Hail the Mail

Child drugging

To have my prejudices seriously undermined twice is very disturbing.

I yield to no one in my loathing of the Daily Mail as a propaganda rag.  But twice recently they have been spot on with disclosure. I have spoken to the best journalist Jerome Burn many times. He is very perceptive – a rarity among Mail journalists. I had had many long conversations with him.

He was kind enough in a recent penetrating analysis of our ramshackle regulation of medicines. He wrote:

“Few of us would think to question the safety of our prescription drugs. After all, they’ve been developed to make us better.

But just how safe are they really — and is the official drug watchdog doing enough to protect us?

Last month, for instance, it was revealed that the number of powerful anti-psychotic drugs being prescribed to children had almost doubled in past six years.

Yet despite the growing evidence that these drugs can seriously harm children — causing excessive weight gain, a rise in blood pressure, severe lethargy and even lactation — the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency is powerless to limit their use.

The problem is that these drugs aren’t officially licensed for use on children — they are given on doctors’ own authority and the MHRA is not able to interfere.

In other areas where the MHRA does have power to act, it turns out to be a watchdog with rubber teeth. Critics say it simply isn’t robust enough.”


Last week I had an invitation to comment on another Mail story. The information was sparse and the journalists did not send the promised details by e-mail. Nevertheless they went head with this story.

Schools Secretary Ed Balls is at the centre of a controversy over the appointment of a top executive with a drugs company to the board of education watchdog Ofsted.

Paul Blackburn, 53, is a senior vice-president at GlaxoSmithKline, which is being sued by hundreds of parents and patients who claim its drugs have caused suicide and psychosis.

His appointment came two weeks before the company won a reported £100million contract to vaccinate all schoolgirls of 12 and 13 against the sexually transmitted virus linked to cervical cancer. Family campaigners argued that the jabs would ‘normalise’ childhood sex.

Mr Blackburn’s new role has been met with such disquiet that one childcare expert boycotted an Ofsted conference on Friday, and urged others to make a similar stand.

Many others did and there has been a storm of criticism. Paul Blackburn resigned. A welcome defeat for GSK and mass medication for dubious purposes.

Cannabis Sense

‘Today in Parliament’ used a long quote from my intervention on the cannabis debate yesterday (see yesterday's blog). This is very surprising because this was a minor debate on the day of PM’s Questions.

Supportive comments have come in. Many times, I and others have pressed the case for this effective benign medicine. A tiny change in the law would give legal relief from spasm and pain to tens of thousands.

The ignorance and cowardice of politicians has blocked progress in the past. It still rules Westminster in spite of the voices of sanity on the Advisory Committee. So much could be achieved, especially if a change in the law is followed by advice of less harmful ways of using the drug.

I understand that there is another alternative to smoking now in Amsterdam cafes. In additional to cannabis cake or drinks, the drug can be inhaled by using a balloon full of cannabis gas. That sounds healthy.

I must dig up the bill on medicinal cannabis I moved several years ago. One day sense will prevail.

Double standards

The Argus persists with their scaremongering evidence-free story about the closure of the Newport Passport Office.

There is still no sign of this ‘secret’ document that Monmouth MP David Davies has 'revealed.' I have dropped him a line asking him to send my a copy. He would not be so stupid to raise such a storm without having seen the document himself.

Or would he?

Compare and contrast the Argus’s feign concern about possible job losses now and their mouse like squeak when real jobs were really lost in their own backyard. Newspaper printing ended very quietly with the loss of 40 jobs. No screaming headlines then. No sob stories about the fate of families made redundant. No regret that the skilled work of printing newspapers in Newport would end after 100 years.

Makes you think.

Comments

[Anon]

Did you know Christopher Glamorganshire? What's the gossip?

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/politics-news/2008/07/09/sacked-blogger-s-taking-case-to-tribunal-91466-21308104/

[Jolly Roger.........]

You refer to the Argus' evidence free story,
And at the risk of becoming all tedious and bory.
I would ask for your source for your following assertion:
"15,000 people died in London last year from effects of air pollution",
I have searched and searched with all due vigour,
But cannot confirm your stated figure.
Please tell me where it originates,
It's the least you could do for one of your mates.

It has been said by others, not me.
That you lack a certain credibility,
By making statements, such as above.
Without any evidence at all to prove.
Please help satisfy my curiosity,
And respond with an absence of acetosity.
Just the facts will do, old mate.
If you can help me, that would be great.

[Huw O'Sullivan]

If some people were a little less keen on being smart alec's they would have checked to confirm the figure is what it appears to be, suspected perhaps a typo in the 15,000 figure. Easy to check, what question is on record. http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debate/?id=2008-07-08a.1277.0
I'd link to hansard but you can get there from the link anyway.
The 1,500 figure was also used in
the Presentation to Citeair Conference, Mayor’s Air Quality Strategy
Sarah Legge, Senior Policy Adviser - Air Quality, 11 March 2005.
"Air pollution is estimated to bring forward 1,600 deaths and cause another 1,500 hospital admissions every year in London."
It seems a little on the low side
Air pollution causes between 12,000 and 24,000 premature deaths each year (Committee on the Medical Effect of Air Pollutants).
Quantification of the Effects of Air Pollution on Health in the United Kingdom, COMEAP, 1998
In the census 2001 , London had a population of 7,172,00
In 2001 GB had a population of 59 Million
Giving London roughly 1/8th of the population of the UK

If we assume that London has no greater proportion of deaths than anywhere else in UK (a reasonably safe way of guaranteeing that our figure will be an underestimate) then the figures for London would be 1500 to 3000 premature deaths each year.

Paul you seem to be underestimating as has the Mayors office, well the previous Mayor, this one seems to be ignoring it.

[Patrick]

Some fodder for Jolly
"to be a fool one doesn't need to study"
"no need to to plant or cultivate fools they grow everywhere"
Better silent than stupid.

[paulflynn]

This seems to be a sensitive issue to you Jolly Roger. Do you want to confess something? An owner of a 4*4 perhaps? I have had a great response to this question after it was broadcast on national television.

The question as reported in Hansard is

T3. [216846] Paul Flynn (Newport, West) (Lab): Last year, 1,500 people died in London as a result of air pollution. A decision was taken this morning that will set in reverse 50 years of work to improve the air quality in London by issuing an invitation to encourage even more polluting, gas-guzzling, Chelsea tractors to poison the air we breathe. What can the Government do to protect us from the anti-environment excesses of Boris the buffoon?

The figure quoted was based on the lowest I could find in the Mayor of London air quality report. That is 1,600. As it's inevitably an estimate I rounded it down to a cautious lower figure.

HuwSullivan found my source. The report chillingly recalls the photo-chemical smog of 1991. London's air is still heavily polluted. It used to be as foul as Beijing's. Buffoon is a kind description of someone who is deliberately reversing a clean-up that is taking us from the smog that gave London the nick-name of The Smoke.

Environmental vandal perhaps?

Interesting that the Argus has failed to publish the comments of Jessica Morden and me on the David Davies scare on the web or in the paper. They had them our statement at 7.00 on Wednesday evening - confirmed in a telephone conversation yesterday morning.
A responsible local newspaper should lose no time in allaying fears that they have stoked up.

[John]

Hi Paul

Just to give you some furthur information on the use of Vapourizers for those wanting a harm reducing method of inhaling cannabis.
THese work by having a heating element that heats the cannabis without burning. THis releases the THC CBD's etc without releasing carbon monoxide and the pariculates associated with respiratory irritation and possible cancer.
THe one most widely used in Canadian medicaL Cannabis users is called the volcano http://www.storz-bickel.com/vaporizer/vaporizer.html an industry awarded German built product although there are many others available.
THere have been many scientific studies on the use of such vapourizers such as this
http://www.torontohemp.com/mapsnorml.htm

but I will quote "The vapors from the Volcano® were found to consist overwhelmingly of THC, the major active component in marijuana, whereas the combusted smoke contained over 100 other chemicals, including several polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), carcinogenic toxins that are common in tobacco smoke. The respiratory hazards of marijuana and tobacco smoke are due to toxic byproducts of combustion, not the active ingredients in the plant, known as cannabinoids"

Such information should be freely available as a Public health intiative. At the moment most of the cannabis used is burnt and often the cheap "soap bar" which has around 5% cannabis the rest made up of engine oil,blue tac henna and other fillers I shudder to think what dangers to health this could cause.
Hope you find this useful
best wishes
John

[Paul Flynn]

That's fascinating John and new to me.
I have in the past advocated the health benfits of SNUS - the smokeless tobacco. This method of ingesting cannabis would remove 99% of the health hazards.

[Jolly Roger.........]

Thank you Huw, for the useful posting.
And to Paul for his helpful hosting.
I'm pleased to see that there was a typo,
And that the true figure is somewhat hypo.
The figured quoted could cause alarm.
But I'm sure that Paul meant no harm,
Particularly now that it's been corrected,
And shows more accurately those affected.

In answer to your question regarding my car,
I'm afraid that I'm an environmental star.
My vehicle is powered by dual-fuel.
And at 51p. a litre I'm no dual-fool.
It starts on Petrol and then, soon as,
It changes over to propane gas.
Despite my environmental stance.
My car tax goes up so I've got no chance.