The A 200 just got an update bringing its top end technology to the class with a multitude of tech features.
The standard fare includes a sensor key with push button start, leather seats, cabin mood lighting, wireless phone charging, Apple CarPlay/Android Auto, digital radio and built-in navigation, and the awesome high-resolution wide-screen dash display similar to those in the E-Class and S-Class limousines.
Super bright LED headlights with automatic blanking of oncoming traffic, a panorama sunroof and 360-degree view camera are bundled in a option pack.
Adjustable steering and seating positions will accommodate drivers of most shapes and sizes. One half of the giant wide-screen — infotainment, left of the instrument cluster — is now a high resolution touchscreen for added convenience.
Mercedes' new cabin control module is a small touchpad with a hump on which to rest your wrist.
The A-Class' interior is of an extremely high quality. Small "tiles" on the steering wheel also act as a touch or swipe pad with the wireless phone charging works well, even when the device is in a case.
And an awesome 10-speaker premium audio — including a subwoofer — is standard.
The A 200 has nine airbags to protect occupants should the worst happen. It also includes autonomous emergency braking at city and highway speeds, accompanied by blind zone warning, lane-keeping assistance and speed sign recognition.
The A200 has plenty of zip for a relatively small 1.3-litre four-cylinder turbo with the twin-clutch auto is smoother than before. The turning circle is incredibly tight, handy for U-turns in narrow streets. And the steering itself is light and precise once on the move.
The new A-Class corners with confidence, whether in roundabouts or a winding road.


text:
Named Entity Results, William Harris
hide Named Entity Searches
Search for places: matching this name within this state within this country
Enter the name of a place, like "Springfield" or "Athens", to find all locations matching the name, or enter a state ("Illinois") or country ("Canada") to find all places within that state or nation. You may also enter more than one of these to narrow your search ("Athens, Greece" or "Springfield, Illinois, United States").
Note that abbreviations ("USA", "Ill.") do not work at present--please stick to full names!
Search for a person:
In: Forenames Surnames Full name
Searching for "Washington" in "Forenames" and "Surnames" will return all people with Washington as a first or last name, respectively. A full-name search will find anyone who matches the entire search string ("Washington Irving").
Search for dates:
From: [any] January February March April May June July August September October November December , A.D. B.C.
Month Day Year
To: [any] January February March April May June July August September October November December , A.D. B.C.
Enter a month, day and/or year to search for references to that date. You do not need to fill out every field: searching only for "1863" will find all references to the year 1863, while searching for "July 4" will find all references to the 4th of July, regardless of year.
Enter a starting date and an ending date to find all occurrences of dates in between.
hide Matching Documents
The documents where this entity occurs most often are shown below. Click on a document to open it.
Max. Freq
Min. Freq
Lucius R. Paige, History of Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1630-1877, with a genealogical register	 40 6 Browse Search
Emilio, Luis F., History of the Fifty-Fourth Regiment of Massachusetts Volunteer Infantry , 1863-1865	 26 0 Browse Search
Rebellion Record: a Diary of American Events: Documents and Narratives, Volume 11. (ed. Frank Moore)	 26 0 Browse Search
Historic leaves, volume 3, April, 1904 - January, 1905	 14 2 Browse Search
Admiral David D. Porter, The Naval History of the Civil War.	 4 2 Browse Search
The Daily Dispatch: January 26, 1861., [Electronic resource]	 4 0 Browse Search
Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 15. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones)	 4 0 Browse Search
The Daily Dispatch: July 24, 1861., [Electronic resource]	 4 0 Browse Search
the Rev. W. Turner , Jun. , MA., Lives of the eminent Unitarians	 4 4 Browse Search
View all matching documents...
Browsing named entities in The Daily Dispatch: August 11, 1863., [Electronic resource]. You can also browse the collection for William Harris or search for William Harris in all documents.
Your search returned 1 result in 1 document section:
The Daily Dispatch: August 11, 1863., [Electronic resource], From Charleston. (search)
Runaways--$210 Reward. --Absconded from the defensive works around Richmond the following free negroes, impressed from Richmond-- John M Brown, John M Campbell, Patrick Coleman, Michelle Pleasant , Timothy Roper, Jumius B Thomas, Elijah Pittman, George Dixon, John Thacker, Jos Tonguitt, Wm George, Robert Clarker, William Harris, Alex Whiting, Edward gray, By the act of the Virginia Legislature, passed 19th February, 1863, to provide for the enrollment and employment of free negroes in the public service, these negroes being amenable to the rules and regulations of the articles of war, are deserters, and a reward of thirty dollars each will be paid for their apprehension and delivery to Capt W G Turpia, at Engineers' office, corner 19th and Cary sts. W H Stevenson, Col. Eng. jy 30--ts

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Q: Why do we have reinterpret_cast in C++ when two chained static_cast can do its job? Say I want to cast A* to char* and vice-versa, we have two choices (I mean, many of us think we've two choices, because both seems to work! Hence the confusion!):
struct A
{
    int age;
    char name[128];
};

A a;
char *buffer = static_cast<char*>(static_cast<void*>(&a)); //choice 1
char *buffer = reinterpret_cast<char*>(&a); //choice 2

Both work fine.
//convert back
A *pA = static_cast<A*>(static_cast<void*>(buffer)); //choice 1
A *pA = reinterpret_cast<A*>(buffer); //choice 2

Even this works fine!
So why do we have reinterpret_cast in C++ when two chained static_cast can do its job?
Some of you might think this topic is a duplicate of the previous topics such as listed at the bottom of this post, but it's not. Those topics discuss only theoretically, but none of them gives even a single example demonstrating why reintepret_cast is really needed, and two static_cast would surely fail. I agree, one static_cast would fail. But how about two?
If the syntax of two chained static_cast looks cumbersome, then we can write a function template to make it more programmer-friendly:
template<class To, class From>
To any_cast(From v)
{
    return static_cast<To>(static_cast<void*>(v));
}

And then we can use this, as:
char *buffer = any_cast<char*>(&a); //choice 1
char *buffer = reinterpret_cast<char*>(&a); //choice 2

//convert back
A *pA = any_cast<A*>(buffer); //choice 1
A *pA = reinterpret_cast<A*>(buffer); //choice 2

Also, see this situation where any_cast can be useful: Proper casting for fstream read and write member functions.
So my question basically is,

*

*Why do we have reinterpret_cast in C++?

*Please show me even a single example where two chained static_cast would surely fail to do the same job?

*

*Which cast to use; static_cast or reinterpret_cast?

*Cast from Void* to TYPE* : static_cast or reinterpret_cast

A: A concrete example:
char a[4] = "Hi\n";
char* p = &a;

f(reinterpret_cast<char (&)[4]>(p));  // call f after restoring full type
      // ^-- any_cast<> can't do this...

// e.g. given...
template <typename T, int N>   // <=--- can match this function
void f(T (&)[N]) { std::cout << "array size " << N << '\n'; }

A: Other than the practical reasons that others have given where there is a difference in what they can do it's a good thing to have because its doing a different job.
static_cast is saying please convert data of type X to Y.
reinterpret_cast is saying please interpret the data in X as a Y.
It may well be that the underlying operations are the same, and that either would work in many cases. But there is a conceptual difference between saying please convert X into a Y, and saying "yes I know this data is declared as a X but please use it as if it was really a Y".

A: There are things that reinterpret_cast can do that no sequence of static_casts can do (all from C++03 5.2.10):

*

*A pointer can be explicitly converted to any integral type large enough to hold it.

*A value of integral type or enumeration type can be explicitly converted to a pointer.

*A pointer to a function can be explicitly converted to a pointer to a function of a different type.

*An rvalue of type "pointer to member of X of type T1" can be explicitly converted to an rvalue of  type "pointer to member of Y of type T2" if T1 and T2 are both function types or both object types.
Also, from C++03 9.2/17:

*

*A pointer to a POD-struct object, suitably converted  using  a reinterpret_cast,  points  to  its  initial member (or if that member is a bit-field, then to the unit in which it resides) and vice versa.

A: As far as I can tell your choice 1 (two chained static_cast) is dreaded undefined behaviour. Static cast only guarantees that casting pointer to void * and then back to original pointer works in a way that the resulting pointer from these to conversions still points to the original object. All other conversions are UB. For pointers to objects (instances of the user defined classes) static_cast may alter the pointer value.
For the reinterpret_cast - it only alters the type of the pointer and as far as I know - it never touches the pointer value.
So technically speaking the two choices are not equivalent.
EDIT: For the reference, static_cast is described in section 5.2.9 of current C++0x draft (sorry, don't have C++03 standard, the draft I consider current is n3225.pdf). It describes all allowed conversions, and I guess anything not specifically listed = UB. So it can blow you PC if it chooses to do so.

A: You need reinterpret_cast to get a pointer with a hardcoded address (like here):
int* pointer = reinterpret_cast<int*>( 0x1234 );

you might want to have such code to get to some memory-mapped device input-output port.

A: Using of C Style casting is not safer. It never checks for different types can be mixed together.
C++ casts helps you to make sure the type casts are done as per related objects (based on the cast you use). This is the more recommended way to use casts than using the traditional C Style casts that's always harmful.

A: Look, people, you don't really need reinterpret_cast, static_cast, or even the other two C++ styles casts (dynamic* and const).
Using a C style cast is both shorter and allows you to do everything the four C++-style cast let you do.
anyType someVar = (anyOtherType)otherVar;

So why use the C++-style casts? Readability. Secondly: because the more restrictive casts allow more code safety.
*okay, you might need dynamic

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
How The Economist turns social visitors into subscribers
February 14, 2017 by Lucinda Southern
For The Economist, as print ad revenues have fallen and digital ad revenues haven't plugged the gap, the focus has been on increasing profitability by growing digital subscriptions.
That means The Economist is very clear about what it wants out of platforms: to reach non-subscribers and give them samples of Economist content to eventually turn into more subscribers. Over the year, it has grown social media followers by 25 percent to now reach 44 million across platforms, mostly Facebook, Snapchat, Twitter and LinkedIn. It has seen a surge of subscribers, first after Brexit and more recently after Donald Trump's election. In the last year, digital subs have grown by nearly 14 percent from 303,500 to 345,500. (The Economist's overall subscription base is 1.5 million.)
"We're constantly debating how much content to give away," said Michael Brunt, The Economist's CMO and managing director of circulation. "If you're too generous, there's no point in subscribing. We have the other view: We are generous; we work hard to distribute content on many platforms to give a flavor."
The Economist has a metered paywall through which non-subscribers can view three articles a week. The 10-person social media team repurposes content for platforms. For instance, facts of the day work as standalone content posted to Facebook as well as teasing the more in-depth piece, like this stating America's homicide rate has risen by 11 percent in 2015.
Red cards act as standalone social media posts.
Typically, The Economist has calculated that it takes nine weeks to convert a reader into a subscriber. For its New Year campaign, it posted articles to Facebook that look back on 2016 to make sense of the future of liberalism. It boosts organic posts that are performing well, re-targeting readers with similar content, before introducing targeted display ads urging them to subscribe.
New Year Facebook ad campaign.
To tie in with students going back to university, The Economist posted 120 content-led posts over six weeks on Facebook, focusing on how the workplace is changing as technology develops, putting money behind posts that performed well. All posts led to a content hub about the future of work where users could read related articles for free. This sample was re-targeted with ads to tip them into becoming subscribers, one of its most successful campaigns in terms of driving subscriptions to date.
While The Economist's 14 percent growth rate in digital subs is solid, it pales to the 30 percent bump it saw the prior year.
"The slowing of digital subscribers isn't a surprise," said Thomas Caldecott, media analyst at Enders Analysis, adding that it's not a reflection on the product but wider economic trends. There are also fewer print subscribers to convert to digital. While there are still many potential Economist readers (76 million globally curious, according to Economist research), converting them inevitably takes longer and costs more than those who are print readers.
Converting through Facebook is cost-effective and scalable, said Brunt. "It's a soft sell as they are already slightly engaged. Then it's appropriate to ask them to subscribe." This targeting has enabled it to lower the cost of acquiring by half. Now, the acquisition cost is "very low, a few tens of pounds," said Brunt, and a year's subscription is £179 ($190). "The lifetime value is high. Readers are very loyal when recruited through this route. It's getting The Economist reading material into their habits."
The publisher doesn't give out figures on how many subscribers it loses, but for those who have subscribed for two years, the churn rate drops to single figures.
"It's a very good case study of if you provide some free content you can increase your ad scale and reach new readers," said Caldecott, "as long as it's cleverly designed and executed intelligently. With the content that The Economist creates, they are better placed than most."
The Economist is also reaching between 3 million and 4 million people each weekend on Snapchat Discover, where it launched last October. It's working on a model assigning a value to these views so it can incorporate it into a subscriber's journey. For now, ad revenue "more than pays for the editorial," said Brunt.
Image: courtesy of The Economist, via Facebook.
With a new CEO, High Times looks to open dispensaries


So you have rats in the walls? Or you have mice in the house?
If you own the house then it's your problem and your responsibility – nice and straight forward.
However if you are a leaseholder or are renting then it's not quite so clear.
The situation for people renting…..
Guess what? The tenancy agreement states that pests (and everything else that suggests cost for that matter) are your responsibility!
Tenancy agreements are inevitably written with a heavy bias on preserving the profits of the landlord and usually overwrite the various Acts of Parliament that may suggest otherwise.
Landlords hide behind this document and simply chance that most tenants never challenge them on it as they assume it to be legal and above board.
In a legal tussle though, it doesn't matter what you signed up for – if there is an Act of Parliament that states otherwise it will come down to that at the end of the day.
When Environmental Health enforce people or businesses to take action against pests, they will always cite the relevant Act that is empowering them.
If rats are within the walls, ceiling voids or under the floor then this will compromise HS&W through chewed wires risking fire, chewed pipes risking flood, odour, rat fleas and from dust borne Weils disease if uncovered floorboards are present.
If mice are within the living areas, then HS&W is compromised by their feet spreading Salmonella & E Coli, their droppings, their urine and from contaminated food stuffs.
If squirrels are in the roof, then this will compromise HS&W through chewed wires, chewed pipes and the risk of dead ones ending up in any CWS tanks.
If you have rodents affecting where you work in the same manner as listed above, then your employer has a duty under this act to ensure you work in an environment that doesn't compromise your health & safety.
Aside from the bacteria and viruses associated with rodents there is also the stress they can impose on some people – this too can fall under the definition of 'an environment that doesn't compromise your health & safety'.
Things are a little more complicated when it's leasehold.
Here the legal arrangement is that the leaseholder is responsible for the flat itself but the freeholder is responsible for the 'fabric of the building' – that is the external walls, roof, the common parts and services in and out.
A typical response from a freeholder to a report of rodents from the leaseholder is 'well they weren't there when you moved in so you must have brought them with you'.
This is an incredibly short-sighted approach.
All rodents will enter a building via defects to the building fabric – they don't hide in suitcases or smuggle themselves in with the shopping delivery.
House mice for example will enter a property via defects to the building fabric – i.e. where mains water/gas/electricity enters the flat or where the floor meets the wall underneath the kitchen units.
Essentially house mice live in the building fabric and can travel from one property to another this way where a block of flats or terraced row exist – they then emerge into the living areas to forage for food wherever penetrations/defects arise allowing them to do this.
Rats will always enter a building fabric from a drainage defect or occasionally from an above ground entry point in the externals of the building.
Whether these defects are the leaseholders responsibility or the freeholders comes down to (1) exactly where the defect(s) are within the building fabric (2) what the defect is or what has caused it and (3) the interpretation of the legislation outlining freeholders liability versus leaseholders liability.
There is why a correct diagnosis of what is permitting the rodents to infest your property is critical – do not believe that they came in the back door!
Do rats really live in drains?


This exhibit features four color coded illustrations depicting the anatomy and functions of the brain. At the top, two brains are situated showing normal anatomy and function. At the bottom, two brains are shown with severe contusions affecting the frontal, parietal, and temporal lobes. The injured brains also show cortical atrophy in the frontal lobes and focal subarachnoid hemorrhaging in the right parietal lobe.


text:
Who will pay for Xanadu?
Posted in advertising, BBC, Media by Deputy city editor on December 16, 2008
Greg Dyke, brutally terminated as BBC director-general after foolishly imagining that the BBC was independent enough to call out Tony Blair on his delusional Iraq dossier, nevertheless left two great legacies.
Dyke, who was against the BBC licence fee before he was for it, although it seems he may now be against it again, is the man who saw to it that the so-called* freeview specification used for digital terrestrial services in the UK would not be compatible with subscription television. This, he later boasted, was to make it harder to abolish the licence fee, because with millions of incapable boxes in the field it would be "impossible" to convert viewers to subscriptions.
This was a deft move in defence of the licence fee, but a disaster for viewers and public broadcasting. Viewers are entitled to public broadcasting directly accountable to the public. The BBC is not a public broadcaster – it is a state broadcaster, answerable to ministers. The licence fee is the worst solution to guaranteeing the independence of the BBC. A subscription would be the best. A public broadcaster, not for profit, that could draw a mandate from thousands or millions of subscribers, each free to cancel at will – now that would be accountable public broadcasting.
So Dyke by his own boast admits that he sneakily, without any public debate, least of all one including his blessed fee payers, abused a technical standard for a purely political motive. His intention was nakedly to sabotage any possibility that the BBC could break free of the licence fee and establish a respectable relationship with the viewers. The beautiful irony is that the slippery Dyke was hoist by his own petard. Having ensured that the BBC would be 100% dependent on government more or less forever, the government promptly sacked him!
Now Dyke is boasting of a second pillar to his BBC legacy. This is equally dubious and sneaky. Dyke claims that he secured a secret deal from Tessa Jowel, then the culture minister, and one of the most venal and stupid government ministers in a crowded field, to financially guarantee the BBC's massive, and shady property developments on Portland Place and elsewhere. This tookthe form of an understanding the government would retain the licence fee for 30 more years, to pay off the BBC's mortgages!
Not that licence fee payers should presume themselves to inquire too deeply into the extraordinary machinations of the BBC property empire. It is at Portland Place, on the banks of the holy West End, that the BBC is building a corporate headquarters that would make Kubla Kahn blush. Those staff not exiled to Manchester will here enjoy a stately pleasure dome, just minutes from the best restaurants in town. The building will also be the new headquarters of BBC News, which naturally will have the biggest and most costly newsroom in the world. All this is costing well more than £1 billion although the numbers released by the BBC are less and admit to being a mere £20 million over budget. I doubt very much BBC candor on this point. Anyway, according to Dyke, we are all on the hook for this. Or at least, those who continue to pay the fee are on the hook.
How much worse this gets is open to dispute. The extent of the cost-overuns for the Manchester development and the move of thousands of staff there is equally opaque, as to be expected from the BBC. How these deals are being financed, what covenents are in place, and what the current credit conditions might mean for these deals, or the BBC generally, or the government as the supposed guarantor, we do not know. These are the BBC's darkest secrets.
Getting to the bottom of this financial tale ought to be a job ab initio for the media correspondents of the national media. As Andrew Neil noticed some time ago, these are "the dross of Fleet Street." They do not present an inspiring example to the profession of journalism. One of the stoutest hack defenders of the BBC even got an MBE (and got a TV show, on the BBC). One can understand why these journalists are mostly useless: they are entirely dependent for their stories on the BBC press office.
Don't expect anything from the the BBC Trust. This successor to the governors supposedly represents the licence payers but actually answers to the government which appoints all of its members.
And least of all do not expect much from the House of Commons select committee on media, chaired by the affable but so-far useless John Wittingdale.
C. Northcote Parkinson remarked that when organisations move themselves into lavish headquarters, they are already in decline. The BBC reaffirms this astute observation. But will the BBC implode? The government, pace Dyke, apparently has promised that it won't. But the viewers could still do the job if they showed enough spine and cancelled their direct debits. Yet another poll this week shows two-thirds of us are against the fee. Consent for the television tax is lost. No surprise the politicians and the BBC find it convenient to ignore this.
* Freeview it goes without saying is not free – you are still required to buy a TV licence "or get done" by the BBC's private police.
Tagged with: broadcasting, TV Licence
13 things you need to know about the TV licence (or maybe 130)
Posted in Media by Deputy city editor on November 18, 2008
Despite the widespread mistrust of the BBC by those who pay for it, the corporation enjoys strong political and media support . After an extravagant expansion during the epoch of Blair and Brown, the BBC licence fee is temporarily frozen and if the BBC is no longer the subject of universal admiration, it remains powerful and dangerous. Reform of this self-obsessed monopolistic provider of so-called public broadcasting is long overdue. The establishment will, however, wish to maintain its control of this ideological enterprise. There are already huge numbers of reluctant licence fee payers and also many who outright refuse to pay. But given the interests of the deep British establishment versus the people paying the bills, the abolition of the licence fee, and the transformation of public broadcasting into a medium actually accountable to the public, seems to be still very distant. That the licence fee is the worst of all possible methods for funding public broadcasting seems to matter not a twitter.
Australians got rid of their TV licence by mass refusal to pay – the Brits are a more obedient lot, it seems.
Polls (except those rigged by the BBC) pretty consistently show 60 per cent of the public annoyed that they are paying the fee. After recent scandals, the BBC is now widely mistrusted and even hated for reasons that go well beyond its typically craven journalism (BBC political news), frequent populist vulgarity (countless examples), vast waste, stupid salaries, left-wing trade unions and generalised contempt for viewers. Then there is the corporation's role running its own contracted force of investigators who launch 17% of all prosecutions in the nation's magistrate's courts. The defendants are mainly female and poor – single mums at home during the day when the inspectors call. These women are too polite/intimidated to shut the door on the BBC tax farmers and they are processed through the magistrates' courts, in order that the chattering classes might enjoy Radio Four.
Despite creating a hideous relationship between the BBC and its viewers, the licence fee has enormous political support. Politicians like the BBC because they are drawn to TV cameras and the BBC has a lot of them. The BBC is conscientious mirroring the Westminster debate. Politicians set the annual rise in the licence fee and appoint the Trust that claims to represent the licence-payer. Nobody opposed to the licence has ever been appointed to the Trust. The thought that there might be an alternative is never discussed in Parliament, or much mentioned in the media.
Even Murdoch likes the licence fee, for fear that a truly independent BBC, financed by subscriptions, could build a platform to rival his own BSkyB structural subscription broadcasting monopoly.
Then, there is a large public constituency of people who listen to e.g. The Archers, and firmly believe that everyone must contribute to their listening pleasure. Even magistrates like the BBC, which helps finances their house magazine and whose prosecutions provide much of the cash-flow the courts reap from fines. The BBC works hard to keep various interest groups on-side. There is even a legion of rinse-haired fogeys who promote the BBC while styling themselves the 'voice' of the viewer and listener. Needless to say, the 'voice' gets a BBC subvention.
The BBC has constructed a careful mythology of its own greatness. This, with its £3 billion in licence-fee cash, and a disproportionate share of electromagnetic spectrum, especially in the radio band, the BBC is an institution of influence without equal in Britain. The licence fee keeps a lot of the chattering classes on the payroll – from Andrew Neil to Ian Hislop via Polly Toynbee. The BBC's cheques are very useful when it comes to the upkeep on the Provençal (Neil) or Tuscan (Toynbee) villa.
As of April 2010, the TV licence costs £145.50 and roughly 20 million households pay it. It is illegal to watch ANY television without a licence. The BBC claims this includes computers and games consoles. Where does the money go? Propping up the Groucho Club accounts for only a tiny share, notwithstanding the publicity given to the notorious millions paid in salaries to various celebrities. It is actully hard to say where all the money goes because the BBC's acounts are a bit like Enron's. There is known to be a £2 billion pension deficit. Presumably, the licence-fee payers will be asked to pay for this, too. Although there is no risk to the corporation's top executives, whose pensions are among the richest ever known in the so-called public sector.
This is possibly a lesser black hole than the BBC's exposure to risky property developments, which focus on the construction of palaces for itself. In addition to the rebuild of Broadcasting House at immense expense in London, whose cost-overrun is certainly not fully revealed by the BBC's opaque accounts, the BBC, at an even vaster expense, is currently decanting thousands of its dazed and confused worker ants to a new media city in Manchester.
They are leaving the capital with the grace of the san coulottes departing Paris. It would take a heart of stone not to laugh at the plight of the BBC apparachniks told they must live in the North of England. But the BBC sees this as a crucial step in the defence of the fee after 2013. As for the credit crunch – who knows?The BBC is engaged in colossally expensive property developments Manchester, too, although the exposure of these is hard to divine. Billions seem to be at stake. You can read more about BBC corruption here.
As the BBC knows, I have not had a TV licence for many years. It has even been several years since I have received one of their charmless letters. For the moment they leave me alone. I think I am possibly on the list of political refuseniks. Do I have a TV? How might I use it? I consider these questions none of the BBC's business. I avoid their programmes. I find their relationship with the viewers to be obnoxious and their journalism to be mediocre, tendentious, but mainly tedious, narrow and self-obsessed. Fighting this ministry of truth in the courts has been a mug's game (see below). At the local level, they practically own the courts. But they have to be nervous. The BBC is a gigantic contradiction, very close to implosion. I'd love to see their books. I reckon they are probably bankrupt. And they certainly will be if viewers stop sending them cheques.
Opting out of the TV tax is not as hard as it seems. There are probably a million hard-core resisters and the number appears to be growing. These people are a diverse group ranging from EU-phobes, to people who simply can pay and won't because the programming is so miserable, as well as others who may ethically object to the ransoms paid to the BBC's personalities. Still others detest the patronising drone of its programmes, and then there are those (like me) who simply consider the BBC's demands unlawful and impertinent. There are lots of reasons to be a conscientious objector to a scheme that is the worst option on every level. Can you really get away with not paying? The BBC spends heavily to make you think not. The truth is more subtle.
Those who simply ignore the BBC will, for the most part, get away with it. Even at the best, the BBC manages to proecute only a tiny percentage of evaders – and these are always those who are prepared to admit the crime!
If convicted, it's not so terrible – maybe more a badge of honour. The fine (usually £150) is hardly more than the price of a licence and is about as much a badge of shame as a parking ticket. But here's the key point: you'll only get convicted if you admit it. The key tactic of resistance is to throw away all the mailed demands, ignore the pathetic threats, and in the unlikely event that one of the BBC's hired goons shows up at your doorstep, say absolutely nothing. What about the detector van? Worry not (read on).
If you are new to BBC resistance, or simply considering overcoming your fears of getting done and joining one of the several announced boycotts, you'll have plenty of questions. There's a bit to know. For those new to this fray, I am pleased to present the 'need to know' points – 13 of them naturally, pace Proust, although revised and extended, due to the requirements of the material.
1. Know thine enemy. TV Licensing is not an entity or a registered company but a trademark owned by the BBC. The BBC does not wish to be directly associated with the collection of the TV licence so it contracts out the collection to the Capita group, which has a billion pound contract with the corporation. Capita employs a small army of tax farmers (styled TV licence "inspectors") who visit those who can't or won't pay. Unless, of course, they are a high-profile refusenik. Needless to say, those willing to make admissions to these inspectors tend to be the weakest and most vulnerable. So if you attend the BBC prosecutions at your local magistrates' court, the people you'll see prosecuted are single mothers.
2.TV detection is all a Big Lie. There is no evidence that the detector van really exists, other than as a photo-op van filled with scary-looking bits of electronics. The legality of warrentless electronic surveillance by the BBC has never been tested because no detector van evidence has ever been used in court. Privacy and proportionality are merely two of the reasons why it never will be. The BBC relies for convictions on the admissions extracted on the doorstep by its army of monitors, who get a bonus for every prosecution they bring (though this is not disclosed to the court).
3. The prosecutions depend on confessions. If you do not confess, you will not get done. BBC/TVL prosecutes more than 150,000 people annually but even the BBC admits that a hard core of maybe a million households puts up a finger and get away with it. While most of those who get done are women and on benefits, most of those who don't are the people the BBC's inspectors don't fancy tangling with. One of the highest rates of evasion is in Northern ireland. Wonder why? Only a handful are imprisoned after being unable or unwilling to pay the fine. Typically, the twin-setted, Archers-listening magistrates punish TV Licence evasion more harshly than they do assault. (Visit their courts – and weep.) The cases are processed by rote and the BBC is represented by a prosecutor employed by Capita. Legal aid is not available. This is British Justice – uncut.
4. Intimidation is believed by the BBC to be the only effective tactic against people termed 'evaders' hence the expenditure of millions each year on threatening advertising campaigns claiming (falsely) "TV detector vans can quickly find you." In one advertisement, a 'license-cheat' is seen swinging from the gallows at Tyburn as the mob cheer and spit at the corpse. This passes for humour. The BBC also advertises straightforwardly: 'Get one or get done' and promises to know where you live and whether you are licensed because of its all-knowing database. Is there any other organisation that treats its customers in such a manner? But of course these are not consumers in a traditional sense. They can send no meaniningful economic signal to the BBC, as they can to Murdoch, by cancelling Sky. They are captive ratepayers – victims, not viewers. Many people think it is just and proper that those who not not appreciate the BBC, nevertheless must pay for it. They will not explain why if the BBC is loved and respected, it should not be the case that those who love and respect it can choose to pay for it.
5. No alternative to the licence fee has ever been seriously considered by the BBC or governments of either political stripe. With the consequence that the licence fee keeps the BBC entirely dependent on government, for money and governance. The BBC trust is headed by a Labour placeman. All members of the Trust are appointed by the government. The size of the fee and its periodic renewal are matters for the prime minister. The claim that the licence makes the BBC independent is a Big Lie. The BBC in return for the licence validates the British polity by mirroring the parliamentay debate, sucking up to those in power, over-promoting celebrities and above all, defending itself. Politicians of all parties rather like the idea of a broadcaster so firmly under the thumb of politicians, hence tend to defend the fee. Jeremy Hunt, the shadow media secretary, and my own MP, is utterly useless, having advocated only cosmetic changes, in order to perpetuate the fee. Cameron is worse, slavering on like some demented Archers fan. Just notice: Nobody opposed to the licence fee is ever appointed to the Trust. Discussion of the fee itself is simply avoided. Debate is shut down. The BBC even pays a subvention to the Voice of the Listener! Never mind that polls consistently show a growing majority of the population objects to the fee and that popular consent for it has vanished.
6. The fee is contradictory to the stated right in the European Convention on Human Rights (adapted by the UK) to receive information without interference. It also arguably contravenes the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (a meaningless document which the UK has also signed.) The collection of the licence fee, which is essentially a poll tax, uses disproportionate methods that invade personal privacy. The taxation of television contradicts the television without frontiers directives by making it illegal to watch foreign satellite broadcasts without a permit. Profoundly illiberal, the BBC is entirely driven by the insane and self-defeating wish to retain the licence fee. In the BBC newsrooms are NUJ posters with the demand: "Defend the licence fee." Now the BBC even wishes to extend the licence fee to networked computers. TV licence fees are not an exclusively British problem, although we invented them. These so-called public broadcasters (really state broadcasters) are political playthings everywhere. Made absurd by an infinite digital media diversity that makes their entire rational absurd, they demand exemption from normal human rights laws to protect their licence fees. But there are plenty of reasons to challenge these fees nonetheless – with the proviso that it will take years and enrich only the lawyers. The much better way to sweep these fees away is a mass refusal to pay them. There is precedent for this.
7. So, with unlimited legal resources, the BBC can expose any litigant-challenger to enormous and continuing costs. Resisters and conscientious objectors have preferred to use defensive techniques – not exactly pouring boiling oil over the BBC's inquiry agents, but not making incriminatory statements, either. This technique of passive resistance is highly effective. it involves ignoring all the threatening correspondence from invented people at the licence bureau; ensuring that TV sets cannot be seen or heard from the front door, and responding to any inquiry by men with clipboards with the words, "I cannot help you," and closing the door. Some say you should write to them withdrawing their right of implied access even to approach your door. But simply ignoring them avoid entering into correspondence with these people, and the waste of a perfectly good stamp. The so-called inspectors for all of their blue fluorescent costumes have no right of entry and one is not obliged to even reveal one's name to them (indeed it is strongly advised not to do so). Those who employ this entirely legal stonewall tactic report that the BBC's thugs (who have only rarely been known to physically assault recalcitrant television owners) invariably move on to lusher pastures (usually deprived areas and council estates, where single women are easily intimidated into signing the "witness statement" that the BBC's inquiry agents will subsequently triumphantly produce in court, for the benefit of the credulous magistrates). This has been descrbed as the criminalisation of female poverty. The BBC is unabashed.
8. BBC prosecutions amount to 17 per cent of all the business conducted in the magistrates courts according to Sarah Lyall in the New York Times and those prosecuted are never fined the £1,000 threatened but usually £150 plus of course prosecution and court costs and also a special fee used to sustain the victim counselling scheme. It seems that much of the cost of the magistrates courts (when they are not hearing prosecutions for wheelie-bin violations) is paid for by the aseembly-line of fines for TV licence evasion. A court can raise several thousand pounds for a TVL docket – and they all do. Magistrates are kept 'on side' to TVL through a specific PR campaign aimed just at them. TVL advertises lavishly in the glossy magistrates' magazine. Magistrates are an odd lot. It is sad to see why people would seek this work. If you want to test the oxymoron "British justice" just drop in and see your local magistrates deal with TV licences in batches of 100 at a time. Failure to buy a TV licence is a conviction that does not need to be disclosed on a US visa waiver!
9. The BBC will not allow serious or continued discussion of the licence fee on its own airwaves nor is there any evidence that the trustees or governors before them have ever seriously considered an alternative. Despite clear evidence that most of the BBC's fee-payers would like to be offered an alternative, nobody advocating one has ever been appointed to the governors or trustees. The House of Commons media select committee has never held a hearing on whether there should be a licence fee. The commentariat defend it while never disclosing their own BBC earnings.
10. BBC/Guardian propaganda notwithstanding, Rupert Murdoch is the licence fee's biggest fan. Although he knows perfectly well that the licence fee is a ridiculous, self-deafeating and unfair tax to the benefit of a competitor, it suits him that Sky is the only national subscription TV platform (cable is very regionalised), and it terrifies him that the BBC could produce a competitive terrestrial subscription platform, to compete with his electronic programme guide and conditional access monopoly. One might have thought the BBC would seize the opportunity of subscrptions (Murdoch has proven it works) and liberate itself finally from a detested fee and a sordid relationship with its viewers. The BBC would have a chance to establish a powerful and profitable platform business, by itself or in partnership with others, should they have introduced a free view box capable of conditional access. But Greg Dyke (who was against the licence fee before he was for it; he may now be against it again) boasted that the BBC sabotaged this idea at the Department of Media. Dyke and the BBC engineers ensured that a crippled box was offered to the public, with no possibility of conditional access. In other words: there was an a priori exclusion of even the possibility of subscription televisionin which viewers could make their own choices. What a fool he was. The BBC cut itself off from the future and boasted about it! BBC manipulation of technical standards to inhibit competition is nothing new, of course, as the disaster of digital radio has reaffirmed. (Dyke was sacked because proving doubly that he is a fool, he'd actually believed the BBC was independent and could challenge the government on the war in Iraq.)
11. Other than the uniquitous BBC services, public broadcasting meanwhile hardly exists in the UK (unless you count Big Brother) and there is no access or money or even frequencies for anyone who wants to compete with the BBC. The BBC has ahieved the status of a secular religion (maybe a little like the NHS) where it has successfully confused its own identity with something the public understands to be desirable. Unfortunately, the BBC has long been an obstacle to a diverse public broadcasting culture in the UK, through its monopoly of the funds not to mention its monopoly of the frequency spectrum (half the VHF band) (and obstruction of competition).
12. The BBC tells us frequently that it is a beloved British institution – so why is it so terrified of asking viewers and listeners to pay voluntarily, like every other media company? Murdoch has persuaded almost 10m people to pay for Sky. Could not the BBC do at least as well offering subscriptions. If the argument is universality, there is nothing to stop them giving away some of their programs. Or they take a few ads (which the BBC already does – in America.) The BBC has never explained why it needs to be so big, so imperial, so obsessed with itself – or even for that matter why it publishes Hello magazine in India. Why shouldn't we have real public broadcasting, accountable to the public?
13. The BBC was the model for the Ministry of Truth in 1984 and in 2008 it really has become a Big Auntie but with a vicious temper and gutter tastes. They claim to be loved, but don't trust that their output is saleable. In Australia, public revulsion with the ABC led to a boycott of the licence fee, which politicians were forced to repeal. Subsequently, ABC seems neither much better nor worse, although the media choices available to all have expoloded, with the Internet and digital wireless, satellite and cable. When will the British say enough and refuse en masse to pay? It would probably not take much to make the entire licence fee edifice crumble. If the BBC wants to become part of a diverse public broadcasting sector, good luck to them. But the argument for the licence fee is a tissue of lies, wrapped in hypocrisy. But will anything change? You gotta ask yourself the question: are the British willing to stand up to the bullying BBC, or when the Inspector calls, will they revert to the customary reflexive cringe?
Tagged with: BBC, TV Licence


text:
Mar 1, 2000 Issue
Tips from Other Journals
Ultrasonography in Evaluation of Postmenopausal Bleeding
Am Fam Physician. 2000 Mar 1;61(5):1515-1516.
The use of transvaginal ultrasonography (TVUS) for evaluation of endometrial pathology in postmenopausal women has generated interest because of its noninvasiveness. It has been assumed that endometrial thickness measured as the endometrial stripe on TVUS would help clinicians decide whether a patient should undergo endometrial biopsy. TVUS has primarily been employed in symptomatic women using hormone replacement therapy (HRT) with estrogen and progestin or with estrogen only (ERT). Little data exist on expected endometrial thickness in postmenopausal women who are using ERT or HRT. Archer and associates studied endometrial thickness in women using hormonal therapy to see if it differed from that in women not using hormone therapy. They also sought to determine whether bleeding and endometrial thickness were associated.
A total of 148 healthy postmenopausal women (43 to 70 years of age) entered the study; 121 were taking oral hormone preparations. The women were divided into five groups: (1) women who had not used any hormone therapy in the six months before the study; (2) women who had used cyclic or continuous oral ERT for at least three months; (3) women who had used oral ERT for at least three months and had irregular vaginal bleeding or spotting; (4) women using a cyclic HRT regimen for at least three months; or (5) women who had used HRT for at least three months and had irregular bleeding or spotting. TVUS was performed on the same day but before the endometrial biopsy was obtained. Endometrial biopsies were performed using routine endometrial aspirators.
No women were found to have endometrial carcinoma or adenomatous hyperplasia with atypia. Results of endometrial biopsy showed abnormal endometrial changes for 15 subjects, of whom 11 had hyperplasia without atypia. For all subjects, endometrial thickness ranged from 1 to 25 mm. The median endometrial thickness was 5.0 mm in older patients and 5.25 mm in younger patients.
The median endometrial thickness was 6.1 mm in the subjects taking hormones who were experiencing spotting or bleeding, compared with 4.0 mm in the control group. This difference was significant.
When all hormone groups were compared with the control group, the median thicknesses were 4.0 mm (control group), 5.5 mm (combined HRT groups) and 6.5 mm (combined ERT groups). The HRT and ERT groups had significantly greater endometrial thicknesses than the control group. The endometrial thickness of women using ERT was thicker than that of women using HRT, but the difference was not significant. Across all study groups, a measurement greater than 5 mm had a sensitivity of 67 percent, a specificity of 52 percent and a positive predictive value of 14 percent for determining which women had endometrial histology consistent with low estrogen stimulation. For a measurement greater than 4 mm, sensitivity was 38 percent, specificity was 73 percent and the positive predictive value was 12 percent.
Results were summarized as to the number of subjects who had abnormal and normal endometria; results of TVUS were grouped according to endometrial thickness of 5 mm or less and 4 mm or less. The results in the treated women did not show that a meaningful cutoff could be established with TVUS for correlation with endometrial pathology. However, the data for the control group support the value of using endometrial thickness as an indicator of a nonpathologic endometrium.
If a thickness greater than 5 mm had been regarded as a preliminary indicator of abnormal endometrium, 70 women would have qualified for endometrial biopsy. However, based on subsequent endometrial biopsy, only 10 of these women actually had an abnormal endometrium. A criterion of greater than 4 mm was as unreliable as 5 mm or less. Fewer women with endometrial abnormalities would have been missed, but the four who would have been missed included two with hyperplasia. In addition, 89 women would have been identified as having potentially abnormal endometrial findings although 78 of them had a normal endometrium based on endometrial biopsy.
The authors conclude that endometrial thickness assessed by TVUS is not a reliable indicator of a normal endometrium and cannot be used to rule out pathology. Thus, regardless of the thickness of the endometrium, any unscheduled bleeding during HRT should be further investigated. Even in women using HRT without abnormal bleeding, pathologic findings may be present with an endometrium that is less than 4 mm thick, although only two of 49 women in the study were affected. This study does not show a correlation adequate to recommend the use of screening TVUS as a predictor of endometrial findings.
BARBARA APGAR, M.D., M.S.
Archer DF, et al. A comparative study of transvaginal uterine ultrasound and endometrial biopsy for evaluating the endometrium of postmenopausal women taking hormone replacement therapy. Menopause. Fall 1999;6:201–8.
Home / Journals / afp / Vol. 61/No. 5(March 1, 2000) / Ultrasonography in Evaluation of Postmenopausal Bleeding


text:
Make India Asbestos Free
For Asbestos Free India
Ban-Asbestos-India
Journal of Ban Asbestos Network of India (BANI). Asbestos Free India campaign of BANI is inspired by trade union movement and right to health campaign. BANI has been working since 2000. It works with peoples movements, doctors, researchers and activists besides trade unions, human rights, environmental, consumer and public health groups. BANI demands criminal liability for companies and medico-legal remedy for victims. Contact: Advocate Gopal Krishna, LL.M., krishnagreen@gmail.com
Health Hazards of Trade Agreement with Asbestos trader Canada
Shri Yashwant Sinha
Chairperson & Members
Parliamentary Standing Committee on Finance
Shri Ramkumar Suryanarayanan
Subject- Health Hazards of Trade Agreement with Asbestos trader Canada
This is to draw your attention towards the need for making our country asbestos free at the earliest. But instead of immediately banning the import of potentially deadly asbestos, the proposed free trade agreement between India and Canada will boost asbestos trade.
Amidst a growing demand for a global ban on all kinds of asbestos and its products, Ban Asbestos Network of India (BANI), an alliance of occupational and environmental groups and public health researchers' appeal to the Committee to recommend that ban on asbestos trade with Canada must be deemed a pre-condition for future negotiations on CEPA. On November 16, Canadian Minister of International Trade Peter Van Loan opened formal talks with our Union Commerce Minister, Anand Sharma on a strategic economic partnership between the two countries.
We wish to bring to your notice that a helicopter carrying our President hit an asbestos shed at the Bhubaneshwar airport on December 9, 2009. Shri M C Bhandari, Hon'ble Governor, Orissa and Shri Devi Singh Shekhawat were also along with her. A Court of Inquiry was ordered into the incident by the Indian Air Force but the fact that such asbestos sheds pose a health, environmental and occupational risk to everybody in our country is noteworthy too. In 2006 alone there were more than 1,000 mesothelioma deaths (asbestos related fatal disease) in Japan which along with some 52 countries have banned asbestos.
Our armed forces are at a grave risk of asbestos exposure because asbestos has been used extensively in their work places and residential places. In the Army and Air Force, asbestos is used in brake and clutch pads installed in everything from tanks to jeeps to aircraft. Asbestos is part of the insulation in housing and other buildings on military bases, electric wiring insulation aboard military planes, and fire retardant materials used by military firefighters and gunners. In the Navy, Merchant Marine, and Coast Guard, it is even more widely used, mainly as thermal insulation aboard ships. Asbestos is used in old and new constructed naval vessels.
Our Ministry of Defence, Navy, Army and Air Force must be asked to compile statistics for how many soldiers have died from asbestos related diseases, how many are suffering from it and how many face the danger of exposure which causes asbestos-related lung cancers and serious respiratory diseases.
Our airmen, sailors and soldiers would feel betrayed by the armed forces and the government they served if they come to know that they faced asbestos exposure and government did nothing to save them.
It was admitted by Indian public health experts that none of the 300 medical colleges are asbestos free and none are equipped to deal with asbestos diseases. "A beginning must be made by asking all the medical colleges to prepare a list of asbestos exposed patients, preparing a register of incurable asbestos diseases and starting occupational health courses," said Dr Arun Kumar Agarwal, Additional Director, General of Health Services, Government of India at another international conference at Maulana Azad Medical College, New Delhi on 19th December, 2009. This reveals the state of occupational and environmental health infrastructure of our country.
We seek your urgent intervention in the matter of a serious unprecedented environmental and occupational health crisis with regard to unnoticed epidemic of asbestos related disease in our country in general. Even if one asbestos fibre reaches the right place, it causes irreversible damage - leading to asbestosis, lung cancer or mesothelioma. Thirty deaths are caused per day from asbestos-related diseases as per estimates based on US and European studies.
We appreciate the fact that the Parliament has taken a historic initiative of introducing The White Asbestos (Ban on Use and Import) Bill, 2009 in the Rajya Sabha. The issue of health hazards from asbestos has been raised consistently in the parliament. The Statement of Objects and Reasons of the White Asbestos (Ban on Use and Import) Bill, 2009 introduced on 31 July 2009 captures clearly the global stand on this issue:
The white asbestos is highly carcinogenic even the World Health Organisation has reported that it causes cancer. It is a rare fibrous material that is used to make rooftops and brake linings. More than fifty countries have already banned the use and import of white asbestos. Even the countries that export it to India prefer not to use it domestically. But in our country, it is imported without any restriction. Canada and Russia are the biggest exporters of white asbestos. In 2007, Canada exported almost Ninety five percent of the white asbestos it mined and out of it forty-three percent was shipped to India. It is quite surprising that our country is openly importing huge quantity of a product, which causes cancer. This is despite the fact that safer and almost cheap alternatives to asbestos are available in the country. Instead of importing a hazardous material, it will be better if we spend some money in research and development and use environment friendly product. In view of the above, there is an urgent need for a total ban on the import and use of white asbestos and promote the use of alternative material.
When the world is preparing and planning to get rid of all forms of asbestos, it makes us look stupid in India to be still importing it, we should devote our scarce resources to prevent the impending disaster by phasing it out as soon as we can. Safer substitute materials for white asbestos are available, they should be considered for use. It is high time the committee recommended measures to prevent asbestos exposures of citizens, consumers, workers. Notably, the exposure of construction workers and automobile mechanics for instance defies regulatory control efforts in any country.
We wish to draw your urgent attention to the order of Kerala Human Rights Commission on January 31, 2009, the Commission ruled that the government should take steps to phase out asbestos roofing from all schools in the state.
We wish to ask: Is it not unfair that the ministry is the real protector of the hazardous asbestos industry to the detriment of public health? How is it that killer fibers of asbestos, banned in some 52 countries, is deemed poisonous in those countries and it becomes non-poisonous the moment it enters Indian borders?
It may be noted that Union Ministry of Labour has admitted in the Parliament that "Out of a total of Rs. 59.66 lacs allocated for the National Institute of Occupational Health (NIOH)'s study of chrysotile asbestos by Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilizers, the Asbestos Cement Products Manufactures Association has contributed Rs. 16 lacs" on March 17, 2008. The corrupt influence of the asbestos industry on the ministry is quite manifest. The government has consistently slashed import duty on asbestos and made it artificially cheaper.
It may be recalled noted that in the US, Dow Chemicals Company has set aside $2.2 billion to address future asbestos-related liabilities arising out of the Union Carbide Corporation acquisition. There no such initiative by the Indian asbestos companies although it an established fact that asbestos is a known human carcinogen that claims more than 100,000 lives every year. The World Health Organization (WHO), the International Labour Organization (ILO) and the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), representing 176 million workers in 151 countries have all called for an end to the use of any form of asbestos, including chrysotile asbestos, which represents 100% of the global asbestos trade.
The time is now to embrace policy that puts public health before blind profit. You and the Parliamentary Committee have the historic opportunity and the moral duty to end the deadly asbestos legacy.
We wish to point out that despite Canada's leadership in medical care and technology, it is an act of double standards and human rights violation when an advanced country that strictly regulates the use of asbestos within its own borders, exports asbestos in India and around the world. Admittedly, India lacks the expertise to monitor and treat incurable illnesses that results from inhaling asbestos fibers.
BANI seeks your support and solidarity with the protest from health and environmental groups against an attempt by Indian and other investors to revive a big Canadian asbestos mine. Jeffrey and one other remaining mine in the Quebec province of Canada produce chrysotile, or white asbestos, used mainly to reinforce cement used for water pipes and other building materials. Exposure to asbestos fibers causes incurable and fatal lung diseases.
Canada is the world's fifth-biggest asbestos producer after Russia, China, Kazakhstan and Brazil. India is one of the biggest consumers of cancer causing asbestos fibers from Quebec, Canada. The proposed revival and expansion of the mine would boost asbestos production from the 100-year-old mine from an estimated 15,000 tonnes this year to 180,000 tonnes in 2012 and an eventual capacity of 260,000 tonnes, or about 10 per cent of global production.
In India, there is a ban on asbestos mining but trade, manufacture and use of asbestos products is yet to be banned. There is a ban on trade in asbestos waste as well.
As per the survey of U.P. Asbestos Limited, Mohanlalganj,Lucknow and Allied Nippn Pvt Ltd, Gaziabad, (U.P), the lung function impairment was found to be higher in subjects exposed for more than 11 years. This was the result of a Central Pollution Control Board sponsored project entitled "Human risk assessment studies in asbestos industries in India". This has been reported in the (2001-2002) Annual Report of Industrial Toxicological Research Centre, Lucknow. It has also been published in the 139th Report of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Environment, Forests, Science and Technology and presented to the parliament on 17th March, 2005. Unmindful of such studies new factories are coming up in Bihar, Orissa, Maharashtra, Uttaranchal and in other states.
We submit that given the ubiquitous presence of the killer fibers of asbestos, there is no alternative to getting it banned in right earnest. Scientists, doctors, public health researchers, trade unions, activists and civil society groups has been working to persuade the Governments to give up its consistent and continued pro-asbestos industry bias and lack of concern for the asbestos -injured who die one of the most painful deaths imaginable.
We wish to draw your attention towards the Government of India's submission made in August 2006 in its Report to the Supreme Court by the then Secretary, Union Ministry of Environment and Forests and Chairman, Technical Experts Committee on Management of Hazardous Wastes took note of asbestos victims and cites the "Medical Examination of the Asbestos Handlers" by a team of National Institute of Occupational Health (NIOH) that concludes, " The X ray examination by NIOH showed linear shadows on chest X rays of 15 (16 %) of 94 workers occupationally exposed to asbestos. These are consistent with asbestosis".
Although the Supreme Court of India has ruled that the Government of India must comply with ILO resolutions, so far the ILO resolution (June 14, 2006) stating "the elimination of the future use of asbestos and the identification and proper management of asbestos currently in place are the most effective means to protect workers from asbestos exposures and to prevent future asbestos-related disease and deaths" has not been acted upon.
Earlier on August 18,2003, the Union Minister of Health and Family Welfare and Parliamentary Affairs informed the Parliament that: "Studies by the National Institute of Occupational Health (NIOH), Ahmedabad, have shown that long-term exposure to any type of asbestos can lead to development of asbestosis, lung cancer and mesothelioma." This was not the first official acknowledgment of the asbestos hazard. Government of India's Office Memorandum NO.6 (6)/94 - Cement, (Sept 1, 1994) of the Ministry of Industry states: "The Department has generally not been recommending any case of Industrial License to any new unit for the creation of fresh capacity of asbestos products in the recent past due to the apprehension that prolonged exposure to asbestos leads to serious health hazards".
Public health researchers, civil society groups, trade unions and human rights groups have demanded an immediate ban on all uses of asbestos including an immediate end to the import of chrysotile. We seek measures to identify, compensate and treat the asbestos -injured and regulations to minimize harmful exposures are also being proposed. We demand criminal prosecution of those responsible for asbestos exposures such as factory owners and company directors. Although non-asbestos technology certainly exists in India, in fact in some factories the two technologies exist side-by-side, consumers will inevitably opt for the cheaper product: more demand will translate into higher sales which will generate more chrysotile rupees that can be used to obtain an eve of political support.
It appears that since a quid-pro-quo relationship between government officials and asbestos industry exists, the issue remains away the media spotlight, journalists and the public remain unaware of the pernicious reasons which motivate the decisions being taken; decisions which will expose current and future generations to the deadly asbestos hazard.
In India asbestos is still used in the manufacture of pressure and non-pressure pipes used for water supply, sewage, and drainage, packing material, brake linings and jointing used in automobiles, heavy equipment, nuclear power plants, thermal power plants amongst others.
Dr S R Kamat, a renowned lung specialist was bitter at the "utter callousness of employers", the total lack of medical expertise and government inaction; all of which continued to put workers at risk of contracting asbestos-related diseases. In the 5 surveys done in the country, large number of the subjects showed asbestos lung diseases. All of them showed breathing problem, many had cough, some had sputum, chest pain finger clubbing and chest pain. Disability in such cases are permanent, progressive; means of compensation are meager, informs Dr Kamat.
According to recent studies in United States there 10, 000 deaths happening every year due to past asbestos exposure and will cause million more deaths worldwide. This has been corroborated by studies published in the British Medical Journal.
We wonder as to why is it that the concern of the countries, which have banned asbestos not relevant to India?" Exposing workers to asbestos must be equated to murder and legal provisions must deal with it accordingly. How many consumers would want to use the material if they know that even a single exposure can cause cancer? "Experimental as well as epidemiological studies proved asbestos as carcinogen as well as co-carcinogen. Risk assessment and control of occupational exposure are very poor in developing countries like India," said Dr Qamar Rehman, a renowned toxicologist. In such a scenario, it is quite disturbing to note that there are no industrial physicians and virtually no occupational health centres in India, whatever the rules may say.
Even World Bank has a policy against asbestos since 1991. "The Bank increasingly prefers to avoid financing asbestos use...Thus, at any mention of asbestos in Bank-assisted projects, the Task Manager needs to exercise special care." Diagnosable asbestosis among workers in most asbestos cement factories and consumer products with no warning labels and unions with no programmes to prevent asbestos disease and exposure in builders and mechanics is alarming. Delay in stopping asbestos use is a victory for those who do not wish to put health and the environment ahead of commercial interests.
In the light of these findings and developments, in short we urge you to put an end to the use of the of all kinds of asbestos products that is being manufactured and encountered daily, because none of the schools, offices, legislatures, courts, hospitals, automobiles, private and public buildings in our country are asbestos free in our country. There is an urgent need to prepare a Register of asbestos handlers and victims and award a compensation of at least Rs 20 lakh for the asbestos victims.
It is submitted that the International Programme on Chemical Safety, the European Union, the Collegium Ramazzini, the International Social Security Association and the International Commission on Occupational Health all support a global ban on asbestos. Even the Supreme Court of India recognised in 1995 the hazards of asbestos in the case of Consumer Education and Research Centre (CERC) versus Union of India and more recently, in 2009 the Kerala Human Rights Commission noted that "exposing Indians to asbestos is a human rights violation" by banning its use in school. National Human Rights Commission too has termed it as harmful to health.
Therefore, we urge you to recommend the Government of India to:
· Take steps to ban import of asbestos from Canada and from all other exporting countries.
· Ensure the passing of the White Asbestos (Ban on Use and Import) Bill 2009 introduced in the Rajya Sabha in July 2009 (Bill No. XIII of 2009).
· Revise its stand and support the listing of chrysotile asbestos in the Prior Informed Consent (PIC) list of the Rotterdam Convention.
· Ratify the ILO Convention & Resolution on Asbestos.
· Take concrete steps to address the occupational and safety concerns of workers employed in asbestos related industries; ensure compensation for workers harmed by asbestos and support a just transition for workers losing employment due to a ban on the mining, use in manufacture, and trade in asbestos.
· Amend the existing Import Policy of Ministry of Commerce for chrysotile asbestos without which the alarming rise in the consumption of asbestos products is unlikely to change.
In view of the above, we request you and the Parliamentary Committee to examine the need for immediate ban on asbestos of all kinds including chrysotile asbestos. We will be glad to share more information.
Gopal Krishna,
Mb: 98180989660, E-mail-krishna2777@gmail.com
Blog: banasbestosindia.blogspot.com
1 Sinha, Shri Yashwant
2 Dr Bali Ram
3 Bandyopadhyay, Shri Sudip
4 Chang, Shri C. M.
5 Chavan, Shri Harischandra Deoram
6 Das, Shri Bhakta Charan
7 Das, Shri Khagen
8 Dasgupta, Shri Gurudas
9 Dubey, Shri Nishikant
10 Mahtab, Shri Bhartruhari
11 Mandal, Shri Mangani Lal
12 Nahata, Smt. P. Jaya Prada
13 Rao, Shri Sambasiva Rayapati
14 Reddy, Shri Magunta Sreenivasulu
15 Reddy, Shri Y. S. Jagan Mohan
16 Sarvey, Shri Sathyanarayana
17 Siddeswara, Shri Gowdar Mallikarjunappa
18 Singh, Shri N.Dharam
19 Tagore, Shri Manicka
20 Thambidurai, Dr. Munisamy
21 Yadav, Shri M. Anjan Kumar
22 Ahluwalia, Shri S.S.
23 Alvi, Shri Raashid
24 Darda Shri Vijay Jawaharlal
25 Goyal Shri Piyush
26 Mahendra Mohan, Shri
27 Dr. Mahendra Prasad
28 Misra Shri Satish Chandra
29 Moinul Hassan, Shri
30 Rao, Shri K.V.P. Ramachandra
31 Trivedi, Shri Y. P.
Posted by mediavigil at 9:00 PM
NHRC orders replacement of asbestos sheets roofing with roofing made up of some other material
NHRC Acts on TWA's Asbestos Complaint
Occupational Health India (OHI) Ban-Asbestos-India
Canada's Ugly Secret
NHRC issues notices to ministries over Asbestos usage
NHRC issues notice on white asbestos to govt ministries
Asbestos-related cancer: NHRC notice to health, environment ministries
NHRC notice to Centre, State Govts on Prohibiting Use of white Asbestos
NHRC notice to states on banning use of asbestos
Web www.asbestosfreeindia.org
South Asian Ban Asbestos Network (SABAN)
BanAsbestosAndhra
BanAsbestosJharkhand
BanAsbestosGoa
BanAsbestosUP
BanAsbestosKerala
BanAsbestosTamilNadu
BanAsbestosRajasthan
BanAsbestosGujarat
BanAsbestosOdisha
BanAsbestosWestBengal
Ban Asbestos Bihar (BAB)
THE WHITE ASBESTOS (BAN ON USE AND IMPORT) BILL, 2009
HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT STUDIES IN ASBESTOS BASED INDUSTRIES IN INDIA
ILO Ban Asbestos Resolution
Environmental Health Criteria 203; Chrysotile Asbetos
WHO ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH CRITERIA 203
ILO Asbestos Convention, 1986
Health Canada on Chrysotile Asbestos
BanAbestosMaharashtra
ASBESTOS CRISIS
WHO FactSheet on Elimination of Asbestos-related Diseases
Ban on Asbestos is a Must
A study in a peer-reviewed journal had earlier estimated that there could be more than 6,000 workers affected by asbestosis (an untreatable lung ailment) and another 600 suffering at the minimum from asbestosis-related lung cancer in India at present. Occupational cancer from asbestos, the disease caused by emissions at the work place, poses an increasingly serious health problem. But the subject has attracted relatively little attention from industry, labour, public health bodies or the medical profession. Asbestos is one of the single largest sources of occupational cancer. Indian polticians are acting as if they are bonded workers of asbestos industry.
Ban Asbestos India
asbestos mesothelioma resource
International Ban Asbestos Secretariat (IBAS)
Building and Wood Workers' International
International Federation of Building and Wood Workers
European Public Health Association
Weekly Toll
Ban Asbestos Canada (BAC)
International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC)
Asbestos Bans
asbestosblog
Killer Fiber
OccupationalHealthIndia
OHI
OHI, India
Russian Asbestos Information Source
Refuting Industry Claims That Chrysotile Asbestos Is Safe
Asbestos Products News
Chrysotile Asbestos Institute
Rotterdam Convention Updates
Govt urged to take lesson from South Africa and ban asbestos
White asbestos continues to be in use in India
World's Cheapest, Smallest Car–But Is It Asbestos-Free
Statement of Support for the Ban Asbestos in America Act of 2007
Submission on Asbestos before Independent People's Tribunal on the World Bank Group
Asbestos, the biggest killer in the workplace
Asbestos poisoning at India shipyards
Asbestos kills Americans, Europeans, Australians & Japanese but not Indians
Say no to white asbestos
Killer Asbestos: Breathtaking negligence
Asbestos, the Silent Killer
Asbestos-Is-A-Carcinogen
Canada's asbestos exports immoral
Asbestos: Kill the people, protect the industry
India still uses Amphibole Asbestos along with Chrysotile
BANI Condemns Indian Government's Double Speak on Asbestos
Doctoring asbestos study to promote its use
A government under an asbestos roof
White asbestos, a health time bomb
Use of Russian & Canadian Asbestos Rising in India
India's Position on Chrysotile Asbestos Dictated by Vested Interests!
India's Asbestos Time Bomb
Asbestos Facts
World Trade Center, New York collapsed Thousands of tons of asbestos became airborne.
Back in 1981, there was research coming out that Asbestos was cancer causing and this ad was in rebuttal to that research touting the benefits of using Asbestos. The text over the Twin Towers states, "When the Fire Alarm Went Off, It Took Two Hours to Evacuate New York's World Trade Center." I do not need to remind anyone of the images of September 11th and this ad. The copy below the ad goes on to mention all of the places that Asbestos was used in the World Trade Center. I can not not think of all of the innocent victims in the area that were exposed to all of the dust, smoke and inherent asbestos that was in the air after the buildings collapsed. The cloud of smoke went across the entire city and potentially exposed hundreds of thousands of individuals to asbestos. Hopefully there can be a cure or treatment for Mesothelioma before all of these potential victims are diagnosed.
Ban Use of Asbestos Products
Afer EU, Australia, Japan & others, US pases legislation to Ban Asbestos in its country.
Apex Court allocates meagre compensation for asbetsos victims
In 1995, the Supreme Court of India fixed Rs 1 lakh compensation amount and identified National Institute of Occupational Health (NIOH) as the final authority to certify asbestosis cases. Compensations are given through the Employees State Insurance Corporation (ESIC). Two workers in Ahmedabad Electricity Company diagnosed as having asbestosis by NIOH have been compensated by Gujarat High Court. Twenty-five workers in asbestos jointing and packing industry at Mumbai were compensated by the Special medical board of ESIC. The court ruled that the industrial units must maintain a health record of every worker up to a minimum period of 40 years; insure workers under the Employees State Insurance Act or Workmen's Compensation Act and give health coverage to every worker.
Asbestos Victims
Every day estimated 30 deaths in India is under way due to the ongoing trade and use of white asbestos. 'Asbestos' in Greek means 'indestructible'. Greeks called asbestos the 'magic mineral'. Asbestos is a generic term, referring usually to six kinds of naturally occuring mineral fibres. Of these six, three are used more commonly. Chrysotile is the most common, accounts for almost 90 per cent of the asbestos used in the industry, but it is not unusual to encounter Amosite or Crocidolite as well. Though Crocidolite asbestos is banned in India, it can still be found in old insulation material, old ships that come from other countries for wrecking in India. All types of asbestos tend to break into very tiny fibre, almost microscopic. In fact, some of them may be up to 700 times smaller than human hair. Because of their small size, once released into the air, they may stay suspended in the air for hours or even days. Asbestos fibres are virtually indestructible. They are resistant to chemicals and heat, and are very stable in the environment. They do not evaporate into air or dissolve in water, and they do not break down over time. Because of its high durability and with tensile strength asbestos has been widely used inconstruction and insulation materials - it has been used in over 3,000 different products. Where do we use it? In India, asbestos is used in manufacture of pressure and non pressure pipes used for water supply, sewage, irrigation and drainage system in urban and rural areas, asbestos textiles, laminated products, tape, gland packing, packing ropes, brake lining and jointing used in core sector industries such as automobile, heavy equipment, petro-chemicals, nuclear power plants, fertilizers, thermal power plants, transportation, defence.
Dr Nikolai F. Izmerov, Head, Russian Occupational Health Institute, Russia
Vladimir Putin government set up a panel of experts to give an opinion on a possible Russian asbestos ban. The panel's report gave an impassioned defence of asbestos use. Dr Izmerov gave a presentation on "Chrysotile. Russian Experience in Occupational Health" at the International Conference on Chrysotile in Montreal during May 23 - 24, 2006. Russia exported 152, 820 MT of chrysotile asbestos to India in 2006.


Regional journalists will vote on a new series of awards, The UK Regional Critics' Film Awards, which will launch at Cinema Days, a distributors preview trade event for regional media held Jan 25-28.
Regional journalists including critics, writers and editors (staff or freelance) will be allowed to vote for their film of the year, film-maker of the year, performance of the year (actor and actress) and newcomer of the year.
Voting will run online at www.cinemadays.com from Jan 12 to Jan 30 and results will be announced in early February 2007.
Cinema Days was established in 1988 and now held three times a year at a regional multiplex.


text:
M&As this week: Aurora Diagnostics, Caesarea Medical Electronics, Innocoll Holdings
Aurora Diagnostics has completed the acquisition of University Pathologists, a provider of hospital-based professional anatomic pathology services in the US, along with its affiliated technical lab, University Pathologists Diagnostics.
The acquisition enables the lab management services provider to expand capabilities to better serve physicians in the hospital laboratory sector.
American medical technology company, Becton, Dickinson and Company (BD) has announced the 100% acquisition of Israel-based infusion pump systems manufacturer, Caesarea Medical Electronics (CME).
The transaction follows BD's acquisition of CareFusion, which owns a 40% non-controlling stake in CME, in 2015. By acquiring the remaining stake in CME, BD intends to expand its infusion portfolio with ambulatory, home and specialty acute care infusion pumps.
Healthcare investment fund company, Gurnet Point, has agreed to acquire pharmaceutical and medical device company, Innocoll Holdings, for a cash consideration of $209m.
"The acquisition is part of Gurnet's business strategy to invest in life science, medical technology and healthcare service companies."
Pursuant to the agreement, the acquirer will also provide a $10m loan for Innocoll's continued development of XARACOLL, its late-stage surgically implantable product candidate for the treatment of postsurgical pain.
In a definitive agreement signed between aesthetic medical products developer, Syneron Medical, and Apax Partners, all the outstanding shares of the former will be purchased by an affiliate of funds advised by the latter, for a cash consideration of $397m.
Barclays and J.P. Morgan are the exclusive financial advisors for the acquirer and the target company respectively.
Partnerships, Licensing, Investments and M&A Deals and Trends in Pharmaceuticals – March 2011
Partnerships, Licensing, Investments and M&A Deals and Trends in Pharmaceuticals - February 2011
Partnerships, Licensing, Investments and M&A Deals and Trends in Pharmaceuticals – January 2011
Partnerships, Licensing, Investments and M&A Deals and Trends in Pharmaceuticals - April 2011
Barclays Wealth Management
Candela Corp
Aurora Diagnostics LLC
CME, Inc.


This policy is valid beginning June 2014 until the end of time or the internet, whichever comes first.
LivingLovingLearningAcademy.com, herein referred to as LLL Academy, is a personal blog written and edited by Melissa Myers. The reading of all information provided is of your own free will. The purpose of LLL Academy is to share adventures in family life and homeschooling, provide information and give encouragement along the way. I do reserve the right to update or modify this policy at any time.
Unless otherwise noted, I, Melissa Myers of Living Learning Academy, am the legal copyright owner of all material on this website, and it may not be used, reprinted, or published without permission. You are more than welcome to link directly to my site, if referencing or to share information provided with others.
Occasionally, I may also write about products or services I purchase personally or receive in exchange for a review. Whether a product or service is purchased by me or received for free, the review will be my own unbiased, honest opinions.
There may be ads on some pages as well. I do my best to check these for content appropriateness as often as I can, but I cannot be online all the time. If I do ever see an ad promoting something that I feel is not something in line with my and my readers' views, I will try to remove it as soon as I can. But again, I cannot be online all the time or catch everything. Sometimes it is easier to read past whatever it is.
All content on LLL Academy is for general information and entertainment purposes. I am not providing legal, medical, or professional advice. You are taking all provided information at your own risk. It is, however, my sincerest hope for this site, that you find more ways to spend time as a family, get homeschooling tips and advice, and maybe even a good laugh or two now and then.


text:
Jamie Garratt – Gastown's Idea Rebel
Jamie on his way to hang out in his personal tree fort.
@idearebel
Gastown has some interesting characters inhabiting the neighbourhood.
The folks here are just like those anywhere else, except they're a little different. Unique in subtle ways and sometimes not so subtle, Gastown's entrepreneurs are their own breed; a hybrid caste of business men and women who roam our historic streets and buildings, fearlessly manifesting wild ideas, and transforming them into real world things.
Can a person grow a digital solutions company from one office into three, covering three cities, countless major markets worldwide, travel the globe, skateboard, wakeboard, play guitar and make a Top 40 hit, have 3 square meals a day and still have time to chill in their custom made tree fort atop an office built in a 100 year old elevator shaft?
Of course. It's Gastown and it's time to hang out with Idea Rebel CEO, Jamie Garrett.
His influence in the development of high profile companies and brands including Electronic Arts, Quiksilver, and BMW has landed him the title of Top 40 Under 40 and Entrepreneur of the Year finalist (Ernst & Young).
Idea Rebel has offices in Vancouver, Toronto, and Montreal, earning reputable nods such as Biggest Digital Agencies in Canada, Top Innovators, and multiple awards.
How did you get here?
Idea Rebel is a digital agency and I have been working in this industry for the past 20 years. We used to be in Yaletown during the mid 90's and then around 2008, I felt it was time for a change. It just didn't feel like a creative place to be in anymore.
When we started Idea Rebel 9 years ago, part of the move to Gastown was because the neighbourhood had a growing creative scene, attracting lots of talent and innovation, and the vibe felt fresher than anywhere else in the city. It was the right fit for us then and it still is today.
Who or what is an Idea Rebel?
The name Idea Rebel came from the notion of how we come up with and share ideas, and how we challenge those ideas. Not everything we do is wildly inventive but we always strive to make it so. Certain work that has really stood out for us has been on projects like The Ford VR Experience – we were the first company to create a 360 degree video that appeared within an app as virtual reality. It all has to do with how we ideate and if we can figure out a way to do it then we'll make it happen.
What was the experience like for you working on the Ford VR Le Mans Project?
Before we started the Ford project we had already completed a ton of virtual reality work for Converse and BMW. Our pitch to Ford was unique, as the idea centred around an app that had a tv channel type interface for the user. We built a platform where Ford could create any content they wished using VR equipment, then seamlessly and independently, add that content to our app and technology. After we built the framework, we handed it over to Ford saying "Here you go. This is how it works".
They were then free to create whatever VR video they wanted for their app. The app launched with the 24 hour race at Le Mans in France and now contains around 15 different episodes that Ford have created themselves. The goal was to create an autonomous, self-sustaining VR platform for Ford with an app that's still going strong today.
Check out the video and case study here.
Get the App here!
Why does Gastown seem to attract artists and creative people, perhaps more than anywhere else in the city?
I'm from Toronto and have been in Vancouver for the last 24 years. When we first moved to Gastown, there were only a handful of tech companies here. Anytime I'm in our boardroom, in a meeting or on a call, I look out onto Water Street and always see fellow entrepreneurs moving about, like the guys from Hootsuite, Quietly or Global Relay.
The amount of creatives and startups down here is countless and I'm running into these types of people all the time, every day. The CEO of Native Shoes lives across the street and Fluevog's Flagship store is a minute away from our office. Gastown is more than just great shops and restaurants; it's also a place with a strong entrepreneurial spirit where we all interact together.
What are some of your favourite spots to hangout at in Gastown?
I love The Black Frog and I love the Greedy Pig. Guilt & Co. is one my favourite nitetime spots to hang out in and listen to live music. I hit The Diamond sometimes and also The Blarney Stone. The Irish Heather is great and I like strolling down Blood Alley and into Tacofino. Anytime friends come to Vancouver, I automatically take them to Gastown for food and entertainment, and then we go somewhere else.
On top of your achievements in the digital world, I've heard that you are also heavily involved offline in music?
I've been in the music industry for over 20 years, recording, touring and playing in bands as a guitarist and singer. We had a top 40 hit in Canada by our band "Exit This Side" – with the song "One Night Stand". We even hit the billboard charts with that one which was pretty cool and unexpected. Today, I'm involved with running a recording studio with one of the guys from Exit This Side, writing music, producing and working with other musicians.
What's next for Idea Rebel?
We're looking to expand more into North America and Europe – currently our three locations are in Gastown, Toronto and Santa Monica. We just launched Roots.com and their full e-commerce platform. That was a big accomplishment for us. We also just signed a 3 year deal with BC Ferries to do a large part of their digital content and we have some cool ideas in the works. We also have a sports division that we're working on with some big sports leagues and teams.