NHS draws up list of items to be banned from prescriptions

The NHS is to stop giving patients travel vaccinations, gluten-free foods and some drugs that can be bought over the counter in an effort to rescue its ailing finances.

Simon Stevens, the chief executive of NHS England, announced the changes in an interview with the Daily Mail in which he detailed new efforts to get better value for money so that money saved could instead be spent on promising therapies that have recently been developed.

GPs will be told to not prescribe medications such as those for upset stomachs, travel sickness and haemorrhoids in a new drive to eliminate waste from the NHS’s £120bn annual budget.

Stevens said: “We’ve got to tackle some of the waste which is still in the system. The NHS is a very efficient health service but like every country’s health service there is inefficiency and waste.

“There’s £114m being spent on medicine for upset tummies, haemorrhoids, travel sickness, indigestion, [and] and that’s before you get to the £22m-plus on gluten-free that you can also now get at Morrison’s, Lidl or Tescos.

“Part of what we are trying to do is make sure that we make enough headroom to spend money on innovative new drugs by not wasting it on these kind of items.”

Next month, NHS England will start reviewing 10 items which it says are “ineffective, unnecessary [and] inappropriate for prescription on the NHS, or indeed unsafe”, which together cost the service £128m a year. The Department of Health is expected to then issue new guidance advising GPs that they are not prescribed.

They include omega 3 and fish oils; the painkiller fentanyl: lidocaine medicated plasters; a tablet used to treat high blood pressure called doxazosin MR; and a drug called tadalafil, which is used to treat erectile dysfunction, along with gluten-free foods and travel vaccines.

NHS Clinical Commissioners, which represents England’s 209 NHS clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) – the GP-led bodies which hold health budgets locally – has asked NHS England to look into whether the 10 itemsare a good use of scarce cash when the NHS is undergoing the tightest budgetary squeeze in its 69-year history.

Many other common medications could soon be added to the banned list. NHS Englandsaid: “In light of the financial challenges faced by the NHS, further work will consider other medicines which are of relatively low clinical value or priority or are readily available over the counter and in some instances, at far lower cost, such as treatment for coughs and colds, antihistamines, indigestion and heartburn medication and suncream. Guidance will support clinical commissioning groups in making decisions locally about what is prescribed on the NHS.”

NHS bosses hope the moves could ultimately save as much as £400m a year. The service is facing serious financial problems. NHS trusts in England recorded a deficit of £2.45bn last year and are expected to end this financial year almost £1bn in the red again, despite repeated warnings to get their finances in order.

An NHS spokesman said: “New guidelines will advise CCGs on the commissioning of medicines generally assessed as low priority and will provide support to clinical commissioning groups, prescribers and dispensers.

“The increasing demand for prescriptions for medication that can be bought over the counter at relatively low cost, often for self-limiting or minor conditions, underlines the need for all healthcare professionals to work even closer with patients to ensure the best possible value from NHS resources, whilst eliminating wastage and improving patient outcomes.”

Stevens’s money-saving initiative is a foretaste of a major initiative he will unveil on Friday. He will announce details of his long-awaited “delivery plan” to fulfil his pledge, first made in October 2014 in his Five Year Forward View modernisation blueprint, to radically transform how the health service works by 2020 so that it delivers better care and closes the £22bn gap which is expected to open up in its own finances by then in order to remain sustainable.

He will give the go-ahead to between six and 10 of the 44 sustainability and transformation plans (STP), one covering each part of England, which are intended to implement his ideas, which centre on moving a lot of care out of hospitals and treating patients closer to home and keeping them healthier so that they avoid expensive £400-a-night unnecessary stays in hospital.

The STP plans have proved very controversial because they could see dozens of hospitals lose key services, such as their A&E or maternity unit.

NHS draws up list of items to be banned from prescriptions

Calls for "porno chic" Saint Laurent ad campaign to be banned

Campaigners have accused the French fashion house Saint Laurent of featuring models in degrading poses for a publicity campaign they say should be banned.

The poster campaign in Paris consists of one image showing a reclining woman in a fur coat and fishnet tights opening her legs, and another of a model in a leotard and roller-skate stilettos bending over a stool. It has caused fury on social media.

The French advertising authority said most of the complaints were from people who saw the images as an “incitement to rape”. Its director, Stéphane Martin, said the brand appeared to have “incontestably breached” the rules.

“I am not sure that [Saint Laurent’s] female clients would like to be associated with these images,” he said. “We had a similar type of porno chic [in fashion advertising] a decade ago, and here we have it coming back again, which isn’t acceptable.”

sophiasept (@sophiasept)

@YSL Tout y est : culture du #viol, #soumission, #objectivation, #infantilisation invisibilisation et invitation à l’#anorexie ! pic.twitter.com/ozBDHQKtrL

March 4, 2017

Martin said they would decide on what action to take after a meeting with the label on Friday. The authority bars all “degrading and humiliating representations of people” and can demand that advertisers withdraw or change their campaigns.

France’s leading women’s group, Oséz le Feminisme! (“Dare to be Feminist!”), called for the campaign to be pulled, saying this was not the first time Saint Laurent had crossed the line.

It had previously raised hackles with another campaign that used “a very young hypersexualised woman”, its spokeswoman, Raphaëlle Rémy-Leleu, said.

She said this time the subtext was “extremely violent”. “It ticks all the sexist boxes. The women are objectified, hypersexualised and put in submissive positions,” she said.

“How do they think they will sell anything today to women with that? But you have to ask if that wasn’t intentional, that this was all about creating a scandal so we would talk about them.”

Saint Laurent was not available for comment.

Britain’s advertising watchdog banned a Saint Laurent advert two years ago that featured a model whose ribcage was showing.

Martin, who said the latest campaign had been created by the brand’s in-house team, questioned whether its new young designer, Anthony Vaccarello, had gone too far.

The Belgian creator has flirted with bad taste in his first two shows for the brand in which he radically ramped up the sex factor. In his latest show last Tuesday, he gift-wrapped models in tight shiny leather mini dresses while his debut collection featured a dress that exposed one breast.

“We have a rather young designer known for his rather ‘specific’ looks,” Martin said. It is possible that “in this rather closed world, with its specific codes, that they did not realise” the effect the adverts would have.

Calls for "porno chic" Saint Laurent ad campaign to be banned

The NHS has banned cigarettes and should ban meat too – both cause cancer

The World Health Organisation ranks bacon, ham and sausages alongside smoking as a cause of cancer, placing processed meats in the same carcinogenic category as asbestos, alcohol and arsenic. The World Cancer Research Fund advises eating cured meats as little as possible – ideally not at all. And there’s persuasive evidence that, compared to a solely plant-based diet, eating meat shortens life and makes people sicker and fatter.

Against this background, the NHS allows fast food chains in its hospitals. Patient menus offer a wide selection of meats every day. And creamed potatoes, beef casserole and sweet chilli pork and rice are recommended “healthier choices”. Patients can tuck into disease-promoting animal flesh, but do not enjoy unrestricted hedonism. Meat eaters who enjoy a relaxing cigarette after dinner are prevented from doing so, apparently in their own and others’ best interests, thanks to a blanket ban on smoking.

But how can the NHS sensibly ban cigarettes as a known health hazard while simultaneously promoting meat? To endorse one known danger while completely banning a similar one makes no sense. Either it’s OK to allow free choice or it’s OK to prevent “unhealthy behaviours”, but you can’t have it both ways. If you ban smoking you have to ban meat, which causes considerably more damage to animals, the environment and individuals than smoking. If you don’t ban meat, then you can’t ban smoking. Which is it to be? George Orwell coined the idea of doublethink in his dystopian novel Nineteen Eighty-Four to highlight the troubling phenomenon where we simultaneously accept mutually contradictory beliefs as true, blissfully unaware there’s any conflict.

In doublethink we fail to notice even the most stunning inconsistencies. Most people like to think of themselves as animal lovers – in the UK for example about half of all households keep pets – yet it’s estimated that only 2%–10% of the UK population is vegetarian (will eat dairy and eggs) and less than 1% is vegan (will not eat or use any animal matter). So it seems that at least 50 million British animal lovers are happy to eat them, which is surely more than a little weird.

We’ve all seen people putting money in animal charity collection boxes with one hand, while eating a beef burger with the other. But even staring absurdity in the face, most of us don’t notice a problem. We only see it once we’re ready to. Until then we flick it away: “pets are different”, “pigs are meant to be eaten”, “we have to have our iron”, “all farmed animals are treated well”, “you can slaughter animals humanely”, and so on.

We are plagued by doublethink because we habitually separate the world into unrelated packets. Smoking is a health issue. Meat is normal. Alcohol is bad. Not allowing tobacco products to be displayed is health promotion. Allowing body parts of slaughtered animals on public view in supermarkets is wholesome. Illogical beliefs appear compatible if their true connections are disguised. Smoking is tightly wrapped in a packet labelled “Very bad for your health”, whereas eating meat is in a quite different packet called “a balanced diet” or “you need your protein”. So long as we see the world in disconnected chunks, we can avoid serious thought, and preserve the status quo. We need more opportunity to think deeply for ourselves. And where better to begin than in the NHS, which should offer balanced information about many life choices, not just those which it’s fashionable to ban.

David Seedhouse is professor of values-based practice at the University of Worcester. His new book, Thoughtful Health Care: A Practical Guide to the Power of Awareness will be published by Sage in the spring.

Join the Healthcare Professionals Network to read more pieces like this. And follow us on Twitter (@GdnHealthcare) to keep up with the latest healthcare news and views.

The NHS has banned cigarettes and should ban meat too – both cause cancer

Antibacterial soaps banned in US amid claims they do "more harm than good"

Antibacterial soaps were banned from the US market on Friday in a final ruling by the Food and Drug Administration, which said that manufacturers had failed to prove the soaps were safe or more effective than normal products.

Dr Janet Woodcock, director of the FDA’s center for evaluation and research, said that certain antimicrobial soaps may not actually serve any health benefits at all.

“Consumers may think antibacterial washes are more effective at preventing the spread of germs, but we have no scientific evidence that they are any better than plain soap and water,” she said in a statement. “In fact, some data suggests that antibacterial ingredients may do more harm than good over the long term.”

Manufacturers had failed to show either the safety of “long-term daily use” or that the products were “more effective than plain soap and water in preventing illness and the spread of certain infections”.

The new federal rule applies to any soap or antiseptic product that has one or more of 19 chemical compounds, including triclocarbon, which is often found in bar soaps, and triclosan, often in liquid soaps. It does not affect alcohol-based hand sanitizers and wipes, which the FDA is still investigating, or certain healthcare products meant specifically for clinical settings. The FDA has given manufacturers a year to change their products or pull them off shelves.

The FDA first proposed a rule about the chemicals in 2013, following research that they might affect human hormones or change natural resistance to bacteria. The agency requested research from the producers to back up their health claims, but in the three years since has found that data lacking or their requests ignored.

Triclosan has been proven effective at killing bacteria if used at sustained length – far longer than the few minutes most people spend washing their hands – and was once only found in healthcare settings.

Recent studies have linked triclosan to a series of disruptions in human and animal health. A University of Chicago study released in July found that triclosan changed the microbiome inside human guts, and its researchers suggested that exposure could damage developing fetuses. A study from earlier this year found that overuse could also be contributing to antibiotic resistance, and a 2015 study found that antibacterial formulas were not more effective than soap and water.

Triclosan can be found in 93% of liquid soaps labeled “antibacterial” or “antimicrobial”, according to the FDA, though some companies, including Proctor & Gamble, have already begun phasing the chemical out of products. There are partial triclosan bans in the European Union and Minnesota, but the chemical remains common in toothpaste, as it is believed effective against the bacteria that cause gum disease.

People should still keep their hands clean, the FDA noted. “Washing with plain soap and running water remains one of the most important steps consumers can take to avoid getting sick and to prevent spreading germs to others,” the agency said. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends that if people need to use a hand sanitizer, it should have at least 60% alcohol.

Antibacterial soaps banned in US amid claims they do "more harm than good"

Beyond burkinis: why ALL clothes should be banned | Dean Burnett

A lot of people have been upset by images of French police forcing a woman to take a burkini off on a beach, in full view of the public, in accordance with the controversial French burkini ban. There are many reasons to be outraged by this ban: the suppression of individual rights and apparent hypocrisy in the name of “secularism”, the misogyny-tinged policing of women’s clothes specifically, the public display of intimidation, and so on.

All of these complaints are misplaced. The real problem with the burkini ban is, it’s too limited. Forbidding a specific type of swimsuit won’t achieve anything: we must ban ALL CLOTHES! And the sooner the better.

This may sound like a ridiculous notion. But, more ridiculous than banning a swimming costume in order to fight terrorism? I think not! Plus, there are many scientifically valid reasons for us to do away with clothes.

Firstly, clothes cause problems. Look at the long history of clothes being used as a tool of oppression and control, often resulting in political problems. If we didn’t have clothes, we wouldn’t have the means to use them to make people’s lives harder. Even today, in these more “liberated” times, clothes regularly cause problems. How many t-shirt controversies have there been now? Considering how much time has been wasted arguing over them, clothes have probably held back human advancement significantly.

In some extreme cases, clothes can lead to decapitation. Photograph: Alamy

If you doubt this, let’s not forget the time a questionable shirt completely overshadowed a major achievement in space exploration. None of this would have happened if we didn’t have clothes. We’d probably be on Jupiter by now! Admittedly, that would be depend on whether you define “space suits” as clothes, seeing as how they’d be banned, but the point still stands.

But you don’t need cite controversy to see that clothes do more harm than good. How long do you spend agonising over what to wear every day? How long to you spend chafing in uncomfortable garments while trying to work because of some unthinking poorly-thought-out office “dress code”? And you dare no deviate from it, or there will be consequences. So you end up spending large sums of money on things you don’t like, don’t enjoy and which don’t really do anything useful.

And that’s without the pressure of judgement risked whenever you walk outside wearing specific clothes. How often do we hear people ask “what your clothes say about you”? Ever changing fashions and clothing choices have just added another layer of stress and paranoia to a world which has plenty of that as it is.

There are other benefits to banning clothes. The environmental damage caused by constantly washing them would be drastically reduced, as would the financial cost of doing so. Everyone would suddenly have more money available, and no need to spend it on clothes! So it would be doubly good.

Let’s not forget the societal benefits. It may be a difficult adjustment at first, but when you consider that most people who practice body shaming or often less-than-perfect specimens themselves then removing the ability to hide your flaws behind opaque cloth could result in more tolerance and sensitivity between people. And if the human obsessions with looking good persists, people would have to work harder to make their own bodies more “presentable” by keeping in shape. The health benefits to all and reduced pressure on medical services that would result from this cannot be understated.

Admittedly, there’d be some down sides, at least at first. Quite a few industries would collapse and livelihoods would be ruined, so the economic impact would be harsh. We’d also be a bit more restricted in the environments we can live in, despite the resilience of the human body.

Scrabbling for the latest sale item or discounted garment could be a thing of the past. A lifetime of being perpetually cold is surely worth that? Photograph: Ray Tang / Rex Features

Women especially, with their difficult-to-restrain breasts, may find the adjustment difficult. Perhaps some exception could be made for sports bras? Although we’d have to carefully monitor the wearing of them, to make sure no woman breaks the arbitrary and questionable rules of what’s acceptable. Can’t see that being a problem though.

Granted, some clothes offer protection, but when you consider it will be virtually impossible to conceal weapons, the safety risks and benefits will hopefully cancel each other out.

There would also need to be some serious revaluation of our social norms, especially our sexual attitudes, but we’d get used to it eventually. Humans are good like that. Although funerals would likely be less sombre affairs for the foreseeable future.

Also, if we’re going to ban clothes, we should do it very soon, because they’re only going to get worse. Developments in flexible, resilient circuits mean we’ll soon see the arrival of genuinely “smart” clothes. Consider the implications; clothes that can think for themselves! Telling you the time, adjusting the heating without asking, sending reminders to your phone. What’s to stop them just calling you for a chat? What’s to stop them getting angry!?!

“Hi, it’s your favourite shirt here, just calling to… what’s that rustling?… WHO ARE YOU WEARING!?”

That’s no life. For this and every other reason mentioned above, clothes clearly need to be banned.

And what this shows is that, even if you can back up a decision with compelling and reasonable-sounding arguments, it doesn’t mean it isn’t ridiculous. Like banning a bathing suit.

Dean Burnett’s debut bookThe Idiot Brainis available now inthe UK,USAand Canada.

Beyond burkinis: why ALL clothes should be banned | Dean Burnett

Unimmunised young children to be banned from kindergartens beneath Victorian program

Mother and father who really do not feel in vaccinating their youngsters will no longer be in a position to get them to childcare or kindergarten in Victoria under proposed reforms.

The state government is introducing legislation that will demand kids to be totally vaccinated before such attendance is permitted.

Associated: Vaccine-totally free childcare ‘potentially catastrophic’, says business group

The proposed law also closes a loophole that makes an exemption for mother and father who decide on not to vaccinate their kids on the grounds they are conscientious objectors.

Kids who can not be vaccinated for health-related causes will remain exempt.

“What we don’t accept is individuals who go all around myth-creating about the dangers of vaccination,” Victoria’s well being minister, Jill Hennessy, mentioned on Sunday.

Associated: Vaccination crackdown: Australia announces end to religious exemptions

“The public overall health and wellbeing of the broader community has to get precedence towards the anti-vaccination movement.”

Youngsters not vaccinated against illnesses this kind of as measles and whooping cough put other kids and the higher local community at risk, wellness experts say.

In spite of a vaccination price of 92% for whooping cough in Victoria, the quantity of reported cases has increased by more than one,000 given that the preceding yr.

“Ultimately it is a parent’s phone in terms of how they reply, but we are not able to continue to see the alarming rise in diseases like whooping cough and measles, and not reply,” Hennessy said.

She is assured the “no jab, no play” policy will provide an incentive for parents to make sure their young children are vaccinated.

Unimmunised young children to be banned from kindergartens beneath Victorian program

Marijuana cookies to hit Washington shops but cannabis lollies are banned

Cookies and brownies laced with marijuana can go on sale in shops across Washington state after new rules were passed. Photograph: Erich Schlegel/Corbis

Marijuana stores in Washington state can sell marijuana in cookies, brownies and other baked goods but not in candies, lollipops or food items that might appeal to children, newly released rules stipulate.

Washington became the second US state to allow recreational sales of marijuana to adults on 8 July, when its first retail stores opened under a heavily regulated and taxed system approved by voters in 2012.

The state’s Liquor Control Board, which regulates the fledgling sector, published guidelines this week for the packaging and labelling of marijuana edibles. They prohibit any products, labels or packaging designed to be appealing to children, including lollipops and suckers, gummy candy and jelly beans. Edibles must be tested for potency and to ensure that the marijuana derivatives are spread evenly throughout the product.

Washington’s move to allow recreational sales comes amid a broader trend of liberalisation in the US. Recreational sales began in Colorado on 1 January.

So far, Washington state regulators have issued 25 licences to retailers and are still processing more than 300 others.

That has led to concerns about shortages. The first and only recreational marijuana shop to open in Seattle ran out of stock only three days after opening. Last week a Seattle-based company that makes marijuana-infused drinks and candies became the first business in the state to be approved, but it was not clear when the first products will hit shelves.

In Colorado, authorities ordered a recall of products made by the Denver-based company, At Home Baked, which was using a regular clothes washing machine to generate the cold water and centrifugal force needed to make “bubble hash”, a marijuana concentrate.

The Public Health Inspections division of the Denver Department of Public Health said it ordered the business to stop using the washing machine because it did not meet minimum sanitation standards.

Among the products recalled on Thursday were marijuana-infused brownies, candies and rice-crispy treats.

Marijuana cookies to hit Washington shops but cannabis lollies are banned

Marijuana cookies to hit Washington outlets but cannabis lollies are banned

Cookies and brownies laced with marijuana can go on sale in shops across Washington state after new rules were passed. Photograph: Erich Schlegel/Corbis

Marijuana stores in Washington state can sell marijuana in cookies, brownies and other baked goods but not in candies, lollipops or food items that might appeal to children, newly released rules stipulate.

Washington became the second US state to allow recreational sales of marijuana to adults on 8 July, when its first retail stores opened under a heavily regulated and taxed system approved by voters in 2012.

The state’s Liquor Control Board, which regulates the fledgling sector, published guidelines this week for the packaging and labelling of marijuana edibles. They prohibit any products, labels or packaging designed to be appealing to children, including lollipops and suckers, gummy candy and jelly beans. Edibles must be tested for potency and to ensure that the marijuana derivatives are spread evenly throughout the product.

Washington’s move to allow recreational sales comes amid a broader trend of liberalisation in the US. Recreational sales began in Colorado on 1 January.

So far, Washington state regulators have issued 25 licences to retailers and are still processing more than 300 others.

That has led to concerns about shortages. The first and only recreational marijuana shop to open in Seattle ran out of stock only three days after opening. Last week a Seattle-based company that makes marijuana-infused drinks and candies became the first business in the state to be approved, but it was not clear when the first products will hit shelves.

In Colorado, authorities ordered a recall of products made by the Denver-based company, At Home Baked, which was using a regular clothes washing machine to generate the cold water and centrifugal force needed to make “bubble hash”, a marijuana concentrate.

The Public Health Inspections division of the Denver Department of Public Health said it ordered the business to stop using the washing machine because it did not meet minimum sanitation standards.

Among the products recalled on Thursday were marijuana-infused brownies, candies and rice-crispy treats.

Marijuana cookies to hit Washington outlets but cannabis lollies are banned

Bounty Mutiny victory for Mumsnet: income reps need to be banned from NHS maternity wards

_{Income reps have no area on maternity wards}

Soon after providing birth for the second time, I was lying in a maternity ward, a bit befuddled, overwhelmed and, I’m sure, hanging halfway out of my hospital gown. My daughter, who had but to meet any of her grandparents or uncles, was lying subsequent to me when an productive and officious female bustled into the room. She quickly scanned the occupants of the four beds in the ward, and then set about speaking to my 3 ward-mates, collecting their information and giving them their post-natal Bounty packs. When she acquired to my bed, and I asked her what on earth she was doing there, she informed me that I was “too posh”, “plainly did not require [her] hand-outs”, and trundled off. As my vowels are a lot more Brooklyn than Cheltenham Ladies’ University, I have no notion what gave her that impression – possibly the mere act of questioning her presence in my personalized room (how entitled am I?) – but both way, 4 hrs post-birth was not the time to be judged, or pressured to get any certain goods.

Permitting commercial revenue reps onto wards with any individuals is disgraceful. A patient’s privacy and dignity need to be leading priority at all times, and the only men and women going to them must be health pros or near household and pals – not salespeople. However the NHS has encouraged the practice for many years, reportedly earning £5.50 per child born through this money-for-accessibility deal.

There is ample evidence of revenue reps collecting information with out permission, and suggesting that individuals who refused to divulge private information would not be eligible to claim youngster benefit. A lot more than half of mothers surveyed by Mumsnet said the Bounty reps had “invaded their privacy”, and 60 per cent mentioned they had not been told (as they should have been) that their personal specifics would be sold on to other businesses. More than 4 out of five mothers imagined the Bounty reps need to be denied access to wards. The NHS ought to have banned this years in the past.

Now, thanks to Mumsnet’s Bounty Mutiny campaign, the Care Quality Commission (CQC) is last but not least examining the practice. Even though the campaign – in which the parenting network gathered far more than 90,000 signatures to a petition calling for an finish to the Bounty reps – has only just announced its victory, considering that April of this yr the CQC has been investigating no matter whether the reps invade the privacy of new mothers. A number of NHS trusts have announced previously that they will be terminating contracts with Bounty. But it is a victory no significantly less and I hope a rallying contact for widespread adjust.

Let’s hope that all NHS trusts adhere to suit quickly, so maternity wards can be risk-free, private areas for mothers, fathers and babies to bond. Soon after all, each and every single aspect of childhood is commercialised these days – let’s preserve the tough-sell out of the maternity ward.

Bounty Mutiny victory for Mumsnet: income reps need to be banned from NHS maternity wards

Poll: need to cigarettes be completely banned?

Tim Crocker-Buque, a expert registrar in public overall health medication who proposed the movement, mentioned that it is unusual for people to make an informed choice to smoke in the course of adulthood. Photograph: PhotoAlto / Alamy/Alamy

The British Healthcare Association will vote on Tuesday on whether to lobby the government to permanently ban cigarettes for any person born soon after the yr 2000. This would not stop any adults who currently smoke from carrying out so but would imply that it will turn out to be progressively illegal more than time.

Supporters of the movement at the doctors’ union say the measure is necessary due to the fact 80% of smokers who consider up the habit make the choice to do so as children. The BMA have previously successfully lobbied the government to ban smoking in public areas and in cars carrying young children. The smokers’ group Forest mentioned the thought was “preposterous and discriminatory”.

What do you believe?

Poll: need to cigarettes be completely banned?

What medical jargon need to be banned? Open thread

Doctors’ explanations of illnesses and remedies are as well often complicated. Photograph: Blend Photographs /Alamy

Health specialists are being urged to use clearer language to assist individuals to understand their illness.

A report by the Royal College of GPs (RCGP) tells medics to communicate a lot more gradually and use less jargon when speaking to sufferers since their explanations of illnesses and remedies are too typically perplexing.

It calls for the UK’s 250,000 medics to stay away from the use of phrases such as “chronic”, “palliative” and “hospice”, and warns that describing a diagnosis of cancer as “constructive” can be misinterpreted as great information.

Tell us which healthcare terms and phrases do you think need to be ditched and why.

What medical jargon need to be banned? Open thread

Junk food apps to entice kids "must be banned"

Dr Haiming Hang, of the University of Bath, called for regulation to manage the games, which are legal.

“There are basic ethical queries to be addressed,” he explained. “The Government needs to enforce labelling and introduce regulation on a par with television advertising. Organizations are manipulating youngsters into wanting foods and drinks that are substantial in salt, sugar and excess fat.”

They have been developed by a quantity of firms, such as McDonald’s and Coca-Cola.

Because 2007, businesses have been banned from advertising meals higher in unwanted fat, salt and sugar throughout children’s television programmes.

The regulation was brought in by Ofcom, the media regulator, but the ban does not lengthen to the internet.

Coca-Cola, which created games with McDonald’s, mentioned they had been aimed at young children aged 13 or over. McDonald’s said only its brand was noticeable in the game.

Junk food apps to entice kids "must be banned"

E-cigarette ad banned over overall health claims

An ad for Ten Motives e-cigarettes has been banned by the ASA Photograph: Screengrab

An advert for an e-cigarette brand has been banned following the advertising watchdog ruled that claims which includes that it was “the healthier smoking alternative” could not be substantiated.

Wednesday’s ruling by the Promoting Specifications Authority comes as it seems to introduce new regulations for e-cigarette marketing and advertising to clear up uncertainty in the industry.

The leaflet for 10 Motives’ disposable electronic cigarettes claimed they have been “the healthier smoking option” and “due to the fact it consists of no tar or cancerous toxins, you can nonetheless appreciate smoking without worrying about the effects on your wellness”.

The ad was challenged over no matter whether these claims could be substantiated.

In its defence, Ten Motives argued that e-cigarettes have been a safer substitute to standard cigarettes, saying that its solution contained none of the 4,000 or so damaging harmful toxins and carcinogens found in standard tobacoo-primarily based merchandise.

It pointed out that regulator Medicines &amp Healthcare Products Regulatory Company (MHRA) had confirmed that it was acceptable to refer to its goods as a healthier alternative.

It also cited a briefing document from the public health charity Ash (Action on Smoking and Wellness) that stated “individuals smoke for nicotine but they die from the tar”.

10 Motives also presented hyperlinks to presentations given at an e-cigarette summit in November 2013 at the Royal Society, which it mentioned had been attended by recognised worldwide scientific authorities on smoking, which includes the MHRA.

It highlighted estimates and presentations that it said supported the ad’s claims, like a science-based mostly independent presentation, “Nicotine security in the context of e-cigarette use and tobacco dependance”.

In its ruling, the ASA mentioned the two claims in the ad have been understood to suggest the Ten Motive’s merchandise were significantly less harmful than typical cigarettes.

But it ruled that the ad ought to be banned, as although it acknowledged the quote from Ash, it mentioned it was not supported by even more documentation or substantiation displaying the results of e-cigarettes or the 10 Motives products particularly.

Likewise, it said the summit presentations did not deal particularly with Ten Motives items.

In its ruling, the ASA concluded the claims “the healthier smoking substitute” and “you can even now enjoy smoking with no worrying about the results on your well being” had been misleading and the ad should be banned.

• To speak to the MediaGuardian information desk e mail media@theguardian.com or mobile phone 020 3353 3857. For all other inquiries please get in touch with the primary Guardian switchboard on 020 3353 2000. If you are creating a comment for publication, please mark plainly “for publication”.

• To get the most current media news to your desktop or mobile, comply with MediaGuardian on Twitter and Facebook.

E-cigarette ad banned over overall health claims

Packets of 10 cigarettes and menthol flavours banned under new EU rules

The legislation will consider effect in 2016 following what is anticipated to be a rubber stamp approval method by EU governments next month.

Professional-smoking groups have criticised a “nanny state mentality”, but cancer charities have backed the measures.

The new guidelines to be introduced across the European Union include:

• picture warnings should cover 65% of the front and back of every single packet of cigarettes, with added warnings on the best of the pack

• a ban on “lipstick-design” packs aimed at ladies – all packs have to have at least twenty cigarettes to leave space for overall health warnings

• roll-your-own tobacco packs to have comparable picture warnings

• a ban on promotional elements, this kind of saying “this solution is free of charge of additives” or is less dangerous than other brands

• a ban on flavoured cigarettes, such as menthol, fruit and vanilla

• a greatest nicotine-concentration degree for e-cigarettes.

• EU-broad monitoring of cigarettes to fight illegal trade

Ministers are expected to endorse the guidelines in March, to come into force in May possibly 2014. Member states will have two many years to introduce the legislation.

The European Commission says the new rules will “deter younger men and women from experimenting with, and turning into addicted to, tobacco” and must lead to a 2% drop in the sum smoked in excess of the up coming five years.

EU Wellness Commissioner Tonio Borg stated: “Nowadays is a wonderful day for EU health policy.

Today marks a genuine turning level for European tobacco handle ”

“The new rules will support to minimize the number of men and women who commence smoking in the EU.

“These measures place an finish to products which entice children and teens into commencing to smoke in the European Union.”

Nevertheless, the director of the pro-smoking campaign group Forest, Simon Clark said banning menthol cigarettes was a ban on client option that “will do little” to deter kids from smoking.

He also questioned the need to have for plain packaging legislation to take away any branding from packs, which is being deemed in some EU countries, including the United kingdom.

Packets of 10 cigarettes and menthol flavours banned under new EU rules

Surgeon struck off in Britain banned from practising and fined in New Jersey

A doctor who fled to the US from Britain after becoming convicted of manslaughter has once more been banned from practising and fined almost $ 500,000, for injuring patients with surgeries he was not competent to execute.

Dr Richard Kaul was stripped of his American licence at a meeting of New Jersey’s board of health-related examiners, which also ordered him to pay $ 300,000 in civil penalties and $ 175,422 to reimburse the state for legal charges and investigation expenses.

John Hoffman, the acting New Jersey lawyer common, explained the board’s selection would defend the public “from a person who place sufferers in harm’s way, and very candidly had no qualms or remorse about repeatedly performing so”.

“Dr Kaul’s sufferers in truth did sustain extra maladies as effectively as uncorrected health-related problems, as a direct end result of Dr Kaul’s improper procedures,” Hoffman mentioned in a statement after the verdict, which confirmed a 3-month skilled prosecution of Kaul last 12 months.

Kaul, 49, became a multimillionaire right after arriving in the US and reinventing himself as a pioneering keyhole spine surgeon, in spite of his only hands-on education getting a two-week course in South Korea. He manufactured errors that left numerous sufferers unable to walk or work.

He had been advised by a London judge in 2001 that his profession was “in ruins”, when he was discovered guilty of creating the death of Isatu Bangura, who suffered a cardiac arrest after he injected her with sedatives and failed to keep track of her issue while she had dental function accomplished.

New Jersey state prosecutors argued that Kaul had performed complicated surgical treatment with “flagrant disregard” for his inadequate qualifications, citing the circumstances of 11 individuals who claimed to have suffered mistreatment at his hands amongst 2005 and 2012.

Judge Howard Solomon agreed in his determination in December that Kaul “never need to have performed any spinal surgeries,” and had engaged in “gross negligence, gross malpractice and gross incompetence” by operating on individuals “without enough training, expertise and competence”.

The case raised fresh considerations about the safety of ambulatory surgical centres (ASCs) like Kaul’s, which supply quicker and much less expensive operations than classic hospitals but are not topic to the identical inspections and checks, and have been criticised by patient watchdogs.

In 2012 New Jersey governor Chris Christie vetoed a bill passed by state legislators that would have ensured all ASCs had been regulated, partly on the grounds that it would value as well a lot for his administration to inspect them.

Kaul presently owed a former patient practically $ 1m following a profitable lawsuit, as properly as hefty unpaid tax payments. He is also becoming sued by Geico, a major insurance coverage organization, which claims he improperly billed it for surgeries. Kaul denies the allegation.

“The state proved its allegations and we’re pleased the Board has enacted the Court’s recommendation of licence revocation,” stated Eric Kanefsky, the director of the New Jersey lawyer general’s division of buyer affairs, said of the board’s selection.

“Dr Kaul’s actions are an affront to medical professionals who commit many years learning and education so they can effectively care for their sufferers.”

Surgeon struck off in Britain banned from practising and fined in New Jersey

Smoking in automobiles carrying youngsters to be banned

Nick Clegg, the Liberal Democrat leader, has argued that the ban is “profoundly illiberal”. Regardless of his considerations, it is thought that just four of his MPs voted against the ban.

Senior Liberal Democrats who voted in favour of it included Danny Alexander, the chief secretary to the treasury, and Norman Lamb, the wellness minister.

Much more than 700 senior physicians last week backed a legal ban, saying that getting in an enclosed room like a auto considerably worsened the harm accomplished to youngsters by cigarette smoke.

Jane Ellison, the health minister, explained that the accomplishment of the ban would not be measured by the number of instances it was enforced by police.

She stated that the government would rather examined the reduction in publicity to second hand smoke.

She advised the Commons: “In the occasion that legislation is to be brought in to cease smoking in automobiles carrying youngsters, we ought to not measure success by the number of enforcement actions.

“We need to measure success by the reduction in exposure to second-hand smoke.

“The Government will listen quite cautiously to what Parliament has to say on the critical principle as to regardless of whether the Government should have the energy to legislate to avoid smoking in autos when young children are present.”

Luciana Berger, the shadow overall health minister, informed MPs:”If we know past doubt that passive smoking in an enclosed area can do significant harm to a person’s overall health, and that hundreds of 1000′s of kids are getting subjected to this each week… must we act and do anything or do we stand by and do practically nothing? We say we are not able to afford to act.”

But Conservative backbenchers appeared prepared to put up a fight in the Commons, with Shipley MP Philip Davies saying if the amendment is passed, it would be “yet another in a lengthy line of triumphs for the nanny state”.

Mr Davies criticised Ms Berger, saying “she represents the smug, patronising excesses of New Labour who think that the only reason they have come into Parliament is to ban everyone else from all the issues that they don’t take place to like themselves”. Even so, it was with his very own celebration that he took certain umbrage.

Mr Davies said the Conservative Get together “used to believe” in the rights of the individual to do as they please inside privately owned spaces, which includes autos, and mentioned the Government was properly taking over the role of mother and father to make their own decisions.

“If we want to inspire a program in this country the place dad and mom take obligation for their kids we have to give them accountability for their kids,” he mentioned.

Smoking in automobiles carrying youngsters to be banned

FGM is banned but quite much alive in the United kingdom

Link to video: Scotland’s victims of female genital mutilation

“I did not know exactly what was going to take place to me, but soon after I saw the blade I knew they would certainly harm me, because that blade is not some thing to play with,” says 25-yr-previous Manika, who had her genitals severed with a razor, with out an anaesthetic, when she was only eight years outdated in Gambia. “It really is a discomfort you can not even … it truly is taking a knife and cutting someone’s flesh.”

She looks nervously out of the window above the rooftops of Edinburgh, the place she has sought sanctuary, explaining that if she returns she will encounter a additional method to “finish” the cutting. Nevertheless, she could have come to the wrong area. Organisations functioning directly with communities impacted by female genital mutilation (FGM), have advised the Guardian that, in spite of legislation against the practice dating back 3 decades, United kingdom-born women are not only getting taken abroad for the “cutting season” of the summer holidays, but they are getting minimize here as properly.

“It is a custom that is very significantly alive, not just in residence countries but in Scotland,” says Anela Anwar, from the Glasgow-primarily based charity Roshni. “People have offered us information saying girls are getting reduce in Scotland or we hear that women are taken back house to be cut above the summer holidays.”

Reviews that “cutters” are at function, some working in pricey private clinics, have come out of major cities which includes London, Birmingham and Bristol, says Sarah McCulloch, from the Agency for Culture and Adjust Management. “Wherever [ethnic minority] communities [that practise FGM] are residing, it is a problem,” she says. “Since why would they end? Why need to they end? What will make them quit?

“No one particular is giving them information. If they arrive in this nation, they do not know the laws of the land – they come with their cultures and hold on to them.”

FGM has been unlawful in the Uk since 1985, and since 2003 any individual taking a kid out of the Uk to be lower faces 14 years in prison. However, there has however to be a single conviction. Two men and women were arrested in November accused of carrying out FGM on a 5-week-outdated baby but, according to the Metropolitan police, there was “insufficient proof to proceed”.

Challenging details about how a lot of women are currently being cut, where and by whom, are scarce because, according to campaigners, the issue has been neglected by successive governments frightened of confronting so-named cultural practices.

Following strain from campaigners the government announced on Wednesday evening that hospitals would now start gathering information on ladies they treat who have undergone FGM. Presently midwives and doctors acquire no regimen coaching on how to support impacted mothers, who can suffer daily life-threatening consequences during childbirth.

A report last year on FGM by a coalition of medical groups, trade unions and human rights organisations estimates that there are 66,000 victims of FGM in England and Wales and warns that far more than 24,000 girls below 15 are at danger. Much more than 2,000 victims of FGM sought treatment method in London hospitals alone in the previous three years.

The doubling of Scotland’s African population given that 2001 (from 22,049 to 46,742) and the growing cost of air travel have played a part in the improve in numbers in Scotland, says Anwar.

“It is turning out to be a whole lot far more pricey to go home, so we have heard now that men and women are pooling with each other sources to deliver a cutter in excess of from abroad to mutilate their girls above right here in a group. I feel folks will use no matter what indicates they can if they are established for this to come about.”

McCulloch agrees: “[Families] are forming a kind of co-operative to raise the funding to pay for someone to come from overseas. The family will bring all the girls together and it is done. Those who are wealthy are making use of nurses or doctors or private clinics That is why London especially has been accused of currently being the FGM city of Europe due to the fact several people are coming from Europe on Eurostar and having their daughters [mutilated].”

The evidence is there, if the sources have been manufactured available to uncover it, says Fatou Baldeh, herself an FGM survivor and now functioning for the Dignity Alert and Research Forum (Darf) in Edinburgh. “Folks consider it really is an outside situation, it is not taking place here. It is extremely widespread, but individuals don’t consider it is,” she says. “It [is] challenging to get females to speak to you about their knowledge.”

Female genital mutilation requires cutting all or element of the outer labia, inner labia and clitoris. It is estimated to have an effect on much more than 140 million girls and girls globally. In the worst instances girls are “sewn up”, leaving only a small hole via which to urinate and menstruate. Historically deemed vital for getting ready a girl for adulthood – in some elements of the planet women who have not been lower are seen as unsuitable for marriage – it has also been attacked as a signifies of controlling female sexuality and autonomy.

In countries such as Sudan, Somalia and Egypt up to 98% of females have been mutilated, but the practice happens in 28 nations in Africa and some nations in Asia and the Middle East. Baldeh was seven when she was mutilated. “Some ladies held my legs, other ladies held my hands,” she says. “I was blindfolded and I felt the sharp minimize,  I felt everything.” The only “medication” she received was becoming informed to sit in warm salty water. “I can never ever overlook that. If you want to pass urine that’s the worst because you are sore and you’ve acquired no medicine, not even a Band-Support. It truly is just an open wound [...] It was the most horrible factor I can bear in mind.”

The consequences can be devastating: women can bleed to death or pick up infections, and in the longer term can suffer from recurrent bladder infections, cysts, infertility, childbirth complications, psychological trauma and lack of sexual need.

Manika, who seems significantly younger than her many years, explains that FGM has left her battling bodily and psychological problems. She says she was “blocked up” when she was minimize and, right after coming to the United kingdom to study, she had intercourse for the first time. It proved so difficult and unpleasant that she had to be rushed to hospital to cease the bleeding that followed. She has suffered from recurrent infections, intermittent intervals, and is terrified of being sexually energetic yet again.

“It tends to make me frightened. Since then I really feel like I never want to have sex. I have it in my thoughts that I am still going to have that exact same soreness,” she says.

“I will by no means forgive my mothers and fathers for undertaking this to me. This is just like you are taking somebody’s life. It is just like you are taking a gun and shooting someone to death. That is how it feels for me.”

There are signs that – last but not least – the problem is becoming taken critically at a national level. The House Workplace lately awarded £250,000 of EU funds for on-line coaching of teachers, nurses and GPs, awareness raising between social staff, and promotion of the NSPCC’s national FGM helpline [0800 028 3550].

In Scotland, right after recent hospital figures unveiled that a lot more than two,500 FGM victims had provided birth in Scottish hospitals, politicians commissioned a Scotland-broad research into its prevalence. Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe, the Metropolitan police commissioner, has called for an overhaul of the “total technique” for combating FGM.

There are difficulties. Hogan-Howe warned that a lack of tip-offs from wellness specialists and teachers was hindering police efforts, a disappointment echoed by Detective Chief Superintendent Gill Imery, Police Scotland’s officer in charge of combating FGM. “We are undertaking a good deal of data-raising in communities and among our very own individuals. We are completely clear that this is a crime – it’s kid abuse.

“Our goal is usually to intervene, since if there is a prosecution we have failed to cease it happening,” she says. The force has worked with a nearby charity that operates on the ground in Edinburgh and Glasgow but did not want to threat disrupting their work by currently being named. In some circumstances they have offered the parents of at-risk ladies a “health passport” -a letter that tells other family members members in the family’s property nation of the harsh punishments for FGM in the Uk.

“On far more than one occasion I have had a phone get in touch with from a mom desperate to stop the procedure asking me to verify with the matriarch of the loved ones in Somalia that if they go ahead and minimize the child then it is feasible that the whole loved ones would not get back into the United kingdom. That has worked,” said 1 outreach worker.

But not ample is however being accomplished, says Leyla Hussein, a survivor and campaigner who presented The Cruel Lower on Channel four. Tips are not statutory, implementation is disjointed, funding is minimum, schooling is patchy, and no one is holding anybody to account, she says. “Right up until we have a greater program in area, I guarantee in ten years’ time we’ll be obtaining the very same conversation,” she says.

Yet, regardless of her disappointment, she remains hopeful about the potential. “I truly feel like I’m not alone in this battle any far more,” she says. “Attitudes are changing at last, but now we have to see a adjust appropriate from the leading, and we can finally put an end to FGM.”

FGM is banned but quite much alive in the United kingdom

Sale of ultra-low-cost alcohol to be banned in England and Wales

Six out of seven significant supermarkets have been discovered to be promoting alcohol at up to 12% beneath expense in a 2008 Competitors Commission examine. Photograph: David Sillitoe

The government is to ban the sale of ultra-inexpensive alcohol in England and Wales, the House Office has announced.

Ministers hope the move, which will come into force on six April, will end the worst instances of deep discounting, which has resulted in cans of lager becoming sold far more cheaply than water in supermarkets.

An official impact evaluation says that the ban on sales of alcohol at below price, defined as duty plus VAT, will indicate an ordinary 440ml can of beer or lager can’t be offered beneath 50p.

The new “floor price” for a bottle of wine will be £2.24 a bottle of vodka or other spirits will cost a minimum of £10.sixteen.

Reduced-power beers which have an alcoholic articles of one.two% or much less will be exempt from the policy as will duty-cost-free sales on ships, aircraft and in airports.

Health campaigners accused ministers of buckling to pressure from the drinks industry final July when they rejected a minimum unit cost for alcohol and a ban on multi-get promotions.

The Alcohol Well being Alliance, which includes the healthcare royal schools, warned that the effect of the alternative ban on marketing at below duty plus VAT would be negligible.

The House Office’s affect evaluation published on Tuesday acknowledges that the move is only very likely to hit 1.3% of all alcohol product sales, mainly in supermarkets, but says that this amounts to income of 220m litres a 12 months.

An explanatory memorandum alongside the parliamentary order introducing the ban says that the “government is committed to making certain the worst instances of low-cost alcohol are banned from sale”.

Ministers insist that under-cost marketing is a real concern, with 6 out of seven significant supermarkets located to be marketing alcohol at up to 12% below cost in a 2008 Competition Commission study.

They also level to expanding evidence of “pre-loading” with two-thirds of younger folks who have been arrested for alcohol-relevant crime and disorder in one particular English city admitting to have “tanked up” with low-cost supermarket booze before going out.

The official impact evaluation estimates that the move will lead to savings of £5.3m a year in well being benefits and £3.6m in crime savings. Yearly expenses are put at £5.3m such as lost duty and VAT income and enforcement charges.

The ban will be imposed by introducing a mandatory licensing situation on all people who promote alcohol, such as small off-licenses. Official say they do not assume revenue from outdoors England and Wales via the internet to be a considerable situation but will maintain it underneath evaluation.

Sale of ultra-low-cost alcohol to be banned in England and Wales

Smoking in cars carrying kids could be banned

Smoking in vehicles carrying kids is presently unlawful in Australia, Canada and components of the US. Photograph: PA

Smoking in vehicles with a little one inside could turn into unlawful, if a vote in the House of Lords is passed on Wednesday.

Labour has proposed an amendment to the young children and households bill intended to discourage men and women from smoking around younger people.

Drivers would be committing an offence if they failed to prevent smoking in their vehicles when a youngster was current.

The shadow overall health secretary, Andy Burnham, says Britain should comply with the illustration set by Australia, Canada and a variety of American states.

He told Sky Information, “When it comes to improving the wellness of children, we are duty bound to take into account any measure that may make a big difference.

“Adults are free to make their personal options but that usually does not apply to kids, and that is why society has an obligation to defend them from preventable harm.

“Proof from other nations exhibits that stopping smoking in the confined room of a car carrying kids can avert damage to their overall health, and has strong public assistance.”

Smoking in workplaces and enclosed public spaces has been banned considering that 2007.

The shadow public well being minister, Luciana Berger, informed BBC Radio 4′s These days programme that if bill was not passed, the move would be integrated in Labour’s manifesto at the subsequent basic election.

Simon Clark, director of the smokers’ rights group Forest, informed the programme this kind of legislation would be hard to enforce, with the finish result of obtaining to ban smoking in all autos.

“I feel this legislation is quite hefty-handed, entirely needless, and according to surveys 84% of grownups wouldn’t dream of lighting a cigarette in a automobile, in a modest enclosed room, with a child present.

“So grownups presently know how to behave. They never require the state interfering in their lives like this. If there are even now some folks who smoke in a automobile with youngsters, then let us educate them but let us not legislate.”

Smoking in cars carrying kids could be banned

Dangers of microwave ovens identified for decades, have been once banned in Russia

Microwaving food may be a matter of ease in today’s quick-paced occasions, but several well being-conscious men and women are aware of the well being dangers brought on by the “need” for this kind of expediency. From being linked to causing cancers to severely compromising the nutrients in food items, microwaving is usually shunned by individuals who alternatively select to cook making use of the stovetop, if they even heat food at all.

Turns out, though, this notion is absolutely nothing new. In 1976, microwaves had been apparently banned in Russia right after experiments that started out in the 1950s demonstrated the dangers of microwave ovens. A United States researcher, William Kopp (who was later prosecuted), brought the results of tests into the limelight. The exams, which had been carried out at the Institute of Radio Technology at Klinsk, Byelorussia, showed a prolonged checklist of detrimental effects caused by consuming foods that had been heated with a microwave. So bad have been the results that the Soviets actually issued overall health hazard warnings on microwave ovens and even set microwave publicity limits for staff.

The results mostly involved the altering of compounds in the meals, which generally destroyed nutritional content, specifically in meats. Even microwaved plants, largely root veggies, formed toxic free of charge radicals. Conclusions from these studies in Russia therefore linked microwaved food items to increased incidences of cancerous cells in the blood, the advancement of abdomen cancer and digestive ailments, lymphatic technique disruption and the inability for the immune system to perform optimally.

As a result of the findings, microwaves have been banned there in 1976. Even so, underneath the leadership in the Soviet Union of Mikhail Gorbachev in the mid-1980s, the ban was lifted.

Although several homes and operate environments often use microwaves, there’s mounting evidence that microwaves and other electronic devices are damaging to our health.

In 1992, research done by Swiss meals researchers was published, outlining findings that microwaving meals poisons a person’s blood and can even lead to anemia, cancers and higher cholesterol amounts. A year just before that, there was a lawsuit in Oklahoma soon after a lady was offered a blood transfusion that had very first been warmed in a microwave oven. In 2003, an report published in The Journal of the Science of Foods and Agriculture noted that broccoli in water cooked in microwave ovens misplaced “up to 97 percent of its useful antioxidants” compared to a loss of only eleven% when steamed.

By means of the many years, proof continues to increase in the case towards microwave use. Even plants watered with microwaved water either has been shown to not develop at all or to increase, but die shortly thereafter!

It is clear that microwaving our foods drastically alters the compounds of these meals, major to severe wellness difficulties like cancer, digestive problems and potentially even neurological issues. If you haven’t presently, why not take into account doing what Russia did in 1976 and ban microwaves from your house? Cooking with a stovetop may get a small longer, but definitely, the well being benefits are well worth the wait. Greater however, consider about going raw to get the most nutrients from your food.

Sources for this write-up incorporate:

articles.mercola.com

rawlivingfoods.typepad.com

www.relfe.com

www.well being-science.com

Dangers of microwave ovens identified for decades, have been once banned in Russia