Mortality levels dropping with better treatment, but concern remains over care for older sufferers The incidence of cancer in the UK continues to rise as the population ages, but death rates are falling with improved diagnosis and treatment, official figures suggest. Statistics on newly-diagnosed cases and mortality published by the Office for National Statistics (pdf) on Thursday reveal about 153,800 men and 152,300 women were told they had cancer each year during 2006-08. That is a rate of 421 per 100,000 and 365 per 100,000 respectively; the rate over 2005-7 was 415 and 359. The latest mortality figures – 81,000 men (212 per 100,000) and 74,000 women (153 per 100,000) each year — represented slight drops on the previous rates of 214 and 154. Of all cancers, breast cancer has the highest incidence for women (123 cases per 100,000) and prostate cancer for men (100 per 100,000). Wales had the highest average annual cancer incidence rate for men (467 per 100,000) and Scotland for women (398 per 100,000) – although more than 80% of all diagnoses and deaths are in England. Concerns remain across the UK about cancer mortality rates compared with those in other countries, and a study on Wednesday warned that older people still faced “age-bias” in treatment for cancer. The Department of Health in England is launching pilot schemes to try to improve access to cancer services, and Mike Richards , its cancer director, has said that he expects the incidence of smoking-related cancers to tumble now the UK’s “tobacco epidemic” is past. Further changes in lifestyle, including lower alcohol consumption and more exercise, are also needed to reduce risks of other cancers. Cancer Health Scotland Wales James Meikle guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Dominic Grieve makes statement to MPs saying evidence that David Kelly took his own life is ‘overwhelmingly strong’ A fresh inquest into the death of Dr David Kelly has been rejected by the attorney general, Dominic Grieve, after he concluded there was “overwhelmingly strong” evidence that the government weapons inspector took his own life. In a statement to MPs Grieve called for a line to be drawn under the matter as he criticised the “imaginative speculation” of those who have suggested in the eight years since Kelly’s death that he was murdered. Catherine McKinnell, the shadow solicitor general, immediately endorsed Grieve’s decision as she praised the “comprehensive nature” of his inquiry in which he asked independent experts to review evidence supplied by a group of doctors who questioned the cause of death. Grieve, who said there was no evidence to suggest a cover-up or a conspiracy in the death of Kelly, told MPs he had found no evidence to change the original conclusion of the Hutton inquiry, which confirmed the causes of death in the death certificate. The causes were, firstly, haemorrhage and incised wounds to the left wrist and, secondly, co-proxamol ingestion and coronary artery atherosclerosis. The attorney general told MPs: “Having given all the material that has been sent to me the most careful consideration, I have concluded that the evidence that Dr Kelly took his own life is overwhelmingly strong. Further, there is nothing I have seen that supports any allegation that Dr Kelly was murdered or that his death was the subject of any kind of conspiracy or cover-up. “In my view no purpose would be served by my making an application to the high court for an inquest. Indeed, I have no reasonable basis for doing so. There is no possibility that at an inquest a verdict other than suicide would be returned.” The attorney general dismissed those who have suggested that Kelly did not take his own life. He said: “The suggestion that Dr Kelly did not take his own life is not based on positive evidence as such but on a criticism of the findings of the investigation and inquiry. It began with the views of a number of doctors – undoubtedly expert in their own areas of practice but not qualified as forensic pathologists – that Dr Kelly could not have died from loss of blood from the wounds described.” As part of his investigations Grieve consulted Lord Hutton, the chairman of the original inquiry into the death of Kelly, whose body was found in woodland close to his Oxfordshire house on the morning of 18 July 2003. The attorney general also consulted Nicholas Gardiner, the Oxfordshire coroner whose inquest into Kelly’s death was transferred to the Hutton inquiry in August 2003, and Dr Nicholas Hunt, the pathologist who carried out the original postmortem investigation. Grieve said the doctors who questioned the cause of death did not have access to the material on which those conclusions had been reached. But he added: “Once such a doubt had been created those who believed Dr Kelly was murdered looked for contradictions in the evidence given to Lord Hutton, for matters that were apparently not followed up by the police and for any other issues that might be considered as suspicious.” Grieve dismissed those who read significance into the position in which Kelly’s body was found after all witnesses, bar two, gave evidence that he was found lying on his back. The two witnesses said his body was propped against a tree. The attorney general said that honest witnesses can recall the same scene differently. Grieve said: “From this minor contradiction came the view that the body must have been moved. If the body had been moved, why, by whom and for what purpose? “This issue has proven a fertile ground for imaginative speculation to take over. In fact, all of the evidence provided by the very careful forensic examination of the scene at the time – and the detailed review which, exceptionally, I have undertaken – supports the view that Dr Kelly died where he was found and from the causes determined. “There is no evidence I have seen that would suggest any other explanation or that suggests any cover up or conspiracy whatsoever.” Grieve extended his sympathy to the Kelly family for their loss and the continuing “intrusive publicity over such a long period of time”. He said: “They have borne that load with great fortitude and dignity. While I realise that it will always be impossible to satisfy everyone I would hope for their sakes that a line can now be drawn under this matter.” David Kelly Hutton report Iraq Dominic Grieve Nicholas Watt guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
The director of this year’s Meltdown festival at the Southbank Centre is joined by the Leisure Society for a world exclusive performance of a newly written track, SANE Read much more about Meltdown here Andy Gallagher Elliot Smith Ben Kape
Continue reading …The director of this year’s Meltdown festival at the Southbank Centre is joined by the Leisure Society for a world exclusive performance of a newly written track, SANE Read much more about Meltdown here Andy Gallagher Elliot Smith Ben Kape
Continue reading …
Paper agrees to publish apology after false claims in about 80 articles and Justice for Baby P campaign The Sun has agreed to pay undisclosed compensation and apologised unreservedly to a social worker over the publication of false allegations about her role in the Baby P tragedy. In a statement read out in the high court in London on Thursday, the paper’s publisher, News International subsidiary News Group Newspapers, also agreed to publish an apology in print and online. Sylvia Henry, a social worker in the London borough of Haringey for 23 years, was accused in articles published in the Sun of being “grossly negligent” in her handling of Peter Connelly’s case and that she was “thereby to blame for his appalling abuse and death”, the high court heard. Henry’s solicitor, Daniel Taylor, told Mr Justice Eady the newspaper also said she had shown no remorse for these failings and was “shameless and had ducked responsibility for Peter’s death”. In a series of articles published over four months from November 2008, the Sun also alleged that Henry was lazy and “had generally shown an uncaring disregard for the safety of children, even in cases where they obviously required urgent protection”. The false allegations are understood to have been published in about 80 articles and Henry was also named in the Sun’s Justice for Baby P campaign, which called for Haringey social services staff it alleged were responsible for Connelly’s death to be sacked and barred from any future work with children. The Sun gathered 1.6m signatures for its petition, which was delivered to Downing Street. Taylor said the newspaper “unreservedly accepts that there is no justification for any of the allegations”. “The Sun accepts that Ms Henry was not at fault or to blame in any way for anything done by Haringey social services that may have contributed to Peter’s terrible abuse and death,” he added. “They accept that she did her very best for Peter and particularly that she made repeated efforts to have him kept safe by being placed in foster care rather than being returned to the care of his mother.” Taylor said the Sun had agreed to publish in the newspaper and online its unreserved apology to Henry for the “distress that she has been caused”. He told the judge the newspaper “will compensate her and will pay her legal costs”. Ben Beabey, solicitor for News Group Newspapers, said: “The Sun fully accepts that the claimant played no part and bears no responsibility for the circumstances surrounding the death of Peter Connelly and that she did her best for him. The Sun apologises to Ms Henry.” Henry accepted compensation and apologies in 2010 from the London Evening Standard, Daily Mirror and Independent over the publication of false allegations about her role in the Baby P case. •
Continue reading …Paper agrees to publish apology after false claims in about 80 articles and Justice for Baby P campaign The Sun has agreed to pay undisclosed compensation and apologised unreservedly to a social worker over the publication of false allegations about her role in the Baby P tragedy. In a statement read out in the high court in London on Thursday, the paper’s publisher, News International subsidiary News Group Newspapers, also agreed to publish an apology in print and online. Sylvia Henry, a social worker in the London borough of Haringey for 23 years, was accused in articles published in the Sun of being “grossly negligent” in her handling of Peter Connelly’s case and that she was “thereby to blame for his appalling abuse and death”, the high court heard. Henry’s solicitor, Daniel Taylor, told Mr Justice Eady the newspaper also said she had shown no remorse for these failings and was “shameless and had ducked responsibility for Peter’s death”. In a series of articles published over four months from November 2008, the Sun also alleged that Henry was lazy and “had generally shown an uncaring disregard for the safety of children, even in cases where they obviously required urgent protection”. The false allegations are understood to have been published in about 80 articles and Henry was also named in the Sun’s Justice for Baby P campaign, which called for Haringey social services staff it alleged were responsible for Connelly’s death to be sacked and barred from any future work with children. The Sun gathered 1.6m signatures for its petition, which was delivered to Downing Street. Taylor said the newspaper “unreservedly accepts that there is no justification for any of the allegations”. “The Sun accepts that Ms Henry was not at fault or to blame in any way for anything done by Haringey social services that may have contributed to Peter’s terrible abuse and death,” he added. “They accept that she did her very best for Peter and particularly that she made repeated efforts to have him kept safe by being placed in foster care rather than being returned to the care of his mother.” Taylor said the Sun had agreed to publish in the newspaper and online its unreserved apology to Henry for the “distress that she has been caused”. He told the judge the newspaper “will compensate her and will pay her legal costs”. Ben Beabey, solicitor for News Group Newspapers, said: “The Sun fully accepts that the claimant played no part and bears no responsibility for the circumstances surrounding the death of Peter Connelly and that she did her best for him. The Sun apologises to Ms Henry.” Henry accepted compensation and apologies in 2010 from the London Evening Standard, Daily Mirror and Independent over the publication of false allegations about her role in the Baby P case. •
Continue reading …
Ofqual’s chief tells exam boards that latest series of errors and rogue questions in AS and GCSE papers are unacceptable The qualification regulator is investigating six errors that have appeared in exam papers this summer, it has emerged. The latest error was found in a geography AS-level paper set by the exam board AQA. A graph showing the velocity of a river was incorrectly labelled as 0.5 rather than 0.05. The regulator has already written to exam boards warning them to ensure their papers do not contain errors. It said four of the errors being investigated were in AS-level papers and two were in GCSE papers. In one case, all the answers were wrong to a multiple-choice question in a biology AS-level paper set by Edexcel. The question was worth one mark out of a possible 425 and the board has promised that markers will adjust scores to ensure no candidate is disadvantaged. In another case, a business studies paper set by the AQA exam board left out crucial information so pupils were unable to answer one question, it emerged last month. The question, worth three marks, asked students about the profits that a fictional chocolate company was making, but examiners failed to include all the information about the company. In another, the OCR exam board included an “impossible” question in a maths AS exam. Students were asked to solve an equation without the information needed to do so. In her letter to exam boards, Glenys Stacey, Ofqual’s chief executive, wrote: “The recent run of exam errors are disappointing and unacceptable. While the vast majority of question papers taken so far have been free from error, there have been a number of question papers that have included errors. We take instances like this very seriously. I am calling on awarding organisations to take steps now to protect students from further disruption and anxiety.” Students fear the time wasted on rogue questions may mean they fail to achieve the grades they need for places at their preferred universities. One student who took the business studies paper told a tutoring website the exam started “with a bang. Then came the killer blow – I wasted quite a bit of time looking for the information.” He had answered the rest of the paper “in an agitated, nervous manner”. Another suggested a boycott of the exam boards on thestudentroom.co.uk website. “Nothing can rectify these mistakes except re-running the paper. And when will exam boards stop making these stupid msitakes [sic]. University places DEPEND on these exams!! It seems as if no-one actually checks these papers. Maybe we could boycott AQA and OCR until they re-run the papers??” AS-levels GCSEs Jessica Shepherd guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Privileged NYT Columnist Tom Friedman Calls for People to Work Less, Own Less in Name of Planet
June 9, 2011 No CommentGood news, we’re doomed, says New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman in Wednesday’s ” The Earth Is Full .” (Has the globe-trotting Friedman never been to Texas?) But we can still save ourselves eventually, as long as we realize that ” the consumer-driven growth model is broken and we have to move to a more happiness-driven growth model, based on people working less and owning less.” But does that “own less” solution include the privileged columnist as well? You really do have to wonder whether a few years from now we’ll look back at the first decade of the 21st century — when food prices spiked, energy prices soared, world population surged, tornados plowed through cities, floods and droughts set records, populations were displaced and governments were threatened by the confluence of it all — and ask ourselves: What were we thinking? How did we not panic when the evidence was so obvious that we’d crossed some growth/climate/natural resource/population redlines all at once? “The only answer can be denial,” argues Paul Gilding, the veteran Australian environmentalist-entrepreneur, who described this moment in a new book called “The Great Disruption: Why the Climate Crisis Will Bring On the End of Shopping and the Birth of a New World.” “When you are surrounded by something so big that requires you to change everything about the way you think and see the world, then denial is the natural response. But the longer we wait, the bigger the response required. But fear not, Friedman argued, a crisis is coming that will make action inevitable. We will not change systems, though, without a crisis. But don’t worry, we’re getting there. We’re currently caught in two loops: One is that more population growth and more global warming together are pushing up food prices; rising food prices cause political instability in the Middle East, which leads to higher oil prices, which leads to higher food prices, which leads to more instability. At the same time, improved productivity means fewer people are needed in every factory to produce more stuff. So if we want to have more jobs, we need more factories. More factories making more stuff make more global warming, and that is where the two loops meet. Friedman wrote a book on climate change called “Hot, Flat and Crowded,” and penned this piece of paranoia in an October 2009 column : “…we never know when the next emitted carbon molecule will tip over some ecosystem and trigger a nonlinear climate event — like melting the Siberian tundra and releasing all of its methane, or drying up the Amazon or melting all the sea ice in the North Pole in summer.” Friedman forwarded Gilding’s anti-capitalistic idea, dressed in green: We will realize, he predicts, that the consumer-driven growth model is broken and we have to move to a more happiness-driven growth model, based on people working less and owning less. “How many people,” Gilding asks, “lie on their death bed and say, ‘I wish I had worked harder or built more shareholder value,’ and how many say, ‘I wish I had gone to more ballgames, read more books to my kids, taken more walks?’ To do that, you need a growth model based on giving people more time to enjoy life, but with less stuff.” Friedman's call to “own less” would be more palatable if he wasn't throwing his self-righteous stones from his own palatial residence . The July 2006 Washingtonian magazine called it “a palatial 11,400-square-foot house, now valued at $9.3 million, on a 7.5-acre parcel just blocks from I-495 and Bethesda Country Club.”
Continue reading …
Morgan Spurlock discusses his latest film, Pom Wonderful Presents The Greatest Movie Ever Sold and the effects of product placement Elliot Smith Catherine Shoard Ken Macfarlane
Continue reading …
Justice secretary set for bruising second round of negotiations with No 10 over plan to increase sentence discount for offenders who submit early guilty pleas The justice secretary, Kenneth Clarke, faces a potentially bruising second round negotiation with Downing Street early next week over abandoning his plan to increase the sentence discount for offenders who plead guilty before they face trial. Justice ministry sources concede that Wednesday’s agreement forced on Clarke by Downing Street to exempt those charged with rape from increased discount will also have to apply to those charged with murder and attempted murder. But there is expected to be a fierce tussle between Clarke and David Cameron over how much further down the scale of offences the exemption from a 50% maximum discount should apply. It is expected that Clarke will concede that those charged with other serious sexual assaults should also be exempt but will then try to draw a line in order that the climbdown does not threaten his overall sentencing package to stabilise the prison population, which has reached a record 85,000 in England and Wales. Downing Street has made clear, however, that Cameron would like to see the proposal to increase the maximum discount for the earliest possible guilty plea from 33% to 50% abandoned altogether for all offenders. This was reinforced today by the front page of the Sun , which again calls for Clarke, “the soft justice secretary”, to resign: “Ken Clarke’s in Laa-Laa land – Time for Tubby Bye Bye.” But for Clarke a decision to scrap the increased discount entirely would tear the heart out of the justice secretary’s plan to stabilise the prison population. Well over 10,000 criminals pleaded guilty at the door of the court in 2009 – more than two-thirds of the cases that reach the crown court – and the justice ministry estimates that the scheme would save 3,400 prison places, and £130m, a year. This is the lion’s share of the 6,000 fewer prison places and the £210m savings a year that Clarke needs to arrest the growth in the prison population and meet the Treasury demand for a 23% cut in his £8.7bn budget. The legislation introducing the sentencing reforms was due to be published this week and has now been postponed while this Whitehall tussle between Cameron and Clarke plays out. The desire to save his overall sentencing package means that Clarke will fight very hard next week to ensure that only the most serious offenders are exempted from the increased discount even if it leads to a two-tier sentencing system. The climbdown on exempting rape cases from the increased discount is only expected to have a very limited impact on the overall £130m saving. There were only 466 rapists out of the 10,000 last year who were eligible for a discount on their sentence for an early guilty plea. The Ministry of Justice has yet to make public the exact cost implications of this concession but the figure is nowhere near the £130m saving that some have assumed. However, it has to be borne in mind that exempting the most serious offenders from the plan would disproportionately reduce the savings as a discount in the case of a rapist could be three months while for a burglar it would be only three weeks. However, the justice ministry confirmed on Thursday that Clarke won a special deal on public spending cuts from the Treasury last year that gives him an extra negotiating weapon. As Clarke, himself a former chancellor, pointed out in the talks on Wednesday, the Treasury had agreed that if the government’s so-called rehabilitation revolution did not deliver a lower jail population, then it would bear the costs from the Treasury reserve. Clarke is insisting this be honoured by the chancellor, George Osborne; if jail places are to go up, Clarke should not pay by finding cuts elsewhere in his budget such as legal aid. The Treasury is insisting, however, that he has a four-year settlement with clear ceilings and it is yet to be seen if they will honour the deal. Kenneth Clarke Prisons and probation UK criminal justice David Cameron Alan Travis guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …