Labour MPs urge Priti Patel to stand against Trump"s "global gag" rule

MPs are calling on Priti Patel to take urgent action to support charities that provide women with information on abortion in an effort to limit the impact of one of Donald Trump’s first acts as president.

Six Labour politicians have written to the development secretary suggesting Britain takes similar steps to the Netherlands, which is planning to form an overseas fund after the US ruled that it would stop providing aid to international groups working in this area.

“As we are sure you are aware, the new US president Donald Trump signed an executive order blocking funding for a number of international NGOs that support women’s rights and family planning,” the MPs wrote, about what has been dubbed the Mexico city policy, or global gag rule.

“We would implore you to take urgent steps on funding and policy as the Dutch government has and as the UK government has done so previously, to mitigate the impact of this decision.”

The group – Stephen Doughty, Stella Creasy, Gareth Thomas, Stephen Twigg, Luciana Berger and Anna Turley – praise Patel for championing the work of the Department for International Development (DfID) for women and girls in developing countries. They say it has focused on access to education, health services, family planning, better nutrition and water and sanitation.

“The department has been at the global forefront in helping poor women to lead healthy and productive lives, and to increase voice, choice and control for girls and women,” they add, warning that Trump’s decision could undermine DfID’s work.

They highlight the Dutch plans for a fund to help projects providing access to birth control, abortion and women’s education.

“If Britain is going to show the kind of global leadership the prime minister suggests, then we need to put our money where our mouth is and step in when others fall short” said Creasy, who helped organise the London Women’s March.

“Cutting funding for reproductive healthcare doesn’t end abortion, it ends safe abortions. Trump may not realise that but Britain does and should act accordingly.”

What is the ‘global gag rule’, and why does Trump support it?

Doughty, a former aid adviser who sits on the development committee, argued that Trump had delivered a “sinister start” to his presidency.

“At a time when Donald Trump is advocating torture and slashing contributions to the UN – they are also gagging women’s rights organisations,” he said, urging Patel and Theresa May to try to undo some of the damage.

Thomas, who is a former DfID minister, said he had previously been involved in a decision to set up a fund after George W Bush, the last Republican president, stopped US aid funding safe abortion and family planning.

“We worked with allies in other development agencies to try to ameliorate the consequences of George Bush’s decision,” he said. “Now that Trump has followed suit I hope Theresa May will instruct DfID to once more lead the development community to help close the gap and thus support the rights of women across the world to live the life they want to.”

A DfID source said. “The secretary of state has spoken about the fact that family planning in development is an important priority to her. We will continue to show global health leadership by working to deliver this‎.”

Labour MPs urge Priti Patel to stand against Trump"s "global gag" rule

Will the Real Vitamin C Please Stand Up: A Closer Look at the Most Controversial Vitamin

When you think of feeling better or fighting off sickness, the first thing that might pop into your mind is, “I’ll take some vitamin C”. You drink some orange juice, maybe an Emergen-C packet, or even take a few tablets of bottled vitamin C in order to chase away the symptoms of an impending cold, flu, or feeling of general fatigue and malaise. Taking between 50-2000 mg during a few days leaves you believing that, “Wow, that vitamin C really helped kick that sick feeling to the curb!”

Vitamin C, whether taken in low or high doses, coupled with its reported health benefiting properties, has been quite controversial for the past several decades and according to the University of California Berkley, no other vitamin has been so extensively researched since 1932. And as of today, despite all the studies, vitamin C still remains a mystery with a divided consensus. The question remains, does it help?

Believe or not, there are two schools of thought regarding water soluble vitamin C also known as L-ascorbic acid or ascorbate. Humans require a regular intake of vitamin C (30-95 mg daily depending on age) because our bodies do not produce nor store this vitamin, however excrete it very quickly.[1] Vitamin C is imperative for maintenance of all the body tissues, proper growth, and wound healing.

New data about the positive effects of vitamin C on the immune system have been introduced in the last several years.[2] Immune cells contain active vitamin C transporter molecules within their membranes that actively pump the vitamin into the cells when more vitamin C is necessary[3], especially phagocytes and T-cells. According to the National Institutes of Health (NIH), a vitamin C deficiency results in a reduced resistance against certain pathogens, while a higher supply enhances several immune system parameters.[4]

On the other side, a Cochrane Collaboration review has concluded that vitamin C has shown no consistent effect on the duration or severity of helping the common cold symptoms after the initial onset.[5] Although, evidence suggests that it could be justified in people exposed to brief periods of severe physical exercise or cold environments.[6] Whereas, Dr. H.K. Bakhru states, “vitamin C helps prevent and cure the common cold and protects an individual against infections”.[7] It is evident that one community believes it does not help much with the prevention and dissipation of cold and flu symptoms and an increase of immunological factors while the other faction believes it does.

A recent controlled trial study showed that vitamin C deficiency has been linked with frequency and duration of colds coupled with immune system defects, and that there are measurable health advantages associated with vitamin C supplementation.[8] Taking into account that if vitamin C introduced into the body will increase immunity, the next question is which form of vitamin C should be taken?

Here is the secret: few people differentiate between the natural vitamin C which you find in fruits and vegetables (citrus, acerola cherries, greens), and synthetic ascorbic vitamin C present in most energizing drinks, vitamin packets, and vitamin C Bottles that you can buy at your local pharmacy or health food store. Because the two are usually marketed side by side as being one in the same, most people are led to believe that if the label says all natural vitamin C, it must be food based, therefore real and wholesome. However, there is a difference. As O. Hofmleker states,”in its natural form vitamin C has a different design than the synthetic vitamin. The natural vitamin C molecule never occurs in isolated form, but rather accompanied by complex nutrients which apparently are essential for vitamin C’s bioactivity. The synthetic ascorbate however, appears in an isolated form, often in overly high concentrations which the human body hasn’t evolved to properly utilize. Human biology has never evolved to accept synthetic vitamins”.[9]

Synthetic vitamin C was introduced in the 1930’s into the market causing all the rage. However, with its inception it pushed the focus of natural wholesome vitamin C found in foods to the back shelf making it a thing of the past. Since then the new trend has been this synthetic ascorbic acid reportedly being linked to all sorts of health benefits.[[10]–[11]–[12] ] It was also believed to be more readily available year round instead of its natural whole food counterpart. The interesting thing is after so many decades and numerous studies conducted, it has actually been shown that ascorbic acid causes potential damage to health. A recent study on vitamin C (Am J Clin Nutr; Jan 2008) showed adults taking the synthetic version had serious side effects and significant adverse effects on the antioxidant system. Dr. Victor Herbert, professor of medicine at the Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York has said, “vitamin C in supplement forms mobilizes harmless ferric iron stored in the body and converts it to harmful ferrous iron, which induces damage to the heart and other organs. In addition, unlike the vitamin C naturally present in foods like orange juice, vitamin C as a supplement is not an antioxidant.”[13]

So in order to take the most optimal vitamin C, you should kick the synthetic vitamin C (which is usually ascorbic acid derived from genetically modified corn) and start ingesting either real fruits and vegetables or food-based vitamin C supplements with the highest amount of real vitamin C and bio-available nutrients. Ideally, vitamin C should be ingested in its natural wholesome form in order to give its all encompassing health benefiting properties in the areas of cardiovascular and immunological health.[14] According to NIH, those fruits are fresh, raw cantaloupes, citrus fruits, kiwis, mangos, papayas, pineapples, strawberries, raspberries, blueberries, watermelon, and cranberries.[15] In addition, peppers, kale, broccoli and peas are also great options.

Do yourself a favor and introduce natural vitamin C in the form of fruits and vegetables to your daily diet. It can be in the form of fresh squeezed juice, smoothies, or as fruit and vegetable snacks throughout the day. Your body will thank you. Not only will you be supplying yourself with a daily dose of natural vitamin C required for the proper running of your body and its systems, but you will be able to forgo the bottles, powder packets, and drinks filled with a synthetic vitamin that your body was not engineered to consume. The real vitamin C is in fruits and vegetables. Nothing else comes close to that nor can it mimic its intrinsic healing properties. Introduce the real vitamin C into your daily eating habits!

Interesting fact: Vitamin C is the most widely researched nutrient on the Internet.

[1] Padayatty SJ, Katz A, Wang Y, et al. Vitamin C as an antioxidant: evaluation of its role in disease prevention. J Am Coll Nutr. 2003 Feb;22(1):18-35.

[2] Pavlovic V. A short overview of vitamin C and selected cells of the immune system. Cent. Eur. J. Med. 2010 October;8(1):1-10.

[3] Strohle A, Wolters M, Hahn A. Micronutrients at the interface between inflammation and infection–ascorbic acid and calciferol: part 1, general overview with a focus on ascorbic acid. Inflamm Allergy Drug Targets. 2011 Feb;10(1):54-63.

[4] Ströhle A, Hahn A. Viatmin C and immune function. Med Monatsschr Pharm. 2009 Feb;32(2):49-54.[PubMed abstract]

[5] Douglas RM, Hemilä H. Vitamin C for preventing and treating the common cold. PLoS Med 2005;2:e168. [PubMed abstract]

5 Douglas RM, Hemilä H, Chalker E, Treacy B. Vitamin C for preventing and treating the common cold. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007;(3):CD000980. [PubMed abstract]

[7] Bakhru H.K., The Complete Handbook of Nature Cure (Mumbai: Jaico Publishing House, 2014), 101.

[8] Johnston CS, Barkyoumb GM, Schumacher SS. Vitamin C supplementation slightly improves physical activity levels and reduces cold incidence in men with marginal vitamin C status: a randomized controlled trial. Nutrients. 2014 Jul;6(7):2572-83.

[9] Ori Hofmleker, “Vitamin Poisioning: Are We Destroying Our Health with Hi-Potency Synthetic Vitamins?”, https://www.organicconsumers.org/news/vitamin-poisoning-are-we-destroying-our-health-hi-potency-synthetic-vitamins, (accessed Dec. 21, 2016)

[10] Fotherby MD, Williams JC, Forster LA, Craner P, Ferns GA. Effect of vitamin C on ambulatory blood pressure and plasma lipids in older persons. J Hypertens. 2000 Apr;18(4):411-5.

[11]Romieu I, Sienra-Monge JJ, Ramirez-Aguilar M, et al. Antioxidant supplementation and lung functions among children with asthma exposed to high levels of air pollutants. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2002 Sep 1;166(5):703-9.

[12]Afkhami-Ardekani M, Shojaoddiny-Ardekani A. Effect of vitamin C on blood glucose, serum lipids & serum insulin in type 2 diabetes patients. Indian J Med Res. 2007 Nov;126(5):471-4.

[13] Jane E.Brody, “Taking to much vitamin C can be dangerous, study finds”, April 9, 1998,  http://www.nytimes.com/1998/04/09/us/taking-too-much-vitamin-c-can-be-dangerous-study-finds.html (accessed Dec.21, 2016).

[14]Asim K. Duttaroy, Aud Jørgensen, “Effects of kiwi fruit consumption on platelet aggregation and plasma lipids in healthy human volunteers”, Platelets (2004) 15(5), 287–292, doi: 10.1080/09537100410001710290.

[15] Zieve, MD, MHA, Isla Ogilvie, PhD,  A.D.A.M. Editorial team, “Vitamin C”, 2/2/2015, https://medlineplus.gov/ency/article/002404.htm, (accessed Dec.21, 2016).

Will the Real Vitamin C Please Stand Up: A Closer Look at the Most Controversial Vitamin

London must stand together in 2017 if its golden age is not to end

For three decades, with barely a blip, the UK capital has been going from strength to strength. Nothing has stunted its potency and growth, not the 7/7 bombings or the 2011 riots, not Black Monday or the 2008 global crash, not even the original Millennium Dome. Its economy drives and subsidises the rest of the country, its still-new tier of regional government – the mayoralty and the Greater London Authority (GLA) – has been a success and it has hosted a triumphant Olympic Games. Its population, after shrinking through years of managed decline, is now at an all-time high, and may hit 10 million by 2030. But London enters 2017 with a question mark after its name. Might its golden age be coming to an end?

After the fireworks, the New Year begins amid unaccustomed unease. The heavy, grey cloud above is Brexit, with major employers in an international city whose wealth has been built on financial services pondering their options for the future. Meanwhile, austerity, albeit moderated by Miliband-ish measures from Theresa May, continues to erode from below. It doesn’t lighten the general mood that armed police officers have become a routine feature of everyday London life. In all these circumstances optimism is essential, but staving off its opposite will require fortitude and skill.

The mayor, of course, has a big part to play in all of this. Sadiq Khan’s 2017 will involve the Labour man in unending nagging of and negotiating with the Conservatives in charge of national government, hoping to secure the best possible post-Brexit deal for the capital and, by extension, the country. His panel of Brexit advisors, bankers, accountants, Peter Mandelson and all, doesn’t delight those who think he’s insufficiently left-wing. But pragmatism is an essential mayoral art: if you want a bunch of Tories to take you seriously, you don’t surround yourself with Corbynites.

Policy delivery will begin with Khan hailing a freeze on those public transport fares that Transport for London (TfL) sets, but not the universal one some of his election campaign statements and a line in his manifesto claimed. Political opponents will attack him (again) for that, and for the demands he is making on TfL’s finances as a whole as his first mayoral budget, covering all GLA functions, comes under closer public scrutiny.

Khan’s new “hopper” fare, which enables bus passengers to catch two buses for the price of one during a 60 minute period, has given him – not to mention a lot of Londoners on low incomes – a quick early win. But this initiative, though welcome, needs to be seen in the context of falling bus ridership, something TfL can ill afford given its increasing dependence on fares revenue.

This, in turn, is a consequence of worsening road traffic congestion, which London’s economy could do without. Congestion also harms air quality, another issue the mayor has sought to make a fast start on. He is set to kick-off implementing his anti-pollution policies by introducing an emissions surcharge (the so-called “T-charge” on toxicity) on high-pollution vehicles entering the congestion charge zone early in 2017, but will be urged by critical friends to go further with his policies as a whole.

Holding down public transport fares is one part of a broader attempt to address London’s high cost of living, which leaves too many of its households, including around 40% of its children, struggling to make ends meet on unacceptably low pay and excluded from many of the city’s many riches. Housing costs are, famously, a huge factor in this and also hugely difficult to control. The mayor’s housing team has assembled a purposeful strategy for getting more homes built for sale, rent or a combination of both at prices ordinary Londoners can afford. Khan will hope to be able to boast of initial successes as he embarks on the vast task of trying to better match housing delivery to the city’s social and economic need. The backdrop to all this is the ongoing three-year monster mission of writing a new London Plan.

There are going to be tensions. Hammered by successive grant cuts and hampered by limits on their freedom to borrow to build, some of the capital’s boroughs, often Labour-run, are becoming ever more adroit at finding ways to meet at least some local “affordable” housing demand, but these can mean private sector partnerships involving publicly owned land that don’t always work as well as planned. The available alternatives – largely, small variations on doing nothing – aren’t all that attractive either.

Squeezed between the same rock and hard place we find shortages of school places and health and social care provision also having their impact at borough, and indeed neighbourhood level. Dynamic boroughs and the mayor alike are trying to get more more purchase on low-cost childcare and improving post-school skills training, as the city strives for greater autonomy in the running of its affairs.

A striking thing about the politics of London is the high degree of consensus about the benefits of devolving power over such things as welfare programmes, property taxes and infrastructure investment from Whitehall. Agreement crosses party lines and unifies business interests, social sector campaigners and more. There is strength in that solidarity. London will need every ounce of it to keep on prospering in 2017 and beyond.

London must stand together in 2017 if its golden age is not to end

The Tories lurch left and right without a clue where they really stand | Gaby Hinsliff

If Ed Balls didn’t have the medium of dance through which to express his feelings, he might be forgiven for wanting to punch a wall right now. So perhaps we can expect a more than usually vigorous turn from the former shadow chancellor on this week’s Strictly Come Dancing. Imagine the frustration of losing a seat last May, only for some of your political thinking to live on, also in May. Theresa May, that is.

This has been a depressing, frightening week in UK politics; a time when genuinely ugly things have been said, then half-unsaid, but not forgotten. But it’s the worst possible time for progressives to abandon hope. May has not lurched right, or left, or towards the centre ground. She’s done all three.

She’s moved left into the kind of borrow-and-build, state-led economic strategy that Balls would recognise, and into an anti-fat cat rhetoric Ed Miliband absolutely did recognise, judging by his single sardonic tweet in response to hints of a clampdown on energy prices: “Marxist, anti-business interventionism imho [in my humble opinion]”.

But she’s also moved sharply rightwards on immigration, something Labour agonised over in the last parliament but couldn’t bring itself to do, even though it was clearly what many working-class voters wanted.

And all the time she’s talking of what she calls the “new centre ground”, although centre of gravity is perhaps closer to the mark; not some balanced ideological midpoint between left and right, but the great confusing expanse of political territory where those labels stop making sense, because public opinion seems to be left-ish on some things (believing big business must be screwing them over) but right-ish on social issues. And if that looks confusing and contradictory from the outside, imagine how it feels on the inside.

This week has revealed a government still interestingly unsure of its ground

May was right to point out this week how many politicians and journalists were wrong about Brexit. But her attack on the dreaded leftie liberal elite disguises the fact that they certainly weren’t alone in getting it wrong. Plenty of outers didn’t see victory coming either, judging by private conversations in the run-up to the referendum, and nor did many of May’s current cabinet.

Not long ago the health secretary, Jeremy Hunt, was earnestly telling us how Brexit would hurt the NHS, and Amber Rudd was socking it to leavers in the TV debate. What a difference a referendum makes. This week Hunt, an instinctive internationalist whose wife is Chinese, was trumpeting plans to train more British-born doctors instead of importing them – prompting a furious row over whether foreign doctors are being tacitly encouraged to leave.

Rudd, a socially liberal ex-journalist, meanwhile suggested companies be forced to publish data about how many foreign staff they employ. In a country happily relaxed about immigration, that might have sounded more pointless than sinister. In the current climate, she was accused of being one step away from handing out yellow stars.

And yes, it’s scary stuff. But it also falls apart surprisingly quickly when prodded, and therein lies the ray of hope: this isn’t a cabinet of racists. It’s a cabinet peppered with people terrified of being exposed as closet liberal elitists, clumsily second-guessing what people they’d once have regarded as racists think, only without the instinctive feel that true believers often have for when they’re going too far. Push back hard enough, and they give surprisingly fast.

Within hours, May was clarifying that she didn’t actually want to send any foreign-born doctors back, while Rudd was on radio explaining that her plan wasn’t necessarily going to happen – and the odds, given the instant backlash from business, are certainly against it. (When ministers asked firms to publish minimal and anonymised data about male and female salaries as part of its equality strategy, the furious complaints about red tape and unfair bad publicity nearly killed the plan. If they’re that afraid of a little light feminist critique, imagine how chief executives feel about ending up on some far-right hit list of supposedly “unpatriotic” businesses reliant on Romanians.)

If Rudd wants to see how divisive this idea might prove in the workplace, meanwhile, she could simply look down the cabinet table. Boris Johnson was born in New York, lived there until he was five, and until last year held dual American and British passports. Should May have hired a homegrown foreign secretary? Or should we be embarrassed to live in the sort of country where anyone would raise that question?

The damage is done now, of course. Some people will have heard the dog whistle all right, but missed the dogs being called off later. Sadly, those who have felt unwelcome here since June may simply feel more so. But the whole episode reveals a government still interestingly unsure of its ground, precisely because much of this isn’t naturally its ground; it’s still feeling its way in circumstances most ministers didn’t anticipate.

That means it can be shamed, it can be reasoned with, and now its defences have been tested properly its weak spots are more obvious – as are the places where arrows ping helplessly off its armour. And Labour ought to know, because it’s been there.

There was more than a whiff of Blue Labour – the economically leftwing, socially rightwing, heavily nostalgic movement that was fashionable for a while under Ed Miliband – about May’s agenda this week, and that provides some interesting clues as to where it might get unstuck. Team Miliband liked Blue Labour’s ideas on economic justice but balked at their awkward, uncomfortable messages on immigration (with the arguable exception of Balls, who was raising concerns over freedom of movement back in 2010).

Judging by the wild applause for every mention of Brexit in Birmingham, and the silence when May promised to protect workers’ rights, Red Toryism has a similar problem in reverse. But if the 2015 election result is anything to go by, cherrypicking the easy bits and ignoring the harder ones doesn’t work; like trying to dance a waltz without a partner, people can see something’s missing.

Trying to keep both ideologically warring halves of the package together, however, is like trying to waltz with someone who’s trying to make you dance the Charleston. Blue Labour excelled at capturing what angry voters thought, but could never quite turn it into coherent policy. Judging by last week, the Red Tories are about to find out how that feels.

The Tories lurch left and right without a clue where they really stand | Gaby Hinsliff

Feel You Cannot Stand To Do Some thing? Demonstrate By yourself Wrong

No matter whether you feel you can not stand one far more day at the office, or you are convinced you can not stand one more minute of a dull seminar, really do not give into people ideas proper away. In reality, the much more you believe you cannot stand anything, the much more crucial it is to show oneself wrong.

Just since you consider you cannot stand it, does not indicate it is correct. (See my preceding report on The 10 Pondering Errors that Will Hold You Back in Existence). You’re very likely in a position to tolerate much more than you give yourself credit for. Nonetheless, the much more you consider you cannot perhaps tolerate another 2nd, the worse you’re most likely to come to feel and the much more these ideas will influence your conduct.

Believe 1st (Photo credit: jDevaun)

Examples of “I Cannot Stand It” 

Picking to steer clear of unpleasant feelings gives some fast quick-term relief, but avoidance can lead to extended-term consequences. Right here are some techniques that thinking, “I cannot stand this,” leads to difficulties for folks:

•  If you consider, “I cannot stand getting hungry,” you may eat frequently to avoid any likelihood that you’ll experience hunger. You might commence consuming an further snack just before you head into a meeting or you might stop to pick up an added bite to eat prior to your commute residence. Even when you really do not come to feel hungry, you may decide not to consider any chances and consume as a preventative measure. Sooner or later, your waistline could suffer the consequences.

•  Thinking, “I can not stand my job any longer,” will probably result in you to only target on all the unfavorable facets of your perform. You could ignore something optimistic about your job and persuade oneself that you need to quit right away.

•  When you feel, “I cannot stand going to people boring department meetings,” you are not very likely to appear for answers that could make the meeting much more productive. Alternatively, you could get started to stay away from the meetings altogether or waste time complaining to other folks about how much you dislike the meetings.

Why Beliving Your Self-Doubt is a Negative Notion

Just since you come to feel unpleasant, doesn’t mean you require to give up appropriate away. Here are the causes why you must prove to oneself that you really don’t need to have to end carrying out one thing just simply because you consider you cannot stand it:

•  Thinking you can not stand anything influences how you truly feel. You are very likely to really feel a sense of dread, anxiety, or even anger as you approach some thing that you think you can’t tolerate. As you knowledge much more negative feelings about one thing, your thoughts are likely to turn into exaggeratedly unfavorable.

•  If you give up every time you can not stand something, you aren’t probably to attain your goals. It is likely that you tremendously underestimate your capabilities. You may possibly sell yourself quick if you give up each and every time you believe you can not stand something.

•  Giving up when the going will get tough can turn out to be a negative habit and it can alter how you see by yourself. You may begin to believe you’re weak or that you are a failure simply because you can not appear to stick with items long sufficient to see optimistic final results.

Demonstrate to By yourself You Can Stand It

When you consider you can’t stand one thing any longer, prove yourself wrong. If you feel you cannot stand anything for yet another minute, stick close to for two minutes just to show to yourself that you can do it. If you think you cannot stand 1 a lot more week at the workplace, resolve to perform at least two far more weeks. 

That does not indicate you require to perform at a job you dislike for 30 many years just for the sake of it, but by doing work 1 day longer than you thought you could, you can prove to oneself that you are stronger than you give your self credit score for. If you pick to quit your occupation, it’s crucial to recognize you quit by choice, not due to the fact you couldn’t stand the discomfort any longer.

When you conduct behavioral experiments that demonstrate your contemplating wrong, sooner or later, it will modify the way you feel. You’ll start to see that you have far more potential than you ever even imagined. You’ll be much less probably to think, “I can not do that.” Instead, you’ll recognize all the issues that you can pick to do.

Feel You Cannot Stand To Do Some thing? Demonstrate By yourself Wrong

Stand up three hours a day for rewards of 10 marathons, says best medic

Creating for the BBC’s Scrubbing Up, he explained: “There is an overwhelming weight of evidence that humans want to be energetic.

“And I’m not talking about hrs in the health club or jogging miles around the nearby park, but basically avoiding the kind of sedentary behaviour that sees us paying hours of our day sat in front of a computer, at the wheel of vehicle or viewing the gogglebox.

“It’s time to stand up for oneself. Virtually.

“There is now tremendous proof that merely standing makes massive distinctions to your health.”

Dr Loosemore, who was chief health care officer for England at the 2010 Commonwealth games, insists that little way of life modifications to incorporate low-level exercising can transform lives with lively people cutting their danger of heart condition by forty per cent.

Large blood strain and the threat of breast cancer can be practically halved although the threat of colon cancer is diminished by far more than 60 per cent by taking moderate exercising, he unveiled.

He also claimed exercising could ease depression as successfully as Prozac and expert behavioural therapy and ward off Alzheimer’s illness.

“If you are feeling unfit or body fat, or as well more than the hill to walk up even a modest a single, it truly is time to consider once again,” he stated.

“Low-degree exercise, even frequently getting off your seat, can adjust your lifestyle forever.”

He additional: “Activity is not only much more effective than drugs for most conditions, but can act as a cure-all.”

But Dr Loosemore warned that government targets might be actively placing people off making an attempt to modify their habits with just 7 per cent of males and four per cent of ladies adhering to them.

He explained: “It is probably not surprising that the Uk has one particular of the highest levels of weight problems in the world.

“Every action, even a single stage on a stair or standing up for a handful of seconds, can place you on a optimistic path to better health.”

“So the governments’ suggestions are not just failing to motivate the population to enhance their bodily activity, but are seemingly acting as a good disincentive to folks to participate at all.

“For a lot of of the population, thirty minutes of moderate exercise is deemed impractical or unobtainable, so the concept that getting much more bodily to improve prolonged-phrase health is ignored or dismissed.

“Most of us do not have the time, energy or inclination to make the hard work, so the suggestions are not just failing to engage the population, but are positively discouraging folks to participate at all.”

He urged the government to make efforts to educate individuals how even a tiny volume of exercise can aid boost their wellness.

Stand up three hours a day for rewards of 10 marathons, says best medic

Egyptian physician to stand trial for female genital mutilation in landmark case

A medical professional is to stand trial in Egypt on costs of female genital mutilation on Thursday, the 1st case of its kind in a country where FGM is illegal but widely accepted.

Activists warned this week that the landmark case was just one modest stage in the direction of eradicating the practice, as villagers openly promised to uphold the tradition and a neighborhood police chief stated it was near-unattainable to stamp out.

Raslan Fadl, a physician in a Nile delta village, is accused of killing 13-year-old schoolgirl Sohair al-Bata’a in a botched FGM operation last June. Sohair’s father, Mohamed al-Bata’a, will also be charged with complicity in her death.

Fadl denies the costs, and claims Sohair died due to an allergic reaction to penicillin she took for the duration of a process to eliminate genital warts.

“What circumcision? There was no circumcision,” Fadl shouted on Tuesday evening, sitting outside his residence the place Sohair died final summertime. “It is all manufactured up by these dogs’ rights individuals [human rights activists].”

In the subsequent village along, Sohair’s dad and mom had gone into hiding, according to their loved ones. Her grandmother – soon after whom Sohair was named – admitted an FGM operation had taken spot, but disapproved of the court case.

“This is her destiny,” stated the elder Sohair. “What can we do? It really is what God ordered. Practically nothing will assist now.”

According to Unicef, 91% of married Egyptian ladies aged amongst 15 and 49 have been subjected to FGM, 72% of them by medical doctors, even although the practice was created illegal in 2008. Unicef’s research suggests that help for the practice is steadily falling: 63% of girls in the same age bracket supported it in 2008, compared with 82% in 1995.

But in rural locations the place there is a reduced standard of schooling – like Sohair’s village of Diyarb Bektaris – FGM nevertheless attracts instinctive assistance from the neighborhood population, who believe it decreases women’s appetite for adultery.

“We circumcise all our youngsters – they say it is very good for our ladies,” Naga Shawky, a 40-12 months-outdated housewife, informed the Guardian as she walked along streets close to Sohair’s property. “The law will not stop anything at all – the villagers will carry on. Our grandfathers did it and so shall we.”

Nearby, Mostafa, a 65-year-outdated farmer, did not realise that genital mutilation had been banned. “All the women get circumcised. Is that not what’s supposed to occur?” explained Mostafa. “Our two daughters are circumcised. They are married and when they have daughters we will have them circumcised as nicely.”

Nearby help for Fadl, who is also a sheikh [elder] in his village mosque, remains high. “Most people will inform you he is a quite excellent man: will not harm him,” explained Reda el-Danbouki, the founder of the Women’s Centre for Advice and Legal Awareness, a local rights group that was the 1st to get up Sohair’s case. “If you asked folks about who is the greatest person to do this operation, they would even now say: Dr Raslan [Fadl].”

Most villagers said they imagined the practice was prescribed by Islamic law. But female genital mutilation is not described in the Qur’an and has been outlawed by Egypt’s grand mufti, 1 of the country’s most senior Islamic clerics. It is also practised in Egypt’s Christian communities – foremost activists to stress that it is a social issue rather than a religious one.

“It’s not an Islamic concern – it’s cultural,” said Suad Abu-Dayyeh, regional representative for Equality Now, a rights group that lobbied Egypt to follow through with Fadl’s prosecution. “In Sudan and Egypt the practice is widespread. But in most of the other Arab countries – which are mainly Muslim countries – individuals don’t feel of it as a Muslim issue. In truth, there has been a fatwa that bans FGM.”

Campaigners hope Sohair’s case would discourage other doctors from continuing the practice. But villagers in Diyarb Bektaris stated they could nonetheless easily find physicians prepared to do it in the nearby town of Agga, in which practitioners could earn up to 200 Egyptian lbs (roughly £16.70) an operation. “If you want to ban it properly,” explained Mostafa, the farmer, “you’d have to ban medical professionals as properly.”

Up the road in Agga, no physician would publicly admit to carrying out FGM operations, and mentioned the law acted as a deterrent. But 1 claimed FGM could be morally justified even if it brought on ladies bodily or psychological discomfort.

“It provides the woman far more dignity to get rid of [her clitoris],” mentioned Dr Ahmed al-Mashady, who stressed that he had by no means carried out the operation but claimed it was necessary to cleanse females of a dirty physique part.

“If your nails are dirty,” he explained in comparison, “never you cut them?”

A number of hundred metres away, sitting in his heavily fortified barracks, the local police chief agreed the practice necessary to finish. But Colonel Ahmed el-Dahaby claimed police could not operate proactively on the problem because FGM happened in secret. He also explained they were held back by the nuances of the Egyptian legal system – one thing that would shock individuals who argue police officers have readily contravened due approach in other more politicised cases.

“It truly is extremely hard to arrest a medical doctor,” said Dahaby. “Why? You do not know when precisely he is going to do this operation. In purchase to arrest him legally you have to have the papers from the prosecutor, and only then can you go. But you never know when the operations will get place, so you have to catch them in the act or it has to be reported by the father. And that is challenging simply because the father will deny what happened.”

In Sohair’s situation, her family members did initially testify that she died following an FGM operation but then changed their testimony a few days later, top the situation to be closed. It was only reopened following a triple-pronged stress campaign led by Reda el-Danbouki, Equality Now and Egypt’s state-run Nationwide Population Council.

Thursday’s hearing will most likely be short and procedural. In subsequent sessions, Sohair’s loved ones is anticipated to waive the manslaughter charges towards Fadl, soon after Dahaby said the two sides reached a substantial out-of-court compensation agreement.

But the family members has no say above the FGM fees levelled at the two Fadl and Sohair’s father – and the state will carry on to seek a conviction against them each. But whether or not such a result will serve as a main deterrent against FGM remains to be observed.

For Equality Now’s Suad Abu-Dayyeh, the solution is a systematic educational programme that would see campaigners usually visit Egypt’s countryside to begin a conversation about a topic that has previously never been questioned. “You need to have to go continuously into the communities. We need to locate a way of actually debating these issues with the villagers, the physicians and the midwives.”

And for the victims themselves, says Abu-Dayyeh, this method can not start quickly sufficient. “They ought to get pleasure from their sexual relations with their long term husbands. They are human beings.”

Additional reporting by Manu Abdo

Egyptian physician to stand trial for female genital mutilation in landmark case

Do plans for transforming principal care stand up to scrutiny? | Richard Vize

Ed Miliband is promising an appointment at a GP surgical treatment inside 48 hrs of in search of a consultation. Photograph: Lynne Cameron/PA Wire

The emphasis of the NHS and politicians is lastly shifting to where the transformation in healthcare demands to consider location – primary care companies. Who should commission them, how considerably income they must get and what they need to do are all being debated.

It is striking that 1 of Simon Stevens’ 1st actions as NHS England chief executive has been to tackle the paralysis in primary care improvement, by acceding to clinical commissioning group calls for a significantly greater function in establishing primary care. His invitation to CCGs to demonstrate how they would use additional powers to improve good quality and place their local NHS on a “sustainable path” is a major phase forward in turning the speak about shifting resources from hospitals to communities into action.

The shadow overall health minister, Andy Burnham, attacked the strategies simply because they open up the chance of GPs possessing a conflict of curiosity – the reason the 35,000 primary care contracts had been given to NHS England in the first place. But transparency and powerful oversight will be a key component of the exams NHS England will apply to the bids, and the contracts themselves may possibly nicely remain with its area teams, leaving the CCGs to concentrate on creating solutions and strengthening high quality. Wellness and wellbeing boards – for whom Burnham desires a a lot larger function – are the apparent selection for supplying regional oversight of CCG ideas.

This all generates a lot more governance spaghetti, but the time for organisational elegance is long past all that matters now is what performs. Offering CCGs more influence above principal care improvement is the appropriate issue to do. It speedily grew to become clear to every person – like NHS England – that location teams lack the capability, regional knowledge and major care expertise to develop and put into action ideas which would shift care from hospitals to communities.

With CCGs now in a position to range across major, community and secondary care – and signals from Stevens that they will soon have a larger part in commissioning professional providers as properly – they will now be capable to develop joined-up plans for most local services which ultimately commence to move sources.

Labour’s own massive thought for main care – unveiled on Monday – is firmly centred on electoral appeal and unburdened by information such as credible costings. Leader Ed Miliband stated that underneath Labour there would be a “same day consultation” for individuals with urgent difficulties, with all individuals entitled to a GP appointment within 48 hrs.

The party claimed it would expense £100m, to be paid for by cutting the bureaucracy developed by competitors. The outdated line that culling bureaucrats and lawyers is all which is needed to fund new providers may possibly pass muster for a press release, but it does not stand up to scrutiny.

Even if it did, the income is not adequate to increase the amount of GPs and practice nurses and adjust the way they operate – notably with greater use of technology – to safe the rapid entry for patients the get together is promising.

As the Royal University of Standard Practitioners factors out, it only amounts to about £10,000 per practice, which is going to make little inroad into the price of using additional clinicians. The RCGP claims the further value of delivering the kind of principal care services that everyone talks about is nearer £3bn, which would indicate rising the major care share of the NHS budget from 8% to eleven%. For as soon as, the college might not be exaggerating this averages at about £14m per CCG.

In the rush to broaden out-of-hospital care, basic practice should not be the unique focus for new investing. Hospital services need to be part of the out-of-hospital resolution, with their clinicians increasingly working in the community and the previous demarcations in between major, community and acute companies being taken down. It would be an terrible mistake if main care took the perspective that “it really is our turn now”. If we have discovered anything from the extreme investing on acute care, it must be that joined-up answers operate greatest.

Are you a member of our on the web local community? Join the Healthcare Specialists Network to receive normal emails and unique delivers.

Do plans for transforming principal care stand up to scrutiny? | Richard Vize

5 important policies on which Labour have to consider a stand

What’s at stake?
We are constructing fewer than half the quantity of homes we require and, partly as a end result, rates are soaring, notably in London and the south-east. In the 70s most government funds allocated to housing was invested on constructing and keeping properties now the vast vast majority is spent on housing benefit and lining the pockets of personal landlords. Tenants frequently get a raw deal, with large expenses and tiny safety of tenure.

The daring selection
Labour has said it wants to see 200,000 properties a yr becoming constructed by 2020. It has appointed Sir Michael Lyons to report on how this can be accomplished. It could go further and perhaps pledge to build a million homes by 2020, such as a batch of new towns. A daring choice could mean enabling councils to borrow a lot more, forcing developers to use land for creating and perhaps coupling this with new bargains for renters. Budgets for housing could be devolved to councils, providing them incentives to build far more, and move slowly away from spending their allocation on housing benefit.

The cautious alternative
The risk of permitting councils to borrow more is that the income displays up on government books and would invite Tory fees that Labour is becoming profligate. It may possibly keep away from this route and opt to place far more pressure on developers to create on or drop land, and enforce a tighter compulsory obtain regime for huge constructing projects. It might stick with its present 200,000 a yr target, whilst stating an ambition to go even more in excess of time.

Which way will they go?
Count on one thing daring on housing, such as plans for a amount of new towns and huge guarantees on the numbers of homes to be constructed. A policy could emerge that will function in tandem with Labour’s devolution agenda. Much more cash and electrical power could be handed out to local authorities if they create imaginative housebuilding strategies that take folks off housing benefit and out of bad worth accommodation, even though generating jobs in building into the bargain.

What is at stake?
Several parents cannot afford to go out to function due to the fact the price of childcare is also higher. In Scandinavian countries, this kind of as Denmark, where there is far more totally free childcare, it is argued that the economic system positive aspects total simply because much more mothers and fathers are cost-free to operate, creating much more tax revenue. A key challenge is how to pay the upfront costs of setting up a program of universal, or near-universal, free care, prior to the economic rewards make it fully or partly self-financing.

The bold selection
Labour has previously explained it will increase totally free childcare for 3- and 4-year-olds from 15 to 25 hours a week for operating parents. But if the celebration had been to make childcare its “big thought” and go for the family vote, while Tories court the grey vote, it could lengthen this promise to two-year-olds and probably one particular-12 months-olds, however the quick-phrase expense would run into billions. It could also supply even more subsidised care on best of the cost-free hrs for parents demanding a lot more.

The cautious alternative
Labour could stick to its recent programs, wary of the extra expense, even though producing a dedication to extending its supply in excess of the course of the subsequent parliament and beyond. The IPPR thinktank is soon to create a report on the price of free childcare that is likely to inform Labour’s decision.

Which way will they go?
The sums of cash are big. Whilst a Scandinavian model is appealing, the upfront expense appears prohibitive. Anticipate some boldness, with a dedication to going further in future.

three) Well being and social care

What is at stake?
The NHS now fees the country £95bn a yr. By 2020 that will have risen to £130bn. People are living longer and expecting ever greater treatment method, and the growing value of medicines and engineering puts much more pressure on budgets. A public service cost-free at the level of delivery for everyone and carrying out to very good requirements can’t be maintained with no significantly much more cash. The recent system is also inefficient: social care and NHS budgets are split, so social solutions have no economic incentive to attempt to keep men and women out of hospital (often the greatest alternative) since the expense of hospital care is met by the NHS, not them.

The bold selection
Labour has currently mentioned it will mix the health and social care budgets, which is daring. But this alone will not fill the economic chasm that is opening up. Ed Miliband could grasp the nettle and introduce a new “NHS tax” – raised via an boost in nationwide insurance coverage contributions – and promise that all the proceeds would be spent on health and social care. Alternatively, or in addition, he could introduce a 10% to 15% charge on estates to shell out for elderly care.

The cautious alternative
Labour could opt for a security 1st method and commit to boost paying on the NHS in real terms, and say that by merging overall health and social care budgets it will supply cost savings. The improved efficiency, it could argue, will be delivered since more individuals will be treated at residence at less price.

Which way will they go?
Gordon Brown’s hike in NI in 2002 to pay out for added NHS investing proved well-known. But an additional NI rise would be politically large-danger in a Miliband manifesto, notably for a get together accused of profligacy when final in workplace. Assume a cautious provide, but with a guarantee to review radical alternatives on how to finance healthcare for the future.

Commuters squeeze on to a crowded train at London’s Victoria station. Photograph: Dan Kitwood/Getty Pictures

four) Transport

What is at stake?
The method of franchising rail solutions to personal companies has not proved either well-liked or good value for passengers. Rail fares have soared and several personal operators have creamed off healthy revenue. Money created by the private sector has been extracted from the network and ended up in the pockets of shareholders, rather than currently being reinvested in deficient nationwide infrastructure. Help for the proposed Substantial Pace two line to the Midlands and the north will be better if coupled with a credible rail technique for the regions.

The daring option
Ed Miliband has currently mentioned he is interested in “innovative answers” for the railways, and has talked positively about the way the East Coast main line franchise has operated because it was brought back under state manage. If daring, he could announce the abolition of the bidding program for franchising and declare that all lines will come back underneath the auspices of a new GB Rail company as and when they expire. This could be mixed with a fares freeze to aid commuters in marginal seats, chiming with Labour’s message on the price of living crisis.

The cautious choice
If he opts to be defensive, Miliband could just let Directly Operated Railways – the organization created by the previous government in 2009 to get over when personal companies operating franchises fail – to bid against the personal sector and win contracts in potential.

This would be a nod to the argument that personal is not always very best. It would also shield Labour from accusations from the Conservatives that they are moving privatised industries back under government manage as portion of some giant lurch leftwards.

Which way will they go?
Labour could be daring on this. There is strong assistance between the public for a renationalisation of rail providers and folks have observed and travelled on nationalised railway operations that function well in other European nations, this kind of as  Germany and France.

If revenue from a GB Rail method have been reinvested in regional railways as element of a “nationwide renewal” approach, and commuters were presented with a fares freeze to boot, renationalisation could have true traction and prove to be a vote-winner.

five) Devolution

What’s at stake?
The UK’s economic system is unbalanced and is as well centred on London. The regions need to be empowered once again so the economic climate can advance nationally, as it was in the industrial revolution, rather than being divided into a rich south-east and the rest. This can only occur, devolutionists say, if power and income is devolved from the centre to the regions so that local authorities can reply to regional demands. Nearby companies will only survive in a time of austerity, it is argued, if they are locally planned and funded.

The bold alternative
Energy and funds could be devolved to eight or far more city areas, which would then be given far higher power to run their very own policies on everything from transport to welfare, operate, capabilities and housing. Former Tory cabinet minister Michael Heseltine recommended £70bn need to be devolved, while Miliband has talked of handing in excess of £20bn to regional regions. Labour could move closer to Heseltine’s figure as another portion of a approach of national renewal.

The cautious alternative
Politicians hardly ever like handing above electrical power or funds to others when they have struggled so hard to get their hands on it themselves. A shrunken, timid provide could see councils being invited to share manage over policies this kind of as transport and skills with Whitehall. But ultimate manage would rest with the centre.

Which way will they go?
Former transport secretary Lord Adonis is pushing devolution as component of his development evaluation. As a keen supporter of HS2, the proposed higher-pace line between London, Birmingham, Leeds and Manchester, he desires power and financial activity spread out of the south-east. Devolution is not a massive vote winner, but as element of a national renewal prepare it is crucial. Count on something really bold.

5 important policies on which Labour have to consider a stand

Campaigners urge George Osborne to stand firm on alcohol tax rises

Bottles of wine in a supermarket. Photograph: Sean Spencer/Alamy

Medical professionals and alcohol campaigners have written to the chancellor, George Osborne, urging him not to give in to industry stress to scrap yearly tax increases on alcohol in the up coming price range.

Sir Ian Gilmore, chair of the Alcohol Health Alliance and the Royal University of Physicians’ particular adviser on alcohol, stated he was concerned that Osborne had frozen the duty escalator on beer – “showing indicators that he is weakening on this resolve” – – and that the industry was campaigning to scrap it altogether.

“The government’s record has not been good on alcohol,” he mentioned. “The minimal unit pricing U-turn was a choice instance of failing to comply with in which the evidence lies. We know that value is the most important determinant of how significantly society drinks. In the absence of setting a sensible floor price, duty is the traditional way of doing it.”

The alliance lobbied for minimum unit pricing since it would boost the price of the strongest drinks above weaker drinks. “The way that cider is preferentially taken care of indicates that you can nevertheless buy a litre of white cider with 7.5% tax for next to nothing – virtually pocket money charges,” he mentioned.

David Cameron 1st backed minimum unit pricing and then transformed his thoughts. The alliance fears the government may cave in to business stress in excess of the duty escalator too.

The letter is signed by 24 members of the alliance, urging the chancellor to stand firm in the encounter of a campaign from the Wine and Spirit Trade Association, the Scotch Whisky Association and the TaxPayers’ Alliance.

Katherine Brown, director of the Institute of Alcohol Scientific studies, mentioned it would be madness for the government to give in to stress. “Scrapping the duty escalator would be going towards nevertheless another government dedication to tackle the low-cost alcohol that is creating mayhem on our streets and bringing our well being support to its knees.

“Moreover, creating alcohol more cost-effective poses a genuine danger to vulnerable groups such as young women. With nearly a third of female drinkers aged sixteen-24 consuming the equivalent of nine shots of vodka in a session each week, we want to be doing almost everything in our powers to curb excessive alcohol consumption, not encouraging it by decreasing the cost.”

The alliance says alcohol harm in the United kingdom expenses much more than £21bn every single yr, which is far more than double the total income collected from alcohol duties (£10bn). Alcohol bought in supermarkets and off-licences is 61% a lot more cost-effective than it was in 1980, it says.

Miles Beale, chief executive of the Wine and Spirit Trade Association, explained: “Most responsible customers would be outraged to find out that because the alcohol duty escalator was launched in 2008, tax on wine has improved by 50% and on spirits by 44%. Independent investigation from Ernst and Youthful has located that if the chancellor scraps the escalator in his approaching price range, this would improve public finances by £230m in 2014 alone and generate much more than 6,000 jobs.”

Campaigners urge George Osborne to stand firm on alcohol tax rises