Phoenix Park covers over 700 hectares and is now the largest urban park in Europe. It was originally formed as a royal hunting park in the 1660s but was opened to the public in 1747. With such a huge space, there are a number of things to do as you explore the park.
The park still contains a herd of fallow deer and is the site of Dublin Zoo, the Peoples Gardens and Áras an Uachtaráin, the residence of the President of Ireland. There are a number of recreational facilities throughout the park including football, GAA and cricket pitches as well as polo grounds. There is also the Papal Cross, erected for the visit of Pope John Paul II, and the Wellington monument which are both particularly popular attractions with locals and tourists alike.
There is a bike hire located at the Parkgate entrance of the Phoenix Park for anyone who is interested in taking a relaxing cycle through the park.
Áras an Uachtaráin is open Saturdays only. Free admission tickets are issued at The Phoenix Park Visitor Centre on the day on a first come, first served basis. Tour times are: 10.30, 11.30, 12.30, 13.30, 14.30 and 15.30.
The Phoenix Park is open 24 hrs a day, 7 days a week, all year round. The main gates of the Park at Parkgate Street and Castleknock Gate are open 24 hours. The side gates to the Park are open from 7am until 11pm.


text:
HomeNewsUS NatGas Futures Edge Up on Soaring Global Gas Prices
US NatGas Futures Edge Up on Soaring Global Gas Prices
(Reuters) — U.S. natural gas futures edged up on Tuesday, shrugging off forecasts for milder weather and lower heating demand next week than previously expected, and focusing instead on a sharp rally in European gas futures that could keep U.S. liquefied natural gas exports near record highs.
Front-month gas futures rose 2.7 cents, or 0.7%, to $3.861 per million British thermal units (MMBtu) by 9:34 a.m. EST (1434 GMT) after rising nearly 4% in the previous session.
"We are in push-pull market condition. On the one hand, we are currently seeing record high LNG feedgas, caused by the high prices in Europe and Asia, as well as the expansion at Sabine Pass. On the other hand, both the GFS00 and EC00 weather models have shifted warmer over the next two weeks," Refinitiv analyst John Abeln said.
Gas prices in Europe jumped more than 18% to an all-time high as Russian gas shipments to Germany through a major transit pipeline reversed direction and colder weather increased demand.
No matter how high global gas prices rise, the United States can only convert about 11.1 Bcfd of gas into LNG. The rest of the gas flowing to the export plants is used to fuel equipment that produces the it.
"Curtailed Russian flows into Europe will not necessarily be equating to an incremental increase in LNG exports given capacity considerations. So, until some bullish assistance is provided by the weather factor, the gas market will continue to experience some difficulty in pushing above the $4.00-4.10 zone," advisory firm Ritterbusch and Associates said in a note.
Data provider Refinitiv projected average U.S. gas demand, including exports, would fall from 123.7 cubic feet per day this week to 118.6 Bcfd next week as the weather turns milder.
Refinitiv estimated 405 heating degree days (HDDs) over the next two weeks in the lower 48 U.S. states, down from the 413 HDDs estimated on Monday. The normal is 428 HDDs for this time of year.
HDDs, used to estimate demand to heat homes and businesses, measure the number of degrees a day's average temperature is below 65 Fahrenheit (18 Celsius).
Mostly mild weather since mid-November has kept heating demand low and means there will soon be more gas in stockpiles than is usual for the time of year for the first time since April.
The amount of gas flowing to U.S. LNG export plants has averaged 11.9 Bcfd so far in December, now that the sixth train at Cheniere Energy Inc's Sabine Pass plant in Louisiana is producing LNG.
That compares to 11.4 Bcfd in November and a monthly record of 11.5 Bcfd in April.
Output in the U.S. Lower 48 states has averaged 96.7 Bcfd so far in December, which would top the monthly record of 96.5 Bcfd in November.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


The Diamonds By the Inch collection by Roberto Coin presents this enticing bracelet. Crafted in 18kt white gold, the thin link chain has stations of single white diamonds that rest along its length for a subtle sparkle. You can layer or wear this Roberto Coin bracelet solo for a look that is perfect with any outfit.


One of the eight federal districts of Russia.
ⓘ 'Unnamed (Ba-analogue of Calcioaravaipaite)' ?
957 valid minerals. 141 (TL) - type locality of valid minerals. 5 (FRL) - first recorded locality of unapproved mineral/variety/etc. 3 erroneous literature entries.


Dentures (also known as false teeth) are custom-made from plastic or metal and fit on the gum where a natural tooth has been lost.
The process of making a denture often takes 4-5 appointments. At the first 1 or 2 appointments, your dentist will take impressions (moulds) of your mouth which will be sent to a laboratory where a dental technician will make the dentures in stages on models. At subsequent appointments, your dentist will try the partially made dentures in your mouth.
Many people feel embarrassed by gaps between their teeth when they smile. Replacing the missing teeth can often improve confidence. Dentures also help improve the appearance (aesthetics) of the face by providing support for the lips and cheeks.
Chewing (function) can be improved by filling the gaps where natural teeth have been lost.
An immediate denture is a term that describes a denture that is planned and constructed with the intention of placing it in the mouth immediately upon removal of teeth. This has the advantage of avoiding a waiting period with no teeth present which many patients would find difficult.
Dentures can be difficult to get used to. They are not like your own teeth and it can take several weeks or even months to get used to them. Even the best fitting dentures only provide about 25% of the chewing power of your own teeth and some patients feel they have a mouth full of plastic, which takes some getting used to!
Speech can also be affected for a while as your muscles and tongue get used to them.
Ulcers often develop after dentures have been fitted as your mouth needs to adjust to having them in place. Your dentist will adjust the dentures over the first few weeks which will relieve any rubbing in the mouth.
Daily cleaning of your denture is recommended. It is best to scrub your denture with an old toothbrush or denture cleaning brush over a basin of water. There are chemical cleaners that can aid with the cleaning process but it is best to discuss the different types with your dentist before use as some can cause deterioration of your denture.
It is also important to leave your denture out of the mouth during sleep to allow your mouth to have a break. If they are left in place, there is a risk of fungal infections developing.


text:
Q: How to get matched value from objects collection in Lodash? private static getControlName(c: AbstractControl): string | null {
    const formGroup = c.parent.controls;

    return Object.keys(formGroup).find(name => c === formGroup[name]) || null;
}

What will be the equivalent of the above return statement in Lodash? I tried with .find and .pickBy (and some others too) but all seems to return an object instead of the value.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
Иностранные песни Рок
Ugly Kid Joe — Everything About You
11 января, 2022 Mr. Good Ugly Kid Joe
Слушать Ugly Kid Joe — Everything About You
Слушайте Everything About You — Ugly Kid Joe на Яндекс.Музыке
Текст Ugly Kid Joe — Everything About You
I, hate the rain and sunny weather,
and I, hate beach and mountains too;
(and) I don't like a thing about the city, no, no,
and I, I, I, hate the countryside too!
And I, hate everything about you!
…everything about you!
I, don't like a thing about your mother,
and I, I hate your daddy's guts too,
I don't like a thing about your sister,
'cause I think sex is overrated too.
and I, get sick when I'm around, I, can't stand to be around,
I, hate everything about you!
everything about you, everything about you, everything about you!
Some say I've got a bad attitude,
but that don't change the way I feel about you,
and if you think this might be bringing me down,
look again 'cause I ain't wearing no frown!
I don't really care about your sister
Fuck the little bitch 'cause I already kissed her
One thing that I did to your lady
I put her on the bed and she didn't say maybe
I know you know everybody knows
the way it comes, the way it's gonna go
You think it's sad,
well that's too bad,
'Cause I'm havin'
A ball hatin'
Every little thing about you!
Everything about you, everything about
I get sick when I'm around
I can't stand to be around
I hate everything about you
← Ugly Kid Joe — Neighbor
Ugly Kid Joe — So Damn Cool →
Ugly Kid Joe — So Damn Cool
11 января, 2022 Mr. Good
Ugly Kid Joe — Neighbor
Сергей Мироненко — Зима
Сергей Мироненко — Мне всё в ней нравится
Сергей Мироненко — Давай включим разум
Сергей Мироненко — Храм
Сергей Мироненко — Свободная
Сергей Мироненко — Удача стерва


We are excited to announce experimental support for discovery using the Cisco UCS Manager. Chassis, blade and service profiles info will be discovered in v5.0.3. This change and other changes in v5.0.3 are discussed below.
As mentioned above, chassis, blade and service profile information will be discovered. Service profiles will be correlated to the corresponding blade devices and you will be able to search by service profile name from the dashboard search box. The blade device view will also have a link to the connected service profile.
With this new feature, the DATACENTER menu also gets a new tab named "Service Profile".
We have added an option in the network switch auto-discovery to choose the debug level. By default, the Normal Debug option will be selected. The Normal Debug option makes the debug information more readable and you can easily decipher the steps during the discovery phase. An example is shown below.
Based on user requests, we have added an option to add a direct connect relationship between a switch port and a device. In earlier versions, you could connect a device to a switch either via a patch panel or via a mac address but not directly. In v5.0.3, all three options are available. You can find the new option under the "Other" tab for the device view and edit pages.
All the notes fields as well as any free form text fields will now show line breaks. In previous versions, all text was displayed as a single line on the view page and line breaks were only visible on the edit page.
The patch panel port display hover now has dynamic sizing based on the character length of the object.
TAP ports and patch panel ports are ordered by module slot # and id now for consistency.
v5.0.3 update file is now available at device42 update page.
New users can grab the device42 virtual appliance from device42 download page. You will need to upgrade to v5.0.3 as we are still working on uploading the latest images for download.


SMITH J: Ms. Anne Henry ("Ms. Henry"), a former Principal Nursing Officer in Saint Lucia, alleges that Dr. Horatius Jeffers ("Dr. Jeffers"), an orthopedic surgeon, was negligent in performing a varus distal femoral osteotomy on her, as well as in his post-operative treatment, which left her with certain disabilities. It is not in dispute that there was non-union of the distal femur osteotomy site and therefore the objective of the surgery was not achieved. Dr. Jeffers says, however, that his surgical procedure and management of Ms. Henry was in accordance with the standard expected of an orthopedic surgeon and that Ms. Henry had been informed of and accepted the risk of non-union.
 The relevant factual background is as follows. In July 2014, Ms. Henry consulted Dr. Jeffers complaining of painful swelling of the right knee. Dr. Jeffers noted no antecedent history of trauma and a grade 1 effusion of the knee joint with valgus alignment of the knee. He recommended a course of physiotherapy, with emphasis on vastus medialis strengthening, and prescribed a course of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.
 In a follow-up visit on 3rd September 2014, Ms. Henry complained of increasingly severe right knee pain and an increase valgus deformity of the knee joint. Dr. Jeffers, after reviewing standing x-rays and an MRI, recommended a varus distal femoral closing wedge osteotomy ("the surgery") to correct this problem. Ms. Henry did not immediately make a decision.
I am satisfied the patient had the requisite capacity to consent to this procedure. I have explained the procedure to the patient. In particular, I have explained the intended benefits: re-alignment of the right knee to allow for unloading of lateral knee joint and allow for resolution of left [sic] knee pain.
 Dr. Jeffers indicated to Ms. Henry that it would take between four to six months before she properly healed and could get back to her normal life. The surgery was performed on 22nd September 2014 at Tapion Hospital and Ms. Henry was discharged on 25th September 2014. She had post-operative consultations with Dr. Jeffers on the following dates: 14th October 2014, 18th November 2014, 11 th December 2014, 5th February 2015, 19th March 2015, 23rd April 2015, 9th June 2015, 28 th July 2015, 10th September 2015 and 17th September 2015. At each of these consultations (except in November 2014 and June 2015), Dr. Jeffers ordered x-rays to monitor her progress. During these visits, he examined her and reviewed the x-rays but never informed her that there was non-union until 28th July 2015, ten months after the surgery, notwithstanding that the x-rays had been progressively revealing implant failure.
 As part of his post-operative management, Dr. Jeffers, in February 2015, had ordered physiotherapy and, over the period March to June 2015, he recommended that Ms. Henry move from light to moderate to full weight bearing, which she alleges contributed to the failure of the surgery.
 Following Dr. Jeffers' disclosure of non-union, Ms. Henry consulted Dr. Richardson St. Rose, an orthopedic surgeon, who, after examining the post-operative x-rays, noted in a memorandum dated 24th September 2015 that: the objective of surgery was not realized; there was implant failure; non-union of the osteotomy; the valgus deformity recurred; femoral fragments displaced and urgent revision surgery was needed at a centre where proper techniques could be applied.
 Heeding that advice, in October 2015, Ms. Henry had revision surgery (a retrograde intra-medullary nailing of her right femur) performed at the Emory Clinic in Georgia, United States of America. Following her revision surgery, she consulted Dr. St. Rose again on 10th February 2016. In a memorandum dated 29th April 2016, he noted that the post-operative films showed good alignment and advanced healing and she was ambulant.
(i) Failed to provide the Claimant with sufficient information on his personal experience in performing the proposed surgery, sufficient to make a rational judgment on whether or not to accept the medical advice given in respect of the proposed surgery.
(ii) Failed to give any warning to the Claimant of the possibility that the operation might be unsuccessful and may require revision surgery and of all possible complications which may arise during and/or from the surgery.
(iii) Failed to perform the surgery sufficiently carefully and to place the hardware correctly to provide complete bone alignment necessary for healing.
(iv) Failed to take appropriate action within a timely manner after post-surgery x-rays revealed that there was failure of structural implant and non-healing of the osteotomy.
(v) Continued to advise the Claimant to undergo x-rays for months following evidence of the non-union of the osteotomy thereby exposing the Claimant to unnecessary radiation and placing the Claimant at risk for a malignancy.
(vi) Failed to advise the Claimant to stop physical therapy in spite of the poor prognosis and implant failure.
(vii) Failed to heed professional literature and the modern professional practice that in very few occasions does a non-union go on to heal without intervention and that in general, if a non-union is still evident at 6 months, it will remain unhealed without specific treatment, usually orthopedic surgery.
It is not in dispute that there was appropriate indication for the recommended surgery. The issues that arise are therefore in regards to the surgery and post-operative management.
(1) Whether Ms. Henry gave her informed consent to the surgery?
(2) Whether Dr. Jeffers negligently used a surgical technique liable to fail?
(3) Whether Dr. Jeffers failed to manage Ms. Henry in accordance with the standards expected of an ordinary skilled doctor exercising and professing to have that special skill?
(4) Whether Dr. Jeffers delayed in the management of the Ms. Henry's treatment and did that delay cause any damage to her?
(5) If Dr. Jeffers was negligent, what is the measure of damages Ms. Henry is entitled to?
 My task in resolving these issues is twofold. Firstly, I must determine whether the evidence presented supports any of the alleged acts or omissions. Secondly, if it does, I must then determine whether, in the performance of the act or in the omission, Dr. Jeffers was negligent.
 The question I must therefore ask myself is this: did Dr. Jeffers, in performing the surgery and in his post-surgery treatment, act in accordance with the practice accepted as proper by a responsible body of orthopaedic surgeons? Put another way: did Dr. Jeffers fail to act in accordance with the standards of reasonably competent orthopaedic surgeons? The court, in order to come to a conclusion as to what were the applicable orthopaedic standards, must rely on the opinion of orthopaedic surgeons.
(1) Dr. Horatius Jeffers, who gave evidence on his own behalf, is a Fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons with a specialty in Trauma and Orthopaedics. He obtained a Certificate of Completion of Specialist in Trauma and Orthopaedic surgery at the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons Glasgow, United Kingdom in 2001. He has practiced as an orthopaedic surgeon in Saint Lucia for the past 17 years.
(2) Dr. Jerome K. Jones provided an expert report to the Court. He is a graduate of Cornell University Medical School and a Fellow of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgery and has practiced orthopaedic surgery since 1983 in New Mexico, Florida and Barbados. His areas of specialty are total hip and knee replacement and management of blount's disease. He is published in the Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics (29(7):730-735; October/November 2009). His expert report to the court supported Dr. Jeffers case.
(3) Dr. Richardson St. Rose provided an expert report to the court. He is a Fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons and has practiced as an orthopaedic surgeon in Saint Lucia for the past 38 years. His expert report to the court supported Ms. Henry's case.
(4) Dr. Richard L. Thomas is a Board Certified orthopaedic surgeon with the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery and Assistant Professor of Orthopaedics, Orthopaedic Trauma and Adult Reconstruction at the Emory Johns Creek Hospital, Georgia, United States of America. Dr. Thomas did not provide an expert report to the court, did not give evidence at the trial and therefore could not be cross-examined.
 I observe that Ms. Henry, in a comprehensive witness statement, alleges that this "is a clear case of professional/medical negligence" and she set out, in great detail, allegations of Dr. Jeffers' failure to act with the degree of skill required of a reasonably competent practitioner. I point out, however, that where Ms. Henry offers medical opinion on issues which require expert opinion, I am obliged to disregard these as she, though a senior registered nurse, is not an expert. I will now examine each of the issues that arise for determination.
She does not dispute that the patient consent form listed infection and non-union. Her contention is that, like the Operative Report from Emory Healthcare which listed the risks as "infection, malunion, nonunion, hardware failure, need for revision, nerve or blood vessel injury, continued pain, stiffness, DVT or PE", Dr. Jeffers ought to have informed of those risks, which in fact occurred.
 In his witness statement, Dr. Jeffers responded that he gave her all information about the procedure, explained the intended benefits and "advised the Claimant of the most serious and more frequently occurring risks namely infections and non-union." He stated that non-union is a material risk inherent in that type of surgery and that he had discussed with her the possibility of adverse reactions, including the non-union post surgery. He said that he was satisfied that she understood the nature of the surgery and the risk associated with that type of surgery and signed the patient consent form of her own free will. During cross-examination, he stated that there are multiple risks in every surgery. He would inform a patient of the more relevant complications, but some risks were so infrequent that it would just disturb the patient if you mentioned all of them.
 Dr. Jeffers did not inform Ms. Henry of the risks of continued pain after surgery, the alleged complete fracture, mal-union, hardware failure and stiffness. Was he under a duty to do so? What is the law in relation to informed consent?
 The Hippocratic Corpus advises physicians to reveal nothing to the patient of his present or future condition, "for many patients through this cause have taken a turn for the worse" (Decorum XVI). This paternalistic approach that existed at the early beginning of the practice of medicine has fallen into desuetude. As observed in Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board,  legal developments now point towards an approach to the law which, instead of treating patients as placing themselves in the hands of their doctors (and then being prone to sue their doctors in the event of a disappointing outcome), treats them, so far as possible, as adults who are capable of understanding that medical treatment is uncertain of success and may involve risks, accepting responsibility for the taking of risks affecting their own lives, and living with the consequences of their choices.
" The correct position, in relation to the risks of injury involved in treatment, can now be seen to be substantially that adopted inSidaway by Lord Scarman, and by Lord Woolf MR in Pearce, subject to the refinement made by the High Court of Australia in Rogers v Whitaker, which we have discussed at paras -. An adult person of sound mind is entitled to decide which, if any, of the available forms of treatment to undergo, and her consent must be obtained before treatment interfering with her bodily integrity is undertaken. The doctor is therefore under a duty to take reasonable care to ensure that the patient is aware of any material risks involved in any recommended treatment, and of any reasonable alternative or variant treatments. The test of materiality is whether, in the circumstances of the particular case, a reasonable person in the patient's position would be likely to attach significance to the risk, or the doctor is or should reasonably be aware that the particular patient would be likely to attach significance to it.
(1) A doctor has a duty of care to take reasonable care to ensure that the patient is informed of any material risks involved in the recommended treatment as well as any reasonable alternative treatments.
(2) A risk is material if a reasonable person in the same position of the patient would be likely to regard a particular risk as significant.
(3) It is impossible to reduce to percentage terms the assessment of materiality of risk.
(4) The doctor may withhold disclosure if he reasonably considers that disclosure would be detrimental to the patient's health (this is the "therapeutic exception") or in cases of necessity as where treatment is urgently required and the patient is unconscious.
(5) The doctor has a responsibility to explain why one of the available treatment options is medically preferable to the others.
 Keeping these principles in mind, particularly the first two, I now examine each of the risks of which Ms. Henry was not informed. It is perhaps useful to observe at this juncture that neither Dr. St. Rose nor Dr. Thomas offered any opinion as to whether Dr. Jeffers fell below the accepted standard in failing to inform Ms. Henry of the risks of continued pain after surgery, the alleged complete fracture, mal-union, hardware failure and stiffness. Dr. Jones was asked whether he would have informed Ms. Henry of such risks and he replied "yes". But, as Montgomery illustrates, the fact that Dr. Jones would have done so does not mean that Dr. Jeffers was under a duty, as a matter of law, to do so in relation to each risk. The determinative question is: was the risk material?
 If the objective of alignment had been achieved and Ms. Henry continued to experience some pain in the knee, I do not think that a reasonable person, similarly circumstanced, would regard that as a significant or material risk. As it turned out, the objective of alignment was not achieved due to non-union, therefore continuing pain was the inevitable corollary. If Ms. Henry was informed that there was a risk that the surgery could fail, that is, that there was a risk of non-union, it follows that she would have been very much alive to the risk of continuing pain if there was non-union, as indeed there was.
 At first blush, there appears to be a conflict between Dr. Jeffers describing the osteotomy as a "complete fracture" and Dr. Jones stating there was no radiographic evidence of a complete fracture. Under cross-examination, Dr. Jones appeared to be associating fracture with some kind of trauma. Dr. Jeffers appears to have considered the osteotomy as a "controlled fracture". The apparent conflict is therefore more semantic than substantial. I therefore conclude on this point, that, to the extent that there was a fracture, this was inherent in the nature of an osteotomy. By agreeing to the surgery, Ms. Henry agreed to the fracture of the femur, which is what an osteotomy is.
 The expert opinion is unanimous that Dr. Jeffers' surgical procedure resulted in a non-union, not mal-union. There is therefore no basis to find lack of informed consent in relation to mal-union.
I do not think that a reasonable person in the same position as Ms. Henry, knowing of the risk of non-union, would consider hardware failure as a material risk that he ought to have been informed about. It is the failure of the osteotomy to heal – to achieve union – that is the material risk.
 No evidence was presented to satisfy the court that a reasonable person would have considered stiffness a significant or material risk of undergoing the surgery. I cannot, on any reasonable view, see how this could be characterized as a material risk.
 During the trial, it was suggested that Dr. Jeffers lacked the necessary experience to perform the surgery. In his memorandum of 29 th April 2016, Dr. St. Rose stated that "the surgeon should have been more experienced in dealing with that type of work." Ms. John-Xavier, in her closing submissions, apparently abandoned this suggestion. In any event, at the trial, no medical opinion whatsoever was presented as to how much experience an orthopaedic surgeon should have had, or how much experience might have been advisable before undertaking the surgery in Saint Lucia. Other than Dr. St. Rose's bare, unsupported statement, there is no basis upon which it can be concluded that Dr. Jeffers, a practicing orthopaedic surgeon for seventeen years, lacked the necessary experience to perform the surgery.
 In summary, on the issue of informed consent, I am satisfied that, keeping the test of materiality in mind, Dr. Jeffers informed Ms. Henry of the material risks associated with the surgery.
 To support her allegation of negligence, Ms. Henry relied on the medical opinion of Dr. St. Rose and Dr. Richard L. Thomas. By order dated 21st November 2017, the court gave leave for Dr. St. Rose and Dr. Jones, respectively, to be expert witnesses. Dr. St. Rose signed a witness statement and was cross-examined at the trial. Dr. Thomas, on the other hand, cannot be considered as an expert witness since no application was ever made to deem him as such. He provided no expert report or witness statement to the court and therefore was not a witness at the trial who could be cross-examined, like the other orthopedic surgeons were. The contents of his medical report, untested by cross-examination, can therefore only be given limited weight.
9.4 Increasing Deformity of the Distal Femur and reoccurrence of the Valgus Deformity of the joint.
10.1 One or more cancellous screws could have been used and inserted through the offset of the plate and parallel to the blade, all within the Distal Femoral Bone. This would considerably increase the fixation of the angled plate in the distal fragment.
10.2 The Cortical Screws were inadequate in length and diameter. The screws did not fully engage the Distal Cortex. Those screws should never have been used in the cancellous bone of the Distal Femoral Fragment .
11. As a result, I advised the patient that an urgent surgical revision needed to be undertaken by a more experienced surgeon in a proper setting where adequate facilities are readily available.
12. If these were not done urgently then complications of arthritis and deformity would worsen.
14. I finally saw the patient on the 10th February, 2016 after revision surgery in the United States of America was done in October, 2015. She had a Retrograde Intra Medullary Nailing of her right Femur. The post-operative Films showed good alignment and advanced healing. She is ambulant. There are permanent operative scars about the knee and proximal thigh: An 8″ long scar anteriorly over the knee and scars on either side of the knee from insertion of Anti Rotation Screws. There are similar scars over the proximal right thigh.
 Dr. St. Rose has therefore offered three reasons why, in his opinion, Dr. Jeffers' surgical procedure was not in accordance with the proper practice. Under cross-examination, however, Dr. St. Rose made certain admissions that undermined his credibility and the coherence of his evidence. Firstly, he admitted that he was wrong when he said that the cortical screws were inadequate in length. He stated: "I will not quarrel with the length. I was wrong in talking about the length." Secondly, he admitted that, though he had stated that the cortical screws were inadequate, he was merely "suspicious of the diameter of the screws, but just suspicious, no proof." He admitted he never saw the screws; he just looked at the x-rays. Dr. St. Rose offered no explanation as to why he changed his initial opinion that the cortical screws were inadequate in both length and diameter. He had the opportunity to correct this before he was cross-examined but did not do so, lending some whimsicality to his testimony. He simply withdrew what he had said in a cavalier manner and, in doing so, eliminated the second of the three reasons he had advanced for opining that Dr. Jeffers' technique was poor.
 Dr. St. Rose's first reason – that "one or more cancellous screws could have been used and inserted through the offset of the plate and parallel to the blade, all within the distal femoral bone" – was partially weakened by the concession made by Mrs. John-Xavier that the Claimant was not disputing that a cancellous screw had in fact been used. What, therefore, remained of Dr. St. Rose's evidence against Dr. Jeffers?
 At the invitation of the court, Dr. St Rose, using one of the x-rays of the knee, indicated where he thought the implant should have been placed. He stated: "the screw went through the osteotomy. The screw was put in the wrong place. The plate ought to have been placed lower down. Get that plate downwards under x-ray control and the fixation would have been more stable." It was put to Dr. St. Rose by Ms. Augustin, counsel for Dr. Jeffers, that the cancellous screw could not have been placed lower down because it would have interfered with the cruciate ligaments. Dr. St. Rose rejected that suggestion and stated that the cruciate ligaments would be well away from this cut.
 I turn now to the evidence of Dr. Thomas which comprised two letters dated 4th October 2016 and 25th December 2017, respectively. Neither of these letters expressed any opinion on Dr. Jeffers' technique and are therefore of no assistance in resolving this particular issue.
"The osteotomy on completion was fixed/stabilized with 90 degree blade plate with screws construct. I used a partially threaded cancellous screw that was inserted through the plates crossing the osteotomy site and anchored in the epiphysis/distal femoral bone. The remainder of the fixation included four cortical screws that were inserted through the plate into the proximal femoral bone. These screws were all of adequate length. They all had a bicortical hold. In other words they went through the bone on the plate side and the cortex or bone surface on the opposite side of the plate.
 Under cross-examination, Mrs. John-Xavier pressed Dr. Jones to examine the x-rays and admit that the screw did not cross the osteotomy site. He disagreed and pointed out on the x-ray that in fact the screw is across the osteotomy site. The court specifically asked him about the technique that Dr. St. Rose stated that Dr. Jeffers ought to have used. Dr. Jones replied that both techniques were acceptable.
 Applying these principles to the instant case, I have no difficulty preferring the evidence of Dr. Jones to that of Dr. St Rose for the following reasons. Firstly, as I have stated above, Dr. St. Rose undermined his own testimony by his unexplained withdrawal of his accusations in relation to the length and diameter of the screws and the use of cancellous screw. It raises significant doubt as to the rigour of his analysis if it could be so casually withdrawn. Secondly, he suggested that Dr. Jeffers lacked the necessary experience for the surgery without offering any opinion on what that experience should be. Thirdly, Dr. St. Rose admitted that his method of determining that Ms. Henry had a ¼ leg length discrepancy (LLD) was imprecise and was just an estimation. Fourthly, Dr. St. Rose appeared to be imprecise and somewhat offhanded in his testimony compared to Dr. Jones who was careful, precise and methodical. He forthrightly stated that he would have informed Ms. Henry of the implant failure at the earliest opportunity. He presented as an objective witness.
 The last of the three reasons cited by Dr. St. Rose (that Dr. Jeffers lacked the necessary experience) has already been disposed at paragraph 31 above, namely, there was no evidence or coherent argument as to why Dr. Jeffers lacked the necessary experience.
 On this issue, I therefore conclude that Dr. Jeffers did not negligently use a poor technique liable to fail. In performing the surgery, he acted in accordance with the standard accepted as proper by orthopaedic surgeons.
(b) Failed to advise her to stop physical therapy in spite of the poor prognosis and implant failure.
 She also alleged that he continued to advise her to undergo x-rays for months following evidence of the non-union of the osteotomy thereby exposing her to unnecessary radiation and the risk of a malignancy. However, no evidence was presented to support this particular allegation and it was not pursued in the closing submissions of Mrs. John-Xavier. The court's examination will therefore be confined to the question of whether Dr. Jeffers' was negligent in his post-operative management of Ms. Henry resulting in financial loss, LLD, muscle hypertrophy and extended scarring to her.
 Before turning to these issues, I must first address Mrs. John-Xavier's technical point that Dr. Jeffers' defence is fatally flawed since it consists of bare denials to the eleven allegations of post-operative mismanagement, without setting out the facts to support his defence. Part 8 of the Civil Procedure Rules 2000 ("CPR") requires that a party's pleadings must fully disclose its case. This is so that each side knows the case to which it has to respond to. Where a party has not pleaded an allegation in his defence he may be prevented from adducing facts to support that allegation, introduced for the first time in a witness statement or at the trial.
 The allegations of post-operative mismanagement, though sliced into eleven specific allegations, really amount to those allegations, which I have distilled above at paragraph 47 of this judgment. At paragraph 7(viii) of his defence, Dr. Jeffers stated, firstly, that at all times he acted in conformity with the standards expected from him as a surgeon. Secondly, at paragraph 7(ix), he stated that the x-rays were necessary at the time they were recommended. Thirdly, at paragraph 7(x), he stated that any physical therapy would have been manageable and in keeping with what Ms. Henry could bear at the time. Fourthly, at paragraph 7(xvi), he stated that there would have been union at six months in the majority of cases but it was not invariable since osteotomy can still progress to union even after six months. It is therefore clear that Dr. Jeffers sufficiently set out the foundation of his defence upon which he would rely in answer to the claim of post-operative mismanagement. Having done so, he later developed these in his witness statements. This is in accordance with the CPR. I therefore am unable to conclude that his defence is fatally flawed.
 The issue of whether Dr. Jeffers is liable for Ms. Henry's extended scarring can be disposed of shortly. Dr. Jeffers' evidence was that scarring is inherent in a surgical procedure like osteotomy, which Ms. Henry knew would be permanent. More important, however, was the opinion of Dr. St. Rose who, in response to a direct question put by the court. responded: "I don't think that I could blame Dr. Jeffers for extended scarring." There is therefore no basis for the court to conclude that Dr. Jeffers is liable for extended scarring.
 Similarly, this issue can be disposed of shortly. In response to a question posed by the court, Dr. St. Rose responded that the muscle hypertrophy  suffered by Ms. Henry is attributable to Dr. Jeffers but that he expected the muscle to recover. There is, however, no medical opinion presented that the muscle hypertrophy suffered was due to the absence of the required degree of skill on the part of Dr. Jeffers. If union can occur up to nine months after surgery, was it to be expected that there would during that period, be muscular atrophy? In any event, the medical opinion of Dr. St. Rose is that the muscle would recover.
 It is not disputed that: (1) Dr. Jeffers managed Ms. Henry, post-operatively, from September 2014 to September 2015; (2) during that period he examined her and ordered and reviewed a number of x-rays to monitor her progress; (3) the series of x-rays showed a progressive loosening of the screws and implant migration; and (4) Dr. Jeffers did not inform Ms. Henry that there was non-union until July of 2015.
 Three questions arise for determination. Firstly, did Dr. Jeffers fall below the accepted standard in waiting ten months before informing Ms. Henry that there was non-union? Secondly, did he fall below the accepted standard in failing to discontinue physiotherapy despite implant failure? Thirdly, if he did, did that delay and/or failure to suspend physiotherapy cause or contribute to the disabilities suffered by Ms. Henry?
 Dr. Jeffers maintained that while the x-rays did reveal the loosening of screws and backing off of the plate, this was not the paramount consideration since the osteotomy could still progress to healing. He stated that fractures could heal by primary or secondary intention and that there was evidence of a "large amount of callous indicative of a change in the direction of remodeling." He stated that after reviewing the x-ray of 23rd April 2015, he made a notation that there was evidence of healing by secondary intention. He concluded: "my analysis was that there was still possibility of union." He said he did not inform Ms. Henry of the backing out of the screws because implant failure did not mean you cannot have union and he did not wish to unduly alarm her until he had concluded there was non-union, a conclusion he arrived at in July of 2015.
 Dr. St. Rose stated that if revision surgery had been done after two months, it would have been much easier and would have made the surgery less hazardous than having waited until nine months had passed. He did not opine, however, as to whether Dr. Jeffers fell below the accepted standard in waiting ten months to inform Ms. Henry of non-union. Neither did Dr. Thomas' documentary evidence offer any opinion on this issue.
 Under cross-examination, Dr. Jones stated that the purpose of the x-rays was to monitor the progress of the patient, who should be informed of progress at all times. He stated that he would have informed the patient of any progress he saw in the x-rays. Dr. Jones was asked to review each of Ms. Henry's x-rays separately and he commented in relation to each one. The essence of his observations was that he observed that they showed the progressive backing out of the screw, backing away of the fixation and bone loss, but "no real bone loss at the osteotomy site." In relation to each x-ray, he said that informing the patient is something he probably would have done. He stated that, once backing away of the screw and implant was apparent he would have mentioned that the patient could consider revision surgery. Or, he said, waiting to see if fusion occurred is an acceptable alternative, if there was still alignment. As long as alignment is intact, he stated, "you do not lose anything." He was asked to comment on his observation of loss of alignment. He stated that the x-ray at page 297 of the trial bundle showed loss of alignment but the previous x-rays did not. On the previous x-rays, he said, the alignment was acceptable.
 This is a significant statement by Dr. Jones. The study date of the x-ray at page 297 of the trial bundle is 10th September 2015. Ms. Henry stated at paragraph 34 of her witness statement that, it was during the visit of 10th September 2015, after reviewing the x-ray, that Dr. Jeffers "apologized and stated that we were back where we started – meaning the alignment problem was not solved." Following this visit, Ms. Henry consulted Dr. St. Rose and then did revision surgery at Emory.
 The conclusion I draw from this, as to when Ms. Henry ought to have been informed about the implant failure, is that there were two alternatives. The first was to keep Ms. Henry advised on what each x-ray revealed. The second was to wait to see if fusion occurred and alignment maintained. The second alternative was the one chosen by Dr. Jeffers.
 In an attempt to clarify this matter, I specifically asked Dr. Jones whether, in his opinion, Dr. Jeffers fell below the standard expected of a reasonably competent orthopaedic surgeon in waiting ten months to disclose to Ms. Henry that there was non-union. His answer was that Dr. Jeffers did not. There being no conflicting medical opinion on this issue, I am obliged to accept the opinion of Dr. Jones, whose opinion I had no reason to discount. Much of Ms. Henry's distress and resentment at Dr. Jeffers might have been avoided if he had informed her of the progressive implant migration. The backing out of the screws and plate, in the eyes of a lay person, is indeed alarming. The prevailing medical opinion appears to be, however, that it is not implant failure but alignment that is the critical factor. That, however, does not dispose of the issue of post-operative mismanagement. There remains the question of whether the delay or continuing the physiotherapy, notwithstanding implant failure, caused or contributed to LLD. This, as I see it, is the more critical question. If Dr. Jeffers had fallen below the standard in waiting to inform Ms. Henry of the non-union, but no damage resulted from the delay, it could not be concluded that he was liable for her disabilities. On the other, if he did not fall below the standard but damage nevertheless resulted from his decision not to discontinue physiotherapy and weight bearing, he would inevitably have to bear responsibility for that. It is to this question that we must now turn.
Did Dr. Jeffers Cause Bone Loss Leading to LLD?
 Mrs. John-Xavier contends, at paragraph 23 of her written submissions, that LLD was not one of the listed risks of any of the surgeries that Ms. Henry underwent. She nevertheless suffered LLD. This, she submitted, "is a complication that the [Ms. Henry] suffered from as a result in [ sic] the delay in her management, caused by the significant bone loss, destruction and erosion." Dr. Jeffers, she contends, caused the bone loss, destruction and erosion.
 Medical opinions clashed on causation of the LLD. It is therefore best that this evidence be examined in some detail.
The evidence of Dr. St. Rose comprised three memoranda (dated 20th September 2015, 24th September 2015 and 29 th April 2016) and his witness statement. Neither of the 2015 memoranda (which were shortly after Dr. Jeffers' disclosure of non-union to Ms. Henry) mentioned anything in relation to LLD. His memorandum of 29 th April 2016, however, mentioned LLD. This reference to LLD was then repeated in his witness statement already set out above at paragraph 31 of this judgment.
"If [revision surgery] were not done urgently then complications may have quickly arisen.
I finally saw the patient on the 10th February, 2016 after revision surgery in the United States of America … There are permanent operative scars about the knee and proximal thigh: An 8″ long scar anteriorly over the knee and scars on either side of the knee from insertion of Anti Rotation Screws. There are similar scars over the proximal right thigh.
 No conclusion as to causation of the LLD can be drawn from Dr. St. Rose's witness statement. His pre-revision surgery observation is that that there is a ¼" shortening, but he does not comment on causation. He stated that if revision surgery was not done urgently then complications could arise which would include LLD. Ms. Henry did in fact have urgent revision surgery the month after Dr. St. Rose recommended urgent revision surgery.
"The Claimant alleges that as a result of my negligence I caused severe bony destruction of the medial femoral condyle. The bony destruction referred to is confined around the bony tissue surrounding the blade part of the blade plate implant and does not extend to the region of the hypertrophic non-union and therefore cannot contribute to a leg length discrepancy. The bone that is juxtaposed to the region of the hypertrophic nonunion is not affected. Further there is no lucency at this time as images presented by the Claimant at three months and conclusively at eleven months post surgery reveal complete resolution or filling of the area of lucency with healthy visible bone.
At the centre of excellence where she did corrective surgery the Claimant consented to the doctors doing everything necessary in the circumstances to alleviate her situation. If she had a leg length discrepancy it was incumbent on Emory Hospital to deal with this at the same time that they performed reconstructive surgery. Addressing a non-union and ensuring that there is balance in leg length are not mutually exclusive. I note the doctor's use of the bovy cord at Emory Hospital during surgery an indication that leg length was being considered during surgery. The bovy cord is one of the most reliable and effective modalities used to establish leg length equality during surgery.
Crucially she was not alerted to the presence of a leg length discrepancy at the time neither was she alerted of the possibility of one developing in the future.
In the preoperative consent given by the Claimant at Emory Hospital I note that the Claimant consented to bone grafting of the non union site if it was thought to be required as an integral part of the operative procedure. This indicates a clear intention of dealing with leg length balance and union using bone grafting techniques should the need arise.
The Claimant at paragraph 9 of her claim states that the procedure had to be revised failing which she would have suffered limb length deformity. The procedure was revised yet she suffered a length discrepancy an indication that the leg length discrepancy was not caused at my hands. At paragraph 14 the Claimant states that corrective surgery was successful, as at her 11-month follow up visit the non union was noted to be completely healed. The length discrepancy could have been averted once the revision procedure was done correctly as a procedure to address a non union takes into account equality in leg length. An orthopedic surgeon must ensure that there is equality in leg length before completion of the procedure. This is a basic requirement and an integral component in the performance of that type of surgery.
During the time that the Claimant was under my care there was no sign of a length discrepancy and consequently I made no record of same. After the Claimant left my care she was cared for by Dr. St. Rose. I note that Dr. St. Rose made no mention of a leg length discrepancy in his medical reports an indication that there was none present.
The Claimant returned to Emory Hospital for additional surgery on 22 nd September 2016 to have the distal screws in the nail removed. The non union was noted to be completely healed but there was no record of a leg length discrepancy.
 Under cross-examination, it was put to Dr. Jeffers that his delay in recommending revision surgery caused Ms. Henry bony destruction. He disagreed and stated that bony destruction at the fracture site is what would cause shortening. He stated that bony destruction of the medial femoral condyle could not contribute to leg length discrepancy.
"x-rays taken on 11th December 2014 and 5th February 2015 reported showing loosening of the proximal screw of the implant fixation. Dr. Jeffers recommended physiotherapy maintaining non-weight bearing on the right lower extremity until 18th November 2014 when partial weight bearing was initiated. The patient continued to have pain at the knee and on Dr. Jeffers notes stated that on 28th July 2015 the presence of a fibrous non-union at the surgical site was determined. Further surgery to allow for healing at the non-union site was recommended.
Dr. Jeffers determined that there was a non-union in July 2015, ten months after her surgery. The time frame for healing of distal femoral osteotomies is variable. Van der Woude et al (Strategies in Trauma Limb Reconstruction 2016) reported that some patients in his series took up to nine months to heal. In the literature there are many definitions of the "non-union" time-frame. The US Food and Drug Administration defines non-union as a fracture that is at least 9 months and has not showed any evidence of healing for 3 consecutive months. Dr. Jeffers' post-operative management is in keeping with this time frame; there is no negligence by Dr. Jeffers and his time frame for management did not have a negative impact or adverse effect on the subsequent surgery or is outcome. It was appropriate to continue with physiotherapy limiting the weight bearing on the right lower extremity during the initial post-operative period.
In his statement dated 29/04/2016 Dr St Rose stated that the patient will suffer about ¼ inch permanent shortening of the limb. I did not see any mention of a leg length discrepancy before the revision surgery. I did not see any mention in any of the records I reviewed on the method used to measure the resulting leg length discrepancy. X-ray scanograms of the lower extremities would give an accurate measurement. Also, if a leg length inequality was identified at the time of the retrograde nailing, then this could have been easily corrected with traction on the extremity at the time of fixation of the retrograde nail. This would not be a separate procedure but adjusting for leg length discrepancy is a common component of the femoral intra-medullary nailing procedure. The retrograde nailing technique used at Emory was the appropriate fixation technique for correcting the non-union in this patient.
I have looked at the Claimant's preoperative notes and the intraoperative notes from Emory Hospital. The Claimant consented to bone grafting of the non-union site if it was thought to be required as an integral part of the operative procedure. At surgery the bony ends of the non-union site were prepared by removal of the interposed fibrous tissue to allow for good bone and bone contact thereby optimizing the chances for union. It was noted that post compression of the non-union site there was a large hypertrophic area of cortical bone on the anterior aspect of the shaft fragment. This was debrided of any soft tissue and then a rongeur was used to resect this hypertrophic bone and the bony pieces were then placed medially and laterally as local bone graft.
In the surgical treatment of non-unions use of bone graft is often used to augment the internal fixation and increase the potential for successful healing. In this case, autogenous bone graft (example, from the iliac crest) would add healthy bone with osteoconductive and osteoinductive properties to the surgical site. With bone graft interposed between the bone ends at the non-union site, the desired impaction could be achieved while any adjustments to correct leg length discrepancy are performed.
(4) The retrograde nailing technique used at Emory was the appropriate fixation technique for correcting the non-union in this patient.
 The court specifically asked him whether Dr. Thomas' observation that there was "significant bony destruction of the medial femoral condyle secondary to the plate" could contribute to LLD. Dr. Jones stated that erosion at blade plate in the distal femur would not contribute to leg length discrepancy. He was asked to review both of Dr. Thomas' letters to see if they mentioned bone loss at any other location that could contribute to LLD. After reviewing the medical evidence of Dr. Thomas, Dr. Jones concluded that there was no reference to bone loss that could actually contribute to LLD.
"She presented to my clinic on 10/02/2015 where x-rays revealed complete failure of hardware of the distal femur blade plate with significant lucency around the blade plate, as well as the proximal screws. There was also clearly a nonunion of the distal femur osteotomy site with some hypertrophic and significant bony destruction of the medial femoral condyle secondary to the plate. As a result from the osteotomy surgery performed on 9/22/2014, the patient was unable to bear weight on her right leg without severe pain and required significant assistance to help her with ambulation.
Given the significant bony destruction of the medial femoral condyle secondary to the plate, it was determined that replating the distal femur with a lateral plate may cause an additional failure; therefore, the patient elected to undergo a retrograde intramedullary nailing of the distal femur nonunion.
At her 11-month-old follow up visit the patient's nonunion was noted to be completely healed, however, there was evidence that one of the screws within the nail had backed out partially from the distal femur. This made the screw head prominent within the knee joint, which was causing significant pain with range of motion of the knee as soft tissue would catch on the screw head. The screw potentially backed out secondary to the bone loss in the distal femur, however, I cannot firmly make that conclusion because it is a known potential complication with all orthopedic hardware involving screws. The patient required an additional surgery on, 9/22/2016, to have the distal screws in the nail removed, which was uneventful.
She will require referrals for physical therapy to increase her strength, a chiropractor for her low back pain secondary to her altered gait, and shoe orthotics for her leg length discrepancy. The leg length discrepancy is likely secondary to the deformation created by the original surgery in St. Lucia.
"This letter is an addendum to previous letter pertaining to my patient, Mrs. Anne Margaret Henry, regarding her diagnosis and treatments for her right femur non-union.
Technically, Mrs. Henry's case was not considered an emergency, given that her life or limb was not in immediate danger. However, given the disruption to her function, quality of life and active bony destruction from the failed implant, her case needed to be treated urgently. Understanding also, that her non-union was well over a year, was of particular concern.
When I first meet Mrs. Henry and reviewed her case with her, I explained at length that the primary goal of the corrective surgery would be to get her bone to heal, and to stabilize her leg so she would have the ability to walk again. We discussed that there may be the potential for a leg length discrepancy following the corrective surgery due to the extensive bone loss from the significant bony destruction due to the failed implant and surgery.
It is well documented, that bone healing is best done under compression and not distraction. If we had distracted her non-union to correct her leg length at the time of the corrective surgery, her chances of failure would have increased significantly, which would have been harmful towards our primary goal of the surgery.
I wish to reiterate that correction of a non-union, and correction of a length leg discrepancy, are separate and opposite surgeries. For a patient like Mrs. Henry who had a non-union for well over a year, healing and restoring mobility had to be the primary goal. I believe the use of any biologics or artificial bone material would have placed Mrs. Henry at a risk for a second non-union given the gravity of bone loss and significant bony destruction from the failed implant and surgery. Additionally, Mrs. Henry's leg length discrepancy is as a result of the severe bone loss due to the significant bony destruction she suffered from her failed surgery. As stated in my previous report, Mrs. Henry was referred to a number of specialists to manage the leg length discrepancy and the associated complications.
(6) Mrs. Henry's leg length discrepancy is as a result of the severe bone loss due to the significant bony destruction she suffered from her failed surgery.
 The conflict of medical opinions that emerges is that, firstly, Dr. Thomas says that Ms. Henry's LLD was caused by the significant bony destruction she suffered from Dr. Jeffers' failed surgery. Dr. St. Rose's opinion appears to supports this. On the other hand, Dr. Jones and Dr. Jeffers say that the bony destruction to which Dr. Thomas refers could not contribute to LLD. Secondly, Dr. Thomas states that correction of a non-union and correction of LLD are separate and opposite surgeries. Dr. Jones and Dr. Jeffers were adamant that they were not. Whose evidence do I prefer and why?
(1) Dr. Jones stated that bony destruction of the medial femoral condyle secondary to the plate (as noted by Dr. Thomas ) could not contribute to LLD. He said that loss of bone at the osteotomy site would have contributed to LLD but he did not observe any such bone loss. He helpfully illustrated his explanations by using a model of the knee and femur.
(2) Having carefully reviewed Dr. Thomas' letters, I can find no reference to bone loss other than at the medial femoral condyle. Having not put in an expert report and not being a witness at the trial, the court was deprived of the opportunity to hear him respond to the opinion of both Dr. Jones and Dr. Jeffers that the bony destruction he [Dr. Jones] observed could not contribute to LLD. It is to be regretted that he was not called as a witness.
(3) Dr. St. Rosen admitted that LLD could be described as major event consequent on the surgery. Yet he failed to note any LLD in either of his two memoranda following Dr. Jeffers' surgery. He sought, unconvincingly in my view, to explain this omission by stating that it was to be "inferred" from his statement that "femoral fragments were displaced" and that he was not focused on LLD. I found his opinion on this issue to be vague and therefore unpersuasive.
(4) Dr. Thomas' bare statement that a non-union and correction of LLD are separate and opposite procedures suffers, regrettably, from the fact that he was not present at the trial to explain or defend his opinion. Both Dr. Jones and Dr. Jeffers emphatically disagreed with his opinion. Dr. Jones, in particular, illustrated and explained, in a logical manner, why the retrograde intra-medullary nailing was designed to do precisely that, that is, correct alignment and any LLD.
(5) Doubt arises from the fact that Emory only mentions a leg length discrepancy in October 2016, after Ms. Henry had returned to Emory Hospital two weeks after Emory's second operation on 22nd September 2016 to have distal screws in the nail removed. Dr. Thomas, not being a witness, could not clear up this doubt.
 I have not been persuaded, on the medical opinion presented, that Dr. Jeffers was responsible for Ms. Henry's LLD either as a consequence of his surgical technique, his decision to wait ten months to inform her of non-union, or his recommendation of physiotherapy despite implant failure. I have been persuaded on the medical evidence that both his surgical procedure and his post-surgery management of Ms. Henry was in accordance with the standard expected of a reasonably competent orthopaedic surgeon. On the medical evidence presented, I therefore cannot find that he is responsible for any financial loss or disabilities suffered by Ms. Henry.
(1) The claim is dismissed.
(2) Prescribed costs are awarded to the Defendant in accordance with CPR 2000.
 Saint Lucia, Claim No. SLUHCV2013/0435.
 CCJ Appeal No. CV 4 of 2012.
 (1957) 2 All ER 118.
  18 Con LR 1 at pp 77-78.
  1 AC 1074 at p 1091.


text:
Vintage Beeb: The Two Ronnies
Geschrieben von: BBC Audiobooks Ltd
Gesprochen von: Ronnie Barker, Ronnie Corbett
Spieldauer: 44 Min.
Ronnie Barker and Ronnie Corbett star in highlights from their BBC TV series. Includes the sketches: 'The Strange Case of Mrs. Mace', 'Plain Speaking', 'Grublian', 'Dr. Spooner Re-Visited', 'A Doctor's Life', and 'About a Bout'. There's also 'Doctors Anonymous', 'Jolly Rhymes', 'The Complete Rook', 'Ronnie Corbett's Chat-Spot', and 'A Doctor's Life'. Vintage Beeb: classic albums first available as BBC LPs, now reissued and available to download.
©2010 BBC Audiobooks Ltd (P)2010 BBC Audiobooks Ltd
Dad's Army: The Lost Tapes
Classic Comedy from the BBC Archives
Geschrieben von: David Croft, Jimmy Perry
Gesprochen von: Arthur Lowe, John Le Mesurier
Spieldauer: 1 Std.
Originalaufnahme
Arthur Lowe, John Le Mesurier, Clive Dunn and Ian Lavender star in a collection of rediscovered Dad's Army gems. Published for the first time, these four instalments of Dad's Army have been brought together from a variety of archive sources and in each case represents something unique. 'A Stripe for Frazer' is the surviving TV soundtrack from an episode whose film recording has long been missing in action.
Fawlty Towers: The Complete Collection
Every Soundtrack Episode of the Classic BBC TV Comedy
Geschrieben von: John Cleese, Connie Booth
Gesprochen von: John Cleese, Connie Booth, Prunella Scales, und andere
Welcome to Fawlty Towers, where attentive hotelier Basil Fawlty and his charming wife Sybil will attend to your every need - in your worst nightmare. With hapless waiter Manuel and long-suffering waitress Polly on hand to help, anything could happen during your stay - and probably will. John Cleese's special introductions to each episode are included in this collection of all 12 TV soundtrack episodes.
16 Classic BBC TV Soundtracks
Geschrieben von: John Sullivan
Gesprochen von: David Jason, full cast, Nicholas Lyndhurst
Sixteen TV soundtracks from the award-winning TV show collected together for the first time, starring David Jason as ambitious market trader Del Boy Trotter and Nicholas Lyndhurst as his younger brother, Rodney Trotter. For 15 years the brothers of Trotters Independent Traders PLC have entertained us both with Del's extreme optimism and scams and, quite simply, Rodney's reactions upon hearing those scams.
Pam Ayres - Down the Line
Geschrieben von: Pam Ayres
Gesprochen von: Pam Ayres
Pam Ayres, one of Britain's best-loved entertainers, personally presents this audiobook which brings together two of her solo stage shows with live audiences. Pam introduces each recording and then, as a bonus, reads a collection of new and previously unrecorded poems from her two most recent books, You Made Me Late Again and Up In The Attic. With poems such as 'My Mother Was Right About You', 'Geriatric Juliet', 'Poor Old Father Christmas', and 'The Hat From Hell', this hilariously funny collection is a must-have for seasoned fans and first time listeners alike.
Hancock's Half Hour
Complete Series One & Two
Geschrieben von: Ray Galton, Alan Simpson
Gesprochen von: Tony Hancock, Sid James, Full Cast
Tony Hancock stars with Sid James and Kenneth Williams in the legendary BBC Radio comedy series. Created by Ray Galton and Alan Simpson in 1954, Hancock's Half Hour was the radio vehicle that made Tony Hancock a household name. Each week listeners would be admitted to the sometimes fantastical, sometimes mundane life of "the lad 'imself". Aided and abetted by Sid James, Andrée Melly, Bill Kerr, and Kenneth Williams, Hancock would enter into the spirit of each episode with characteristic dolefulness.
I'm Sorry I Haven't A Clue 18
The Award-Winning BBC Radio 4 Comedy
Geschrieben von: BBC Radio Comedy
Gesprochen von: full cast, Jack Dee
Four more extended episodes from the award-winning BBC Radio 4 series, specially compiled by producer Jon Naismith. Another collection of episodes from the famous antidote to panel games now in its 18th edition. Jack Dee challenges regular panellists Tim Brooke-Taylor, and Barry Cryer, with a series of silly games against which to pit their wits. In tribute to Jeremy Hardy, a long-running guest panellist on the show who passed away in 2019, he features in every episode.
Jack Reacher, Book 1
Geschrieben von: Lee Child
Gesprochen von: Jeff Harding
Jack Reacher jumps off a bus and walks 14 miles down a country road into Margrave, Georgia. An arbitrary decision he's about to regret. Reacher is the only stranger in town on the day they have had their first homicide in 30 years. The cops arrest Reacher and the police chief turns eyewitness to place him at the scene. As nasty secrets leak out and the body count mounts, one thing is for sure.
Terrible Speaker with the most monotonous voice
Von N. Trogisch Am hilfreichsten 14.04.2019
Geschrieben von: Michael Morpurgo
Gesprochen von: Luke Treadaway
Michael Morpurgo's classic tale, capturing the power of the human spirit. First published back in 1982, 'War Horse' has taken the world by storm. The book was adapted to the stage and was performed at the National Theatre and on Broadway. This full and unabridged edition is beautifully performed here by the National Theatre's first Albert, OIivier-award-winner Luke Treadaway. At the outbreak of World War 1, Joey, young Albert's beloved horse, is sold to the cavalry and shipped to France.
Terry Pratchett: BBC Radio Drama Collection
Seven BBC Radio 4 Full-Cast Dramatisations
Geschrieben von: Terry Pratchett
Gesprochen von: Martin Jarvis, Sheila Hancock, Anton Lesser, und andere
Somewhere on the frontier between thought and reality exists the Discworld, a parallel time and place which might sound and smell very much like our own, but which looks completely different. Collected together for the first time are seven full-cast BBC Radio dramatisations of Terry Pratchett's novels, with star-studded casts including Martin Jarvis, Sheila Hancock, Anton Lesser, Philip Jackson, Alex Jennings and Mark Heap.
Deal of the century!
Von Tomtom70 Am hilfreichsten 05.06.2019
Whatever Happened to the Likely Lads?
Complete BBC Radio Series
Geschrieben von: Dick Clement, Ian La Frenais
Gesprochen von: Rodney Bewes, full cast, James Bolam
Thirteen classic BBC radio episodes starring James Bolam and Rodney Bewes. One of the most popular TV comedies of the 70s, Whatever Happened to the Likely Lads? won a best sitcom BAFTA and attracted an audience of millions before being adapted for radio. In these 13 episodes, we catch up with Newcastle lads Bob and Terry as they meet by chance after years apart. Now engaged to Thelma, Bob is having prewedding nerves, while Terry is having trouble adjusting to life after the army.
Rumpole: The Penge Bungalow Murders and Other Stories
Three BBC Radio 4 dramatisations
Geschrieben von: John Mortimer
Gesprochen von: Benedict Cumberbatch, Timothy West, full cast, und andere
Benedict Cumberbatch plays the young, feisty, devastatingly acute Horace Rumpole in this collection of cracking cases, also starring Timothy West as the older Rumpole. Rumpole and the Penge Bungalow Murders: It is the '50s, and two war heroes have been shot dead. Defending the suspect is deemed hopeless, so the case is handed to a novice. But the novice's superiors didn't count on the tenacity and wit of the young and hungry Horace Rumpole.
Sehr gut :-)
Von Cloud-i Am hilfreichsten 05.05.2018
Geschrieben von: John le Carré
Gesprochen von: John le Carré
Nat, a 47-year-old veteran of Britain's Secret Intelligence Service, believes his years as an agent runner are over. He is back in London with his wife, the long-suffering Prue. But with the growing threat from Moscow Centre, the office has one more job for him. Nat is to take over The Haven, a defunct substation of London General with a rag-tag band of spies. The only bright light on the team is young Florence, who has her eye on Russia Department and a Ukrainian oligarch with a finger in the Russia pie.
Von Samy Senft Am hilfreichsten 02.12.2019
Saturday Night Fry
I'm Sorry I Haven't a Clue
Remembering... Kenneth Williams
The Navy Lark: Volume 28 - Troutbridge's Party
The Navy Lark: 60th Anniversary Special Edition
The Navy Lark: Volume 33
Das sagen andere Hörer zu Vintage Beeb: The Two Ronnies


text:
1976 Leo Sayer – Endless Flight
Andrew Gold, Bill Payne, Bob Glaub, David Hungate, Dean Parks, Ed Greene, James Newton-Howard, Jeffrey Porcaro, Larry Carlton, Lee Ritenour, Leland Sklar, Leo Sayer, Michael Omartian, Ray Parker Jr, Richard Tee, Steve Gadd, Steve Madaio
Endless Flight is the fourth album by English singer-songwriter Leo Sayer, which was released in 1976. It was released in the U.S. and Canada by Warner Bros. Records and in the UK by Chrysalis Records.
The album consolidated his international popularity, reaching #4 in the UK and #10 in the USA; it also charted strongly in other countries including Sweden, Norway, the Netherlands and New Zealand, and was certified as a platinum album in both the UK and the USA, and double-platinum in Canada. The peak of his career came in 1977, when he scored two consecutive US number one hits, first with the disco-styled "You Make Me Feel Like Dancing" (a Grammy Award winner for the year's best Rhythm and Blues Song), followed by the romantic ballad, "When I Need You" (1977), which reached number one in both the UK and US. Written by Albert Hammond and Carole Bayer Sager, it was Sayer's first UK #1 single (after three number two hits). It was also the first of two UK chart-toppers in a row for producer Richard Perry.
1 Hold On To My Love (Barry Mann, Cynthia Weil, Leo Sayer) 3:09
2 You Make Me Feel Like Dancing (Leo Sayer, Vini Poncia) 3:39
3 Reflections (Brian Holland, Eddie Holland, Lamont Dozier) 3:08
4 When I Need You (Albert Hammond, Carole Bayer Sager) 4:12
5 No Business Like Love Business (Brad Shapiro, Clarence Reid, Steve Alaimo, Willie Clarke) 3:52
6 I Hear The Laughter (Johnny Vastano, Leo Sayer) 3:14
7 Magdalena (Danny O'Keefe) 4:22
8 How Much Love (Barry Mann, Leo Sayer) 3:36
9 I Think We Fell In Love Too Fast (Johnny Vastano, Leo Sayer, Vini Poncia) 3:07
10 Endless Flight (Andrew Gold) 4:36
1 Hold On To My Love
Bass Andy Muson
Drums Ed Greene
Guitar Lee Ritenour
Harmonica Leo Sayer
Horn Steve Madaio
Horn Trevor Lawrence
Percussion Bobbye Hall
2 You Make Me Feel Like Dancing
Bass Chuck Rainey
Drums Steve Gadd
Guitar Larry Carlton
Clavinet John Barnes
Background Vocals Clydie King
Background Vocals Becky Louis
Background Vocals Sherlie Matthews
3 Reflections
Bass Bill Bodine
Drums Rick Shlosser
Guitar Earl Slick
Guitar Johnny Vastano
4 When I Need You
Bass Willie Weeks
Guitar Dean Parks
Piano Michael Omartian
5 No Business Like Love Business
Bass Bob Glaub
Background Vocals Myrna Matthews
6 I Hear The Laughter
Guitar (solo) Andrew Gold
Piano Marc Jordan
7 Magdalena
Bass Leland Sklar
Piano Bill Payne
Mellotron Jimmy Phillips
8 How Much Love
Piano Richard Tee
9 I Think We Fell In Love Too Fast
Organ Jimmy Phillips
10 Endless Flight
Drums Nigel Olsson
Guitar Auburn Burrell
Piano John Jarvis
Synthesizer Jimmy Phillips
Synthesizer Paul Buckmaster
Producer – Richard Perry
Engineer (Assistant) – Dana Latham
Engineer (Mastering) – Allen Zentz
Engineer (Recording) – Bill Schnee (Tracks 2, 8),
Engineer (Recording) – Howard Steele (Tracks 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10)
Engineer (Remix) – Larry Emerine (Tracks 5, 10)
Mastered By – Allen Zentz
Art Direction, Design – David Larkham
Photography – Elliot Gilbert
Recorded At Studio 55, Los Angeles
Remixed At Studio 55, Los Angeles
Phonographic Copyright Warner Bros Records Inc
Copyright Warner Bros Records Inc
1976 Porter Wagoner & Dolly Parton – Say Forever You'll Be Mine 1976 Robert Palmer – Some People Can Do What They Like


text:
Die 3 Tornados war ein anarchistisches West-Berliner Kabarett-Trio, das offiziell von 1977 bis 1990 existierte. Seinen letzten Auftritt hatte es 1989. Gegründet wurde die Gruppe 1977 von Arnulf Rating und Günter Thews, im selben Jahr kam Hans-Jochen Krank hinzu. 1981 wurde Krank von Holger Klotzbach abgelöst.

Geschichte
Arnulf Rating gründete zusammen mit Günter Thews zunächst eine Gruppe, die sich selbst als "Berliner Spaßguerilla-Theater" bezeichnete. Ziel war es, so in einer Eigenwerbung, "dass die Leute oben mit erweitertem Bewusstsein und unten mit nasser Hose herauskommen."

Mit dem Musiker und Philosophiestudenten Hans-Jochen Krank absolvierten Thews und Rating als "Die 3 Tornados" ihre ersten Auftritte bei zahlreichen öffentlichen Veranstaltungen und auf teils privaten Feten der linksalternativen Szene während der Studentenstreiks 1976/77 in Westberlin – etwa mit einer Satire über die Aussetzung des Streiks zu den Weihnachtsferien. Der Name des Trios persiflierte den Namen des damals populären Partylieder-Trios Die 3 Besoffskis.

Schon bald waren die 3 Tornados auf größeren West-Berliner Veranstaltungen der Alternativszene nicht mehr wegzudenken.
Ihr Aktionsradius verbreitete sich unaufhaltsam und der erste Kneipen-Auftritt folgte am 25. April 1977 in der West-Berliner Kneipe "Godot".

Später trat das Trio auch bei Demonstrationen der Anti-AKW-Bewegung wie beispielsweise gegen den Bau des Kernkraftwerks Brokdorf und regelmäßig auf Straßen, Plätzen, in Theatern, autonomen Jugendzentren und Kneipen im deutschsprachigen Raum auf.

Auftritte fanden im Rahmen des Dritten internationalen Russell-Tribunals über die Lage der Menschenrechte in der Bundesrepublik sowie auf dem Treffen in Tunix in Berlin im Januar 1978 statt. Aus Letzterem entstand eine bundesweite Abonnenten-Werbekampagne für das im selben Jahr infolge des Treffens gegründete linksalternative Zeitungsprojekt Die Tageszeitung (TAZ).

Die drei Tornados arbeiteten bei der Gründung des Berliner Tempodrom aktiv mit. Auftritte zur Besetzung des UFA-Geländes in Berlin und etlicher Kulturzentren im Land steigerten den Bekanntheitsgrad des Trios weiter. Gemeinsame Programme fanden mit anderen Künstlern zu Wahlen und Aktionen diverser Bürgerinitiativen im Rahmen der Neuen sozialen Bewegungen der 1970er und 1980er Jahre statt.

In Ostberlin konnte die Gruppe nur ein Mal auftreten, privat im Prenzlauer Berg. Zuvor hatte die DDR-Führung eine offizielle Einladung nach Begutachtung des Programms zurückgezogen.

1981 verließ Hans-Jochen Krank die Gruppe. Er wurde durch den Zirkuslehrer und Musiker Holger Klotzbach ersetzt. Die besondere Nähe der drei Tornados zur Bevölkerung zeigte sich u. a. bei ihren privaten Auftritten. So war ihr kleinster Auftrittsort in der Küche eines besetzten Bergarbeiterhäuschens in der Zechensiedlung Auguststraße in Gelsenkirchen.

Die erste und einzige längere Fernsehaufzeichnung fand im August 1979 live von der Berliner Funkausstellung im Rahmen des Kinderprogramms statt.

Die 3 Tornados waren während ihrer Spielzeit mit zahlreichen Prozessen und Auftrittsverboten konfrontiert. Das Kabarett-Lexikon konnte einige markante Höhepunkte auflisten: So wurde im Mai 1979 ein Filmbeitrag zu 30 Jahre Grundgesetz vom SDR nicht gesendet. Der Sketch Krippenspiel beim WDR-Jugendmagazin Radiothek am 30. Dezember 1980 brachte eine katholische Bürgerinitiative in Soest hervor und löste ein Strafverfahren wegen "Beschimpfung religiöser oder weltanschaulicher Bekenntnisse oder der Kirche" (§ 166 StGB) aus. Der Freispruch erfolgte nach vier Instanzen 1983.

Im März 1980 scheiterte eine geplante Live-Sendung im SWF3-Programm, im März machte WDR III eine Einladung zur Talkshow rückgängig, im September 1983 strich der SFB ihre Beiträge zur Sendung Rock Nacht. Ein Auftritt im November 1986 in der Sendung Extratour von Radio Bremen wurde wegen einer Nummer abgebrochen, die sich gegen die Anweisung richtete, sechs Wochen vor der Wahl kein politisches Kabarett mehr zu senden.

Als die 3 Tornados darauf verfielen, sich Fernsehpräsenz via Werbespots zu kaufen, weigerte sich der SFB 1986 (Polizeispot) und 1988 (Barschel-Ehrenwort) diese zu senden. Die Tornados erstritten vor Gericht die Ausstrahlung.

1986 hatten sie einen Auftritt in der AIDS-Satire Ein Virus kennt keine Moral von Rosa von Praunheim.

Der letzte Auftritt der Gruppe fand wenige Tage nach dem Mauerfall am 12. November 1989 im Rahmen des Konzerts für Berlin mit Künstlern aus aller Welt zur Vereinigung in der Berliner Deutschlandhalle statt.

Nach der Auflösung des Trios gründete Holger Klotzbach mit Lutz Deisinger die Berliner Bar jeder Vernunft und leitet jetzt das Berliner Zelt-Theater Tipi am Kanzleramt, während Arnulf Rating als Solo-Kabarettist tätig ist. Günther Thews erlag im Alter von 47 Jahren am 30. Januar 1993 seinem Aidsleiden. Hans-Jochen Krank war von 1991 bis 2013 Gymnasiallehrer für Latein in Bad Freienwalde.

Auszeichnungen
1979 wurden sie mit dem Förderpreis der Stadt Mainz zum Deutschen Kleinkunstpreis ausgezeichnet.

Diskographie
 Flipperschau (1977)
 Tageszeitung (1978)
 A gogo (1979)
 Rundschlag (1979)
 Westtangente (1980)
 Radio Radikal (1982)
 Totalschaden (1985)
 Die 3 Tornados 1977 - 1988 (EAN 4015698025729, 4er-CD-Box, Label: Trikont, mit Auszügen aus den Einzel-CDs plus Live-Aufzeichnungen)

Literatur
Sekundärliteratur und Überreste (Bilder, Tonträger, Gerichtsdokumente) der Tornados sind archiviert im Stadtmuseum Berlin.
Unten aufgelistete Literaturangaben sind einsehbar als pdf-Dateien im
Tornado-Online-Archiv.
 Martin Bayer: Hey, was ist denn da los? Die 3 Tornados: Linke Geschichte als Brachial-Kabarett, in: ak – analyse & kritik, Zeitung für linke Debatte und Praxis, Nr. 430, 23. September 1999, online in:
 Klaus Budzinski und Reinhard Hippen: Metzler Kabarett Lexikon, Stuttgart/Weimar 1996, ISBN 3-476-01448-7.
 Bernd Drücke: Wie kam die Jungfrau zum Kinde? Die 3 Tornados, Mary, Josef, Jesses und das Krippenspiel, in: Graswurzelrevolution, Monatszeitung für eine gewaltfreie, herrschaftslose Gesellschaft, Nr. 274, Dezember 2002, online auf graswurzel.
 Andreas Häcker: Aufbegehren, lachen und die Welt verändern: zum libertären Kabarett – Trio Die 3 Tornados aus Westberlin, mit zwei Interviews mit Rating und Krank, in: Cahiers d'Ètudes Germaniques, Contre-Cultures à Berlin de 1960 à nos jours, herausgegeben von Charlotte Bomy, André Combes, Hilda Inderwildi, Toulouse 2013, S. 147–158, 297–321, Download auf journals.openedition als PDF- oder ePub-Datei.
 Arnulf Rating: Wandertheater auf neuen Wegen: Die Drei Tornados. In: Michael Baumgarten und Wilfried Schulz (Hrsg.): Die Freiheit wächst auf keinem Baum, Verlag Medusa, Berlin 1979, S. 190–221.
 Angie Weihs: Die 3 Tornados, in: Freies Theater, Reinbek bei Hamburg 1981, S. 90–96.

Weblinks

 Tornado-Online-Archiv
 Videoclips: Kein KKW in Saint Tropez! Schwarzseherlied

Kabarett (Berlin)
Anarchismus
Kabarett-Ensemble
Kultur (West-Berlin)

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


Phentermine medication is used by the majority of people with overweight and obesity conditions. Online stores are a good source of these pills particularly when you desire to purchase best quality drugs at an affordable price. One disadvantage that has existed for a significant period is that the shipment of these pills used to take few weeks. Currently, it is possible to receive these pills on the same day you submit an order.
These days, it is normal to order services online as well as prescription medications. You can purchase phentermine and have it shipped on the same day. In instances such as when forget to refill the prescription, the pills run out of stock in the nearby physical store, or when you need a high degree of convenience, then receiving these pills on the same day you make an order is the way forward. Read the subsequent content to get an insight on how you can order the obesity pills and get them delivered within the shortest period possible.
the drug sellers venture is well established, then it is most likely that the company has multiple distribution chains and your purchase can be quickly dispatched to you. If you are not certain that the selected online drug store has the capacity to do so, you can get in touch with them prior to placing your order. Otherwise, you can still try to follow up after making the purchase to ensure that the medication is delivered the fastest way possible.
The majority of reliable online Canadian pharmacy have specific periods in the day when they deliver purchases. Look for the same for the online drug store that you have selected. For instance, if the orders are delivered around noon then make sure that you make your purchase before that.
Selecting an express method will go a long way in ensuring that the drugs are delivered as soon as you make a purchase. DHL, USPS, and FedEx are some of the top service providers that ensure that products are delivered within a short time.
As an individual who desires to Phentermine in a couple hours after making your purchase, you want to ensure that you select the best online drugstore in the first place. Be certain regarding the preferences available and select the one that best suits your needs.
You should check the price of the drugs as well as the shipping cost if present for quick delivery. The web based drugstore you select should be credible and accredited if you are concerned with the quality of the pills.
Before placing your order, understand the refund policy and double check with the online pharmacy to ensure you receive the diet related pills within 24 hours of purchase.
PreviousPrevious post:Weight Loss Alternative Options: Top Medications You Need To Know AboutNextNext post:What constitutes legitimacy and trustworthiness of online pharmacies?


text:
Кишоргандж (, ) — округ на северо-востоке Бангладеш, в области Дакка. Образован в 1984 году из части территории округа Маймансингх. Административный центр — город Кишоргандж. Площадь округа — 2689 км². По данным переписи 2001 года население округа составляло 2 525 221 человек. Уровень грамотности взрослого населения составлял 21,94 %, что значительно ниже среднего уровня по Бангладеш (43,1 %). 92,1 % населения округа исповедовало ислам, 7,2 % — индуизм.

Административно-территориальное деление
Округ состоит из 13 подокругов.
Подокруга (центр)
 Аштаграм (Аштаграм)
 Баджитпур (Баджитпур)
 Бхайраб (Бхайраб)
 Хоссайнпур (Хоссайнпур)
 Итна (Итна)
 Каримгандж (Каримгандж)
 Катиади (Катиади)
 Кулиарчар (Кулиарчар)
 Кишоргандж-Садар (Кишоргандж)
 Митхамайн (Митхамайн)
 Никли (Никли)
 Пакундия (Пакундия)
 Тарайл (Тарайл)

Ссылки
 Округ Кишоргандж в Банглапедии.

Округа Бангладеш


text:
Montoya a hit in Mexico
PUBLISHED: March 1, 2007 at 12:00 a.m. | UPDATED: September 1, 2017 at 9:39 a.m.
MEXICO CITY – Juan Pablo Montoya was clearly the center of attention Thursday as Busch Series drivers prepared for NASCAR's third race in Mexico City.
The Colombian driver who jumped from Formula One to NASCAR late last season gained a strong following in Mexico with Formula N victories in the 1990s. Now the Mexican fans hope a fellow Latino might finally win a NASCAR race on their soil.
"Montoya heads the stars," roared the headline in the Mexican daily Diario de Mexico in its preview for Sunday's Telcel-Motorola 200.
"It's an honor to be racing alongside a driver like Montoya, a Latino who has had so much success in racing," Mexico City native Jorge Goeters said. "Montoya is a born champion."
When NASCAR kick-started its Mexico City event in 2005, much was made about the Mexican drivers' knowledge of the 2.518-mile Autodromo Hermanos Rodriguez road course and his experience racing at 7,400 feet, an altitude that gives the cars a little less down force, robbing them of grip and horsepower.
The expectations for local drivers appeared to be playing out when Goeters stunned the field by winning the pole.
But Goeter's first NASCAR pit stop was a disaster and the final results looked a lot like any other Busch Series race, with Martin Truex Jr. using an early pit stop to outlast Kevin Harvick and Carl Edwards.
In the 2006 Mexico City event, Denny Hamlin won. Mexican driver Adrian Fernandez started in fourth and moved up a spot early, but had a minor crash, injuring his thumb, forcing him to settle for 12th.
Mexican driver Michel Jourdain has raced alongside Montoya at the Hermanos Rodriguez.
"He is a very good driver and he knows this track well," Jourdain said. "Sooner or later, he will make a real impact in NASCAR."
The curvy track was built for open-wheel racing and there is little opportunity to pass, except near the end of a tight straightaway.
But the track has seen some changes since Montoya was here last. A 1,000-foot long chicane that used to slow drivers on the opening stretch was taken out recently.
Robbie Weiss, NASCAR's managing director for international affairs, said Montoya brings in a lot of Mexican fans who are familiar with open-wheel racing.
"NASCAR is a brand just being introduced here, but every year it becomes more and more known," Weiss said. "A big name like Montoya brings in the open-wheel fans. And once people try this product they always discover they like it."


text:
Sussex Cup final means so much to Bognor
The prize that awaits Bognor or Burgess Hill on Tuesday
Steve Bone
Published: 22:22 Wednesday 01 May 2019 Updated: 07:55 Friday 03 May 2019
Jack Pearce says Bognor must go all out to end the season by lifting the Sussex Senior Cup.
The manager – who was at the helm last time they won the trophy in 1987 – is hoping fans, players and staff all have an occasion to savour when they take on Burgess Hill at Brighton's Amex Stadium next Tuesday (7.45pm).
Bognor's build-up is not being helped by the injury problems that have plagued them all season and midfielder Doug Tuck and winger Mason Walsh are both rated doubtful for the showpiece game.
Bognor have beaten Three Bridges, East Grinstead and Brighton under-23s to reach their third final in six years and fourth in nine years.
And having lost at the last hurdle in 2010, 2013 and 2014 they are desperate to win the trophy this time.
Bognor need to be miles better
I shared a pitch with Raheem Sterling and didn't realise
They may have a psychological advantage over Burgess Hill, just relegated from the Bostik premier and 8-0 losers in the league at Nyewood Lane in October, but Pearce says that will count for little once the teams go toe to toe in this one-off match.
"We have had a difficult few weeks in the league but being in the cup final does give us a chance to end the season on a high note," he said.
"At Folkestone on Saturday, although we lost 1-0, we couldn't have asked for any more effort from those who played. The effort was exceptional and we are creating chances, even if we've not been taking them in recent games.
"The cup final is a different game, nothing to do with anything that's happened in the league. It's a big game for the fans to enjoy and the players hopefully can savour playing at a big stadium like the Amex."
Tuck, who has been struggling with a groin injury, and Walsh, whose hip problem has plagued him for much of the season, may miss out through injury although they will be assessed and given every chance of making the line-up.
With centre-half Harvey Read having been released, that could leave Bognor short of options. But top scorer Jimmy Muitt should be fit to start at a ground that was once his home, and young Pompey forward Brad Lethbridge should be in the starting line-up too. Jimmy Wild could complete a three-man attack.
Blake delighted to see Pompey back in Bognor
Not available are cup-tied trio Joe Tomlinson, Ed Sanders and Reece Meekums, who have played for Brighton, Whitehawk and Worthing respectively in this season's Senior Cup.
Meanwhile Bognor are waiting to see what Pompey's plans for Lethbridge and fellow Rocks loanee Leon Maloney will be next season now the Fratton Park club have awarded the two attackers another year on their deal.
Two other Pompey youngsters who the Rocks have borrowed this season - midfielder Freddie Read and centre-half Joe Dandy - are not being kept on at Fratton. Dandy will stay there for another six months as he comes back from injury.
Pearce said it was early in the process of looking at next season's Rocks squad but did say: "We need a fresh influx of players. We need to freshen up the squad."


Shelby-Rising City Schools Technology Coordinator Matt Carley has been appointed to the Nebraska Educational Technology Association (NETA) Board of Directors. Mr. Carley has served as the Tech Coordinator at S-RC for six years and has played an instrumental role in developing the Districts infrastructure, one-to-one device management, grant funding, managing internal systems, and ensuring that data security is a top priority.
We would like to congratulate Mr. Carley on this achievement!