

  6. carol2000 says:

    On the hospital that kicks people out for using tobacco or vaping, one commenter said, “I doubt the hospitals’ position would hold up in court. Being kicked out is not a voluntary discharge.” OK, so where are the “sharks” when we need them? Don’t bother wondering about the ACLU – they’ve been completely co-opted for decades.

    • smokervoter says:

      Good point. Based on some of the contemptible characters the ACLU defended in the past I thought for sure that they would jump to the defense of people under fire for simply smoking tobacco. And especially to defend the property, privacy and freedom of assembly rights of business owners and smokers. But I went to their website long ago and saw a short terse opinion that agreed with the secondhand smoke harm to others argument and that was it.

      I’m still glad that they exist but they’re worthless to me on a personal basis now.

      I’m thinking that Salina Regional Health Center has pondered the legal aspects and decided that they’re bulletproof. What jury is going to side with a lowly smoker? What judge is going to side with a tobacco company customer?

      Is there even such a thing as a pro-smoking law firm in this country? Like you say, the tobacco companies have been co-opted, along with the ACLU. Tobacco company lawyers never seem to defend their customers in court.

      • beobrigitte says:

        Not a good point. Hospitals are run as businesses. The customer leaves……….

        • carol2000 says:

          Hospitals are NOT run like normal businesses. They have a lot more regulations, including requirements to treat emergency cases until they’re stabilized. They also have federal regulations, including a new one from Medicare that penalizes them if their readmission rate is too high – which is what will happen if they toss people out too early.

        • beobrigitte says:

          Hospitals ARE businesses these days and there usually quite a number of hospitals in any given area, so it used to be quite easy to discharge yourself against medical advice and just go to a hospital you think can do more for you. This is something that has changed. Small hospitals merge and with that save money and they no longer compete.
          If hospitals get penalised should their re-admission rate increase the people kicked out for smoking can get themselves straight back to A&E. There they CANNOT be turned away and treatment will continue. Should these patients be kicked out for smoking again, they can turn around and get themselves back to A&E. It might be a good idea to keep a video diary about this.

        • carol2000 says:

          “There they CANNOT be turned away and treatment will continue…”

          Contrary to the demagoguery, in the US, emergency rooms do not have to treat people who are not emergencies. In some places, however, a particular hospital may have an agreement with Medicaid to treat non-emergencies, but they’re not required to by law.

        • beobrigitte says:

          in the US, emergency rooms do not have to treat people who are not emergencies.
          An emergency can be ‘trapped wind’ – if A&E staff turn this patient away and the patient dies on the way to the bus stop, will staff run out and turn this patient around so it looks like he/she was on the way to A&E?

          Defining emergency is not as easy as one might think. Many years back in Germany there were only 2 ways of getting into a hospital – by GP admission or by an ambulance which picked you up after a e.g. road traffic accident. I have been told that these days people can do what they do in England: just walk into an A&E and get seen by medical staff. As far as I know (Germans, please correct me if I am wrong) the various health insurance companies do pay for these “emergencies”.

  7. Rose says:

    Stop Smoking services in Hull to be cut by £1m

    “MORE than £1m is to be slashed from Hull’s stop- smoking services, despite the city having one of the worst smoking rates in the country.
    Almost 2,000 people have started smoking since 2007, despite a concerted campaign to tackle the problem.

    Now, Hull’s Health and Wellbeing Board looks set to cut funding for stop smoking services from £1.4m to just £340,000 for next year.
    Free nicotine replacement therapy such as patches and gum will also be stopped from next month.”

    “Councillor Colin Inglis, chairman of the Health and Wellbeing Board, said: “The general view is this is an ineffectual use of money. A lot of money has been spent, but it is not actually achieving much.”

    “This year’s budget of £1.4m was cut from £1.6m the year before, despite the number of people smoking rising from 31.7 per cent in 2007, when ban on smoking in public places was introduced.”
    http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/Stop-Smoking-services-Hull-cut-1m/story-22926381-detail/story.html

  8. carol2000 says:

    In the latest Surgeon General report (2014, Ch. 10, p. 569), the charlatans added multiple sclerosis to their list of pretended “smoking related diseases.” They cynically failed to even mention Epstein-Barr virus, which smokers and passive smokers are more likely to have been exposed to, for socioeconomic reasons. Meanwhile, there is increasing consensus among REAL scientists that EBV is “an obligatory precondition for multiple sclerosis, which is a stronger attribute than a risk factor only.”

    Targeting Epstein-Barr virus infection as an intervention against multiple sclerosis. D Jons, P Sundström, O Andersen. Acta Neurol Scand 2014 Sep 11 [Epub ahead of print].
    Abstract
    We here review contemporary data on genetic and environmental risk factors, particularly Epstein-Barr virus infection, for multiple sclerosis. There is an important immunogenetic etiological factor for multiple sclerosis. However, a general assumption is that immune defense genes are activated by the environment, basically by infections. We contend that the relationship between infectious mononucleosis and multiple sclerosis cannot be completely explained by genetics and inverse causality. Epstein-Barr infection as indicated by positive serology is an obligatory precondition for multiple sclerosis, which is a stronger attribute than a risk factor only. Data on events in the early pathogenesis of multiple sclerosis are cumulating from bio-banks with presymptomatic specimens, but there is only little information from the critical age when Epstein-Barr infection including infectious mononucleosis is acquired, nor on the detailed immunological consequences of this infection in individuals with and without multiple sclerosis. We discuss how focused bio-banking may elaborate a rationale for the development of treatment or vaccination against Epstein-Barr virus infection. A cohort in which intervention against Epstein-Barr infections was performed should be the object of neurological follow-up.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25208981

    • carol2000 says:

      And here’s an expert review. Epstein-Barr Virus: The Path from Association to Causality for a Ubiquitous Human Pathogen. Bill Sugden [he’s here at UW-Madison]. PLoS Biol. Sep 2014; 12(9): e1001939.
      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4151957/
      My page on EBV and Ms.
      http://www.smokershistory.com/EBVandMS.html

    • Frank Davis says:

      They cynically failed to even mention Epstein-Barr virus, which smokers and passive smokers are more likely to have been exposed to, for socioeconomic reasons.

      What exactly are the socioeconomic reasons?

      • beobrigitte says:

        Thanks, Frank for asking this question!

      • carol2000 says:

        1. The people around them are more to have been infected, including family and friends.
        2. Living conditions are more crowded, which raises transmission rates.
        http://www.smokershistory.com/ebvsocio.htm

        • Frank Davis says:

          1. The people around them are more to have been infected, including family and friends

          More likely to have been infected? Why should the people around them be more likely to be infected?

          2. Living conditions are more crowded, which raises transmission rates.

          Do smokers live in crowded living conditions? Is it being assumed that most smokers belong to the poor working class, sleeping three in a bed?

          I’m wondering because another explanation might be that smokers are also generally more outgoing and gregarious (I’ve always found them to be), and this puts them in more contact with more people, and would raise transmission rates.

        • carol2000 says:

          Read my page. Poorer people get infected by EBV (and H. pylori and CMV) before they even become smokers, often before they even start school. In the NHANES, 75% of the poorest 6 to 8 year olds versus 40% of the wealthiest. Likewise with CMV: “CMV seroprevalence increased gradually with age, from 36.3% in 6–11-year-olds to 90.8% in those aged 80 years. CMV seroprevalence differed by race and/or ethnicity as follows: 51.2% in non-Hispanic white persons, 75.8% in non-Hispanic black persons, and 81.7% in Mexican Americans.”
          http://www.smokershistory.com/CMVsocio.html
          These studies aren’t “assuming” anything. They’re simply measuring it. The anti-smokers, on the other hand, are ignoring the fact that exposure is NOT the same between rich and poor. Poorer people are more likely to become smokers, and their pretense that they can “adjust” away the differences using income or education are simply false, because the relative risks due to infection are large.

  9. harleyrider1978 says:

    Smoking rates on the rise in New York City

    Lite Rock 95.9

    Smoking rates on the rise in New York City. in Health. More New Yorkers are smoking. …read more. Source:: Fox News Health. 2014-09-15.

    http://www.literock959.com/smoking-rates-on-the-rise-in-new-york-city/
    ……………………………..
    Smoking rates on the rise in New York City

    Columbus Ledger-Enquirer

    New York City’s Department of Health released data Monday showing that for the first time since 2007 there are more than 1 million smokers in the city

    NEW YORK — More New Yorkers are smoking.

    New York City’s Department of Health released data Monday showing that for the first time since 2007 there are more than 1 million smokers in the city.

    The city says 16 percent of adult New Yorkers are smokers.

    That’s an increase from 14 percent in 2010, which was the city’s lowest recorded rate.

    To combat the rise, the city is launching a new anti-smoking ad campaign called “Imagine for Life.”

    The campaign is authorized by Mayor Bill de Blasio. It focuses on the negative health impacts of smoking, even for those who only grab a cigarette once in a while.

    De Blasio’s predecessor, Michael Bloomberg, made anti-smoking a centerpiece of his public health agenda.

    Bloomberg banned smoking in public places like bars and restaurants

    Read more here: http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/2014/09/15/3302741_smoking-rates-on-the-rise-in-new.html?rh=1#storylink=cpy

    • beobrigitte says:

      To combat the rise, the city is launching a new anti-smoking ad campaign called “Imagine for Life.”

      LOOOOOOOL!!!! New Yorkers, please ask what your personal ‘image for life’ looks like when you are 86 years old……

      • carol2000 says:

        Let’s help make sure that smokers can do better than just sniveling, “Smokers know the risks.” We should be taking back territory by now.

  10. beobrigitte says:

    To 1. Repulsive, repulsive and even more repulsive.
    The hospital implemented new rules Aug. 4 that are meant to strengthen its policy regarding smoking and use of other tobacco products.

    In a Thursday news release, the hospital warned that patients who violate the policy will be discharged and considered leaving against medical advice. A nurse will remove the intravenous tube if they have one; tests and treatments will cease and the patient will be instructed to call for a ride home.

    The patients are NOT leaving against medical advice, they are being KICKED OUT. If I was a patient, I would sign myself out just to spite them. For each day/night a patient stays the hospital receives quite a substantial amount of money. Remember; the patient is the customer!

    To 2. Repulsive, repulsive and even more repulsive.
    Gary Reinbach, 22, died after being refused a liver transplant in 2009
    At the age of 22 it CANNOT be alcohol that destroys a liver in a human being; at this point the liver has a regeneration rate that compensates. However; autoantibodies produced due to e.g. viral infect will continue to attack what they perceive to be ‘an intruder’. The regeneration process cannot keep up with that; the liver will be trashed.
    I feel for Gary Reinbach’s family; he fell victim to the shortsighted, dictatorial do-gooders.

    Do-gooders, DO LET ME SAVE MY OWN LIFE! I have excessively paid into the system for long enough alone via tobacco tax!!!

    To 3.
    Professor John Ashton stepped down as president of the Faculty of Public Health yesterday following a venomous spat on the social media site.

    Glad to hear that. Perhaps we should lobby for these people to be held accountable by by them losing their PERSONAL finances for their lies. Let’s find out what the anti-smoking lobby has to say about that!!

    • carol2000 says:

      I think there should be an independent autopsy to make damn sure there wasn’t a virus or other pathogen (poisonous mushrooms?) involved.

  11. carol2000 says:

    Off topic – we’ve been suffering more than a week of cold, miserable weather, including several record-breaking low high temps. If this has held together across the Atlantic, it will probably be inflicted on Europe soon.

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      Besides a Plague of viruses hitting everyone this early in the flu season……………Especially this damned stomach bug going around!

No need to log in

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s