Healthcare

How hardcore are you really?

Once again the pill testing argument will rear it’s ugly head after 14 Australia Day revelers were hospitalized at two events, the HTID and Electric Gardens concerts. 6 remain in critical condition. At what point will we hand responsibility over to ‘legal’ adults?

If voting age party-goers are caught with ‘illegal’ substances then charge them accordingly. If people don’t like the law then put action behind a proposal to change it. Despite police sniffer dogs, people smuggled in drugs in condoms and ziplock bags presumably hidden in the nether regions. Coffee grounds were used to throw off the scent.

The real question is if one is hospitalized, why should tax payers pick up the tab for their selfish, reckless behaviour? Would it be a deterrent to let them know that any medical treatment (likely expensive) would not be covered by the state? Put measures in place to ensure the bill is paid for out of future income tax or lowered dole payments. Then let these adults work out the risk reward ratio of taking illicit drugs. Instead of having OD survivors tell horrid tales, they might talk of the financial penalties that followed which have made life considerably tougher than going cold turkey.

If you take illegal pills, don’t say we didn’t warn you. Let’s see how hardcore you really are.” That should be the slogan. Flash up the average cost of an OD treatment on the big screens.

56mn abortions a year. Worth celebrating?

Virtue signaling. Lighting up monuments is the way progressives like to show how ‘woke’ they are. Usually towers and buildings have light thrown upon them after terrorists murder innocent civilians. It is the perfect way to show future terrorists that the West will continue to remain impotent.

Of course love trumps hate is a strategy for liberals. Would be terrorists undoubtedly have pangs of guilt when seeing a building lit up. Deep in their hearts, the defining factor in choosing not to eviscerate concert goers, spray AK-47 fire at cartoonists or run people down in trucks comes from seeing the masses splash French flags over social media avatars.

Still, how crass can NYC be to bathe skyscraper towers to celebrate abortion? Surprised they didn’t invite Michelle Wolf to do her abortion sketch on taxpayer dime in Central Park! What better display of a government acting in the interests of only some of its constituents.

By all means CM respects legislation introduced via democratic process. However is it necessary to champion the terminating of fetuses? Why not conduct a fireworks display for added effect? It is hard not to see it as anything other than an overt and deliberate slap in the face of the pro-lifers and the current administration. Just as easy to pass the legislation without flipping the bird.

Let’s look at the stats.

c.700,000 fetuses are terminated in America each year. Down from 1.4 million in 1990. Hardly stats to cheer about. Of course the arguments for a woman’s right to choose will always be thrown at pro-lifers. Yet allowing termination until birth?

Eurostat statistics on abortion reveal that Germany, France, UK, Spain and Italy alone terminate a combined 760,000 fetuses per annum. Across the EU-28 there are 1.25mn terminations. Without getting into a debate on abortion rights, the pure statistical number points to 20.4% of fetuses never make it out of the womb alive.

According to the Guttmacher Institute some 56 million abortions occur annually. Every. Single. Year. Think that WWII saw 50 million deaths in 6 years of conflict with wide spread use of lethal weapons. So abortions kill at a far higher rate than global conflict.

How ironic that a leftist professor at Birmingham City University, Kehinde Andrews, accused WWII RAF pilots of war crimes. On that logic what does that make abortion clinics? Safe houses?

Take a look at the following photos if you’re game and ask yourself whether abortion is something to celebrate? Once again, this piece isn’t a cry to exert control over women’s rights rather question society and its approach to taking more individual responsibility.

Or are we mistaken to think that the real reason NY lit up these monuments was to lament for all of the fetuses with heartbeats that never had a say in the very legislation that killed them the day before delivery?

Dill Testing

Pill testing. Yes, it is difficult to stop the youth of today popping drugs at rave concerts. If certain drugs like MDMA are illegal, why is it OK to turn a blind eye at the concert gate? If there is medical evidence to say taking MDMA is harmless then change the law. Sadly the tragic deaths of a handful of kids has shown this not to be the case. Overdoses and bad batches dispensed by nefarious actors.

Is the desire to resort to hallucinating narcotics so great that the government should back legislation to allow young kids to have their risky tablets tested?  Imagine if those asking for their pills to be tested were required to put their name down against the test? None would test! There would be outrage over a violation of privacy. Yet we the tax payer invariably foot the bill of the reckless behaviour should things go wrong. Perhaps attendees should be required to file their Medicare number alongside the pill test and pay higher premiums for willingly taking higher risks? Again, none would line up.

The arguments for pill testing surround removing the potentially deadly drugs off the market by creating a virtuous circle of warnings within the drug taking community. The idea is that they could make informed choices were pill testing made available and inform each other what to avoid. Research from Austria showed that 50% of those that got pill testing changed their consumption behaviours.  Sadly the other 50% did not. Other examples of positive outcomes from pill testing revolve around wider knowledge about what drug compounds are popular which helps medical and emergency services better prepare. There is a company in America which sells NARCAN which revives those that overdose from the dead. You can read more about that here.

The arguments for pill testing seem so strong that it is any wonder the government doesn’t go the whole hog and set up its own narcotic stall at these concerts to sell controlled substances directly to the public. Two MDMA tablets and a foil of heroin please. Are those bongs on special?

The stupidity with pill testing is in the word – “ILLEGAL”. If CM gets caught speeding, why shouldn’t I be as justified in saying I was acceleration testing my potentially lethal BMW to make sure the speedometer was accurate? No NSW Highway Patrol officer will grant clemency. I will be fined for breaking the law. Quite right too.

Then we get Greens MP Cate Faehrmann admitting she’s taken MDMA since her 20s. In her doing so we can now have an honest and open debate. Fantastic to have an elected official out herself as an illegal drug user. Is this the type of lived experience we should be basing policy off? How ironic she lambasts the zero tolerance policies of the NSW Government? It may well be costing lives but the measures to combat are proving ineffective.  That is the issue. Time to think outside the box.

Why not just have police controlled mandatory swab tests at exit, fully funded by the event organizer, who can impute that in the cost of the ticket? Those that show a positive sign to ‘illegal drugs’ are arrested and criminally charged. Simple. Make it clear well in advance that those caught for breaking the law go on a national register. Why shouldn’t employers be able to better screen their employees’ behaviours or and health insurers be able to more accurately assess their customers? If you are clean there is zero to worry about.

If we want to create a culture of stopping drugs, we won’t do it by applying soft measures. Rave concerts are a captive audience where drugs are smuggled in often unsavory ways to escape detection. Make it clear that the swabs are mandatory and one of two things will happen; the attendance will only be enjoyed by those prepared to be clean or the rave concerts will end.

Some will argue there will be a risk that rave concerts will go underground but in the day and age of cyber technology, it won’t be hard to track such events going forward. Make the penalties for organizers failing to register and apply for such concerts punishable by jail terms and multi million dollar fines.

If we truly don’t like the law, then let’s change it. Let’s not have two tier judicial systems that openly favour dangerous behaviour because it infringes on someone’s subjective right to listen to a rave concert completely off their rocker. Maybe that is the test – make these kids recall 50% of the music that were played. One can be rest assured most of them didn’t hear a thing.

Motorcycling reduces stress

According to a Harley-Davidson funded UCLA study, motorcycling reduces stress. The report findings were:

  • Riding a motorcycle decreased hormonal biomarkers of stress (cortisol) by 28%

  • On average, riding a motorcycle for 20 minutes increased participants’ heart rates by 11% and adrenaline levels by 27% —similar to light exercise

  • Sensory focus was enhanced while riding a motorcycle versus driving a car, an effect also observed in experienced meditators versus non-meditators

  • Changes in study participants’ brain activity while riding suggested an increase in alertness similar to drinking a cup of coffee.

CM already knew the benefits. Nice to have them confirmed.

UN hit with yet another scandal

Kết quả hình ảnh cho Michel Sidibé

Independent experts have concluded that UN AIDS Executive Director, Michel Sidibé,  has been responsible for creating a toxic environment that promoted “favoritism, preferment and ethical blindness.” Sidibé accepted no reponsibility for any sexual harassment, bullying or abuse of power that occured under his watch.

The investigation started after Sidibé’s deputy was accused of  forcibly kissing, groping and trying to drag a colleague into his Bangkok hotel room in 2015.

In a survey of the 670 staff members at the UN agency conducted by the independent investigators, 18 admitted they had experienced some form of sexual harassment in the previous year and a further 201 said they were on the wrong end of workplace abuse.

One staff member went on the record saying, “U.N.AIDS is like a predators’ prey ground…You have access to all sorts of people, especially the vulnerable: You can use promises of jobs, contracts and all sorts of opportunities and abuse your power to get whatever you want, especially in terms of sexual favors. I have seen senior colleagues dating local young interns or using U.N.AIDS resources to access sex workers.

UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres, who made it clear he had a zero tolerance policy with regards to sexual harassment when he took office,  has refused to fire him. Despite his term ending in January 2020, Sidibé has offered to quit in June 2019 in order to ensure a stable transition period! In what world does a person outed for turning a blind eye to such a poisonous culture get to leave on his own terms? Sacred cows.

Sidibe admitted in an email after the investigation was published, “not all of our staff, in all their diversity, are experiencing the inclusive work culture to which we aspire.” Choice words.

Why do governments continue to fund the UN when it shows time and time again that it operates without any form of governance or ethical code? Remember it wasn’t that long ago that certain people at the UN thought former Zimbabwean dictator Robert Mugabe would make a sensible ambassador for the World Health Organization (WHO). Why would any country seriously want to sign over sovereign powers to the UN with respect to the compact on migration? The UN isn’t fit to run anything of substance.

Why after all the scandals with the IPCC do people put faith in their ability to manage climate change summits? The Delinquent Teenager, written by Canadian investigative journalist Donna Laframboise chronicles how the IPCC participants are picked by governments, not for their scientific knowledge and expertise, but for their political connections and for “diversity.” You can read some of the ridiculous selection processes for lead authors here.

Note the UN promised to streamline. As CM noted 15 months ago,

“The latest U.N. regular budget, while superficially smaller than the previous budget, made no fundamental programmatic or structural adjustments—e.g., reducing permanent staff, freezing or reducing salaries and other benefits, and permanently eliminating a significant number of mandates, programs, or other activities—that would lower the baseline for future U.N. budget negotiations. Despite the Secretary-General’s proposal to eliminate 44 permanent posts, the 2012–2013 budget actually increased the number of permanent posts by more than a score compared with the previous budget. The failure to arrest growth in U.N. employment, salaries, and benefits is especially problematic because personnel costs account for 74% of U.N. spending according to the U.N.’s Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ). Without a significant reduction in the number of permanent U.N. posts or a significant reduction in staff compensation and related costs, real and lasting reductions in the U.N. regular budget will remain out of reach.”

Why are the 99.6% required to opt in for gender on birth certificates?

7D3A8E2F-A916-4B8E-B9EF-3CA73B95674D.jpeg

So Tasmania’s lower house has passed the motion to remove gender from birth certificates allowing people to choose what they identify with from age 16. Apart from the biological and genetic implications, one question is why must the majority opt in as opposed to the minority opting out? It can only be viewed as a form of constructed  re-education.

According to the ABS Census of 2016, only 0.4% identify as other than male or female. 10,000 out of 24 million. Therefore 99.6% are comfortable with traditional biologal gender.

What are the risks? At what point will legislation be tied to the use of puberty blockers? We can’t rule out some parents might try to encourage their young child to associate with the opposite gender?  It has already happened in the US. Parents will know that it is not hard to manipulate a 10yo. It is not to rule out completely that a child may truly identify as the opposite of biological gender but statistically it would be improbable to suggest it is a majority or all. So to dispense puberty blockers under false pretenses is a dangerous risk. Assuming a 10yo is of sound peace of mind to take such drugs, why not give them the ability to vote?! Effectively that is the decision making process being put forth. It is ludicrous.

Assume a child is coerced by guardians/parents (even if a small subset) into believing they are the opposite sex than biological gender and get government permission to take puberty blockers. We do not have enough empirical evidence to know if terminating these drugs will automatically lead to a natural resumption of puberty.

Scientific research has noted that side effects of puberty suppression hormones can lead to arrested bone growth, decreased bone accretion, can prevent full organization and maturation of the brain, cause sterility, coronary/cardiovascular disease, elevated blood pressure and lead to breast cancer. Hey, it is worth it for inclusion, right?

That’s a horrible set of risks to put on a child who might potentially grow out of gender dysphoria. That child’s life could be irrevocably ruined for the sake of ideology determined by those who shouldn’t be in a position to enforce such directives.

The Gender Identity Development Service in the United Kingdom saw a 2,000% increase in referrals over seven years—from 94 children in 2009/2010 to 1,986 in 2016/2017. Is this a case of creating a market to allow people to file for  gender dysphoria? Note this is not to cast aspersions on those who may properly suffer from the condition.

Hruz, Mayer, and McHugh wrote in a Supreme Court brief filed in the Gavin Grimm case that most-cited studies conclude most children with gender dysphoria come to embrace their birth sex but caution hormone therapy often solidifies a child’s gender dysphoria.

800 children in the UK aged as young as 10 are taking puberty blockers. Are we buying time or merely arresting development? The risks seem more like a concerted  push for institutionalized child abuse.

Ultimately who is the arbiter to determine between whether a child might be confused or properly gender dysphoric? Get it wrong and that life might be irreparably damaged. But hey, as long as it was done for the sake of progressive goals, such sacrifices are all in the name of diversity, no?

Tommy trouble

「british tommy propaganda」の画像検索結果

It seems the UK Armed Forces are finding it difficult to recruit their own. So much so that they have lifted a 5-yr waiting period for Commonwealth citizens to join up. The National Audit Office states the armed forces are suffering the worst shortage of new recruits since 2010, being short 8,200 from desired levels. Therefore Aussies, Canadians, Indians and other Commonwealth citizens can sign up.

According to official Ministry of Defence (MOD) in the year leading to November 2017 1,759 of the 15,325 regular troops quit  because their time was up. Nearly half (7,439 ) quit early because of worsening conditions and falling morale. 3,325 were kicked out on disciplinary grounds and another 2,337 were medically discharged.

The MOD’s UK Regular Armed Forces Continuous Attitude Survey 2015 revealed,

-The number of personnel stating that they are dissatisfied with Service life has risen to 32%, up from 27% in 2014. Not a good start.

-There has been a fall in the number of personnel reporting that they are proud to be in their Service, from 81% in 2014 to 77% in 2015.

-25% “state that they plan to leave as soon as they can, or have put in notice to leave” (+9% on 2011).

-Satisfaction with pension benefits has dropped 18% since 2011

– Less than a third (27%) of Service personnel agree that the level of compensation is enough

-In 2015, job security was the top retention factor, followed by dental and healthcare provision, pension and opportunities for sport.

  • Individual morale 40% (-6% on 2011)
  • Unit morale 21% (-6% on 2011)
  • Service morale 14% (-4% on 2011)
  • Service life satisfaction 47% (-10% on 2011)
  • Job satisfaction 56% (-8% on 2011)

UK morale.png

Apart from the appalling trajectory of morale, it is clear that care once out of the military doesn’t fare much better.

While the MoD total budget will increase from GBP23bn to GBP50bn by 2020, data about how it is spent is highly opaque. More is learnt by some of the history surrounding the treatment of Tommies.

Support of  veterans has been so lacking that charities such as Help for Heroes has been active picking up the shortfall. It raises over GBP30 million per annum to support the 2,500 British veterans discharged for medical reasons every year to cope with civilian life.

Despite the American Psychiatric Association acknowledging PTSD in 1980, it took the UK another five years to officially recognize PTSD after the sharp increase in veterans suffering from mental health issues post the Falklands War of 1982. Of the 30,000 troops that were sent to fight, the UK armed forces allocated only one psychiatrist to the far away battlefield.

The problem was compounded in the 1990s with widespread closures of UK military hospitals as a cost cutting measure. Seven of the eight military hospitals had been shut or transferred to the NHS by 1999.

The UK Ministry of Defence (MOD) wrote in its recent report on those deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan about how low suicide rates were. It stated, “While rates of mental disorder are lower in the military (3.1%) than the general population (4.5%), the MOD routinely carries out research into those who have served on large scale combat operations, in order to more accurately assess the effects of deployment.” Note there is no data on veteran suicide in the UK.

The UK MOD’s ‘Defence People Mental Health and Wellbeing Strategy’ is supposedly in place to challenge the stigma surrounding mental health issues, to ensure that all who serve, and have served, can enjoy a state of positive physical and mental health. The MOD has committed £22 million a year on mental health with the establishment of two 24/7 helplines for serving personnel and veterans. How is it a charity funds 1.5x what the government does?

To put that in context, Australia spends 20x this amount every year just on veterans counseling services. America, albeit a larger veteran base, spends $9bn on mental health for its soldiers.

One wonders why the MOD doesn’t listen to the surveys and act. Then it wouldn’t have to go down the mercenary route.