UK News

from Global News Journal:

Quadriplegic in an age of austerity

Every time I write a story on European countries cutting public spending, I feel a frisson of panic. I can't help but fear my health, lifestyle and liberty could be a casualty of the "age of austerity".

On assignment covering the Sri Lankan civil war for Reuters four years ago, I broke my neck in a minibus smash. It left me quadriplegic, almost entirely paralysed from the shoulders down and totally dependent on 24 hour care. I was 25.

Nine months later, in a wheelchair, using voice recognition software and supported by government-funded personal assistants, I got back to work in Reuters London headquarters the day after leaving hospital. Now political risk correspondent for Europe, the Middle East and Africa, I write about the interplay of politics and markets. For the past year and a half, much of that has been the drive to cut government spending as Europe rebalances its books.

That hasn't done my personal mental health any good at all. I even had my doctor tweak my medication to make sure worry didn't produce a gastric ulcer.

Britain's new coalition government intends to cut more than many countries, some 25 percent over five years. Some details will emerge in an Oct. 20 spending review, but I may have to wait until the end of the financial year for details on how that will affect my care and that of others.

In many respects, I have already been very lucky. Stringent UK employment law meant it was hard to pension me off just because of my disability. Improvements in voice recognition software meant I could still write at roughly the same speed as before - crucial to continuing work as a newswire journalist.

Most important of all, decades of growth in Britain's social welfare system meant that - after a substantial struggle - enough state funding was available to look after me in my own home.

from MacroScope:

Health and the older worker

An interesting post on ING's new eZonomics blog points the reader to a new study on older workers and health.  The findings -- as reported in The Lancet -- don't at first glance look terribly surprising:

A poor work environment and health complaints before retirement were associated with a steeper yearly increase in the prevalence of suboptimum health while still in work, and a greater retirement-related improvement; however, people with a combination of high occupational grade, low demands, and high satisfaction at work showed no such retirement-related improvement.

In simple terms, this is saying that if a worker is happy, their health is better. Anyone who has ever had a bad job could have told them that! But the study, of course takes it further.

Working life for older workers needs to be redesigned to achieve higher labour-market participation.

This has broad implications, given the trend away from final salary pensions and the general view that workers are going to have to work longer than in previous generations. Companies that are faced with workers who cannot easily retire because of a lack of pension savings, that need people to work longer  and that are subject to increasing anti-age discrimination will need to take the employment needs of older employees on board.

It may not be easy. As the ING post points out, the OECD looks at the issue in a 2006 report entitled "Live Longer, Work Longer". It began its report:

In an era of rapid population ageing, many employment and social policies, practices and attitudes that discourage work at an older age have passed their sell-by date and need to be overhauled. They not only deny older workers choice about when and how to retire but are costly for business, the economy and society.

Where would you cut public spending?

Vows by Labour and the Conservatives to protect the NHS from spending cuts will require tax hikes or cuts to other areas, a new report shows.

Promises to “ring-fence” health spending in the lead-up to the next election — to be held before June — might lead to cuts of about 8 percent in other departments over the next six years, say researchers at the King’s Fund and the Institute for Fiscal Studies.

Alternatively, sizeable tax hikes could be in store as the next government tries to tackle the largest public deficit since the Second World War.

The deficit, forecast to rise to 175 billion pounds this year, has put public spending at the forefront of political debate.

In its equation, researchers posit that the government would have to raise the equivalent of 340 pounds for each family in the country if it were to restrict spending cuts to other departments to 2 percent, while freezing the NHS budget.

Despite being in the midst of a deep recession, the two main political parties have said they will “ring-fence” most spending.

Does this make sense in the current economic climate? From which departmental budget would you cut public spending?

Should bottled water be banned?

The residents of Bundanoon in Australia, a picturesque tourist destination southwest of Sydney, have voted to rid their town of bottled water to reduce their carbon footprint. Tap’s good enough, they say.

Organizations like conservation group WWF have long campaigned against bottled water, saying resources are wasted in packaging and transporting a product which may be no safer or healthier than tap water while selling for up to a thousand times the price.

But the industry, not surprisingly, disagrees. A ban would reduce consumer choice and possibly tempt the thirsty masses to start drinking less healthy alternatives if all they could buy in the chilled cabinet of their local shop was sugary stuff like colas.   

“The environmental footprint of one bottle of locally produced water is much smaller than a tin of canned tomatoes imported from overseas, some imported cheese, or French champagne,” says a spokesman. “We need to keep it in perspective.”

Do you think a ban would work, or be desirable, in Britain?

from Commentaries:

Water down the tube in London heatwave

London's transport bosses are telling travellers on the tube system to beat the heat by carrying a bottle of water with them when they venture underground.

But how many of us are refilling our bottles with tap water rather than pouring money down the tube -- not to mention the cost of recycling the plastic bottles -- by buying a new bottle of water each day?

Cue the National Hydration Council whose eye-catching advertising campaign to encourage people to buy more "naturally sourced bottled water" -- on health grounds -- featured prominently on the underground network earlier this year.

The worrying thing for the bottled water lobby is not that people are doing what would appear to be the most sensible thing and refilling their bottles from the tap, but that Britons are replacing bottled water with sugary drinks instead.

We're told that sales of bottled water fell by 7 percent last year, with 71 percent of that decline the result of people buying sweet drinks instead. Good news for the soft drinks industry perhaps, but a worry for health officials.

Meanwhile, beneath the streets of London, the hot and flustered faces of fellow tube passengers shows just how dire it is on board the capital's underground trains when the mercury rises.

With a decent air-conditioning system on most lines a distant prospect, Transport for London (TfL) could show it cares by offering each of its cash-strapped passengers a free TfL water bottle and the opportunity to refill them at its stations.

Raising the price of alcohol

Chief Medical Officer Liam Donaldson has recommended that the government should sharply raise the price of alcohol  to try to combat Britain’s chronic drinking problem.

His annual report calls for a minimum price of 50 pence per unit of alcohol sold, which would nearly double the price of some discount beer and wine. Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have also shown interest in minimum pricing.

But the government is under no obligation to accept any such recommendation and is aware of the unpopularity of raising alcohol prices in a recession and not so far away from a general election.

Gordon Brown rejected the proposal outright.

The Conservatives say it is important to deal with people’s attitudes to drinking, not just supply and price, while the Liberal Democrats support putting an end to “pocket-money priced” alcohol.

What do you think? Does price play much of a part in Britain’s binge-drinking culture?

Down’s Syndrome numbers don’t add up

Are more women choosing to have a Down’s Syndrome baby despite learning from a prenatal scan they are carrying a child with the condition?

The Down’s Syndrome Association charity believes this is the case. Its conclusion has been widely followed in press reports, including in the Daily Mail, Independent and the Times.

But research data published in response by the National Down Syndrome Cytogenetic Register (NDSCR) in London suggests otherwise. It says that the rate of terminations of unborn Down’s Syndrome babies has remained constant since prenatal screening became widely available in 1989.

The Down’s Syndrome Association says its help desk has been receiving an average of two calls a week from expectant mothers who have received a positive scan for the condition who say they are continuing their pregnancy, a much higher rate than two to three years ago.

And it points to figures from the NDSCR showing that more Down’s Syndrome babies are now being born in England and Wales than before the start of widespread prenatal screening — there were 749 births in 2006, the latest year figures are available, compared to 717 in 1989 and a low of 563 in 1995.

The number of Down’s Syndrome births as a proportion of all live births has also increased by around 15 percent since 2000.

Medical records

Imperial College withdrew its offer of a place to study medicine to an 18-year-old when it found out he had been convicted of burglary three years ago.

Majid Ahmed won the place after turning his life around and achieving straight A grades at A level. The conviction was spent but he had to disclose it for a criminal records check for Imperial.

The decision, which comes as the government is considering a new strategy to encourage elite universities to take more students from less wealthy backgrounds, has been widely criticised. Ahmed should not have to bear the consequences of a youthful indiscretion for life and should have been given the chance to fulfil his ambition to become a doctor, critics say. 

Imperial College says it was right to bar him and that decision had been made to uphold trust in the medical profession.

What is your opinion? Is Imperial being too harsh?   

Stub out and save

It’s “national no smoking day”, and stubbing out could help your wealth as well as your health. The 1.1 million Britons who quit a year ago have collectively saved more than 1 billion pounds by not feeding their nicotine habit, according to Yorkshire Bank. Meanwhile, the 13 million people who’ve carried on puffing since “no smoking day” last March have seen almost 12.5 billion pounds-worth of potential savings go up in smoke.

“It’s all too easy for long term smokers to forget just how expensive their habit actually is, but those smoking just 10 cigarettes a day could easily save almost 1,000 pounds during the course of a year,” says Gary Lumby, Yorkshire Bank’s head of retail. “By putting the money they’d normally spend on cigarettes in an ISA (individual savings account) or high interest savings account, smokers will soon see those savings adding up, particularly if there is more than one smoker in the household.”

And there are more savings to be made. Insurance companies consider ex-smokers to be ‘non-smokers’ a year after they have given up. And that could see your life and critical illness cover premiums fall by 50 percent. The monthly premium with Norwich Union for a 60-year-old male smoker wanting 100,000 pounds worth of life cover over 20 years is 181.30 pounds, while a non-smoker of the same age will pay just 84.30 pounds — 1,164 pounds per year less — according to figures from price comparison Web site Moneynet.co.uk.

In addition to the financial benefits, there’s a long list of other good reasons to kick the habit — having more energy and looking and feeling younger as the premature ageing effects of smoking are stopped in their tracks. Those who give up should also have lower stress levels, whiter teeth and an improved sense of taste and small, according to the “no smoking day” Web site.

But, as people addicted to the dreaded weed will no doubt testify, it’s a hard habit to break. And they can take some comfort in one little-known benefit to smoking. People with medical conditions and those who are likely to suffer poor health — such as smokers, the obese or those with a history of poor family health — generally achieve higher annuity rates. Their life expectancy might be shorter, but their pension pot will buy them a higher annual income in retirement.