(NaturalNews) A British government committee has recommended vaccinating everyone between the ages of 70 and 79 against shingles.
"I welcome the recommendation that we should look for a cost-effective vaccine," said Gillian Merron, minister for public health. "A vaccination program would be good news for those in their 70s. It would improve quality of life by offering protection against this illness."
Shingles is caused by infection with the virus Herpes varicella zoster, the same virus responsible for chicken pox. In shingles, which occurs later in life, the virus infects a nerve and the surrounding skin, causing highly painful blisters that may last for months. In 30 percent of patients, chronic pain persists indefinitely even after the virus is cleared out. Other long-term side effects include scarring and vision loss.
Shingles was considered responsible for 100 deaths among the elderly in England and Wales in 2008. An estimated one in four adults contracts the infection at some point during their lifetimes.
The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunization (JCVI) conducted an investigation into the disease and concluded that everyone between the ages of 70 and 79 should be vaccinated.
"This age group was proposed as the duration of protection, based on current data, is estimated to be 7.5 years and infection is more severe and the burden of illness is greater in this age group," the committee said.
The JCVI did not recommend widespread use of the chickenpox vaccine in children, due to concerns that it can actually increase the risk of shingles later in life.
The committee's investigation was not triggered by any particular concern about shingles. Its recommendation will now go before the Department of Health, which will decide if it is cost effective.
The only shingles/chickenpox vaccine on the market is Zostavax, made by Merck. If the recommendation is adopted by the British government, four million would be encouraged to receive the shot at once.
Sources for this story include: www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-... www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/jan....
Showing posts with label UK. Show all posts
Showing posts with label UK. Show all posts
Thursday, June 3, 2010
Friday, May 14, 2010
1,200 patients killed in hospital, abused by staff, lying in filth1,200 patients killed in hospital, abused by staff, lying in filth
(NaturalNews) A huge U.K. health care scandal recently shocked the public with reports that up to 1,200 patients in a British hospital needlessly died from abuse and neglect. And the worst part is that not a single worker involved has been prosecuted for his crimes.
It all started when an independent review of the U.K.'s Mid Staffordshire National Health Service (NHS) hospital found that patients there were routinely neglected, bullied, abused and treated poorly. The details of the report include evidence that:
-Nurses regularly ignored patients and left them unwashed in their own filth for as long as a month, and even ignored requests by patients to use the restroom or have their sheets changed.
-Four family members, including a newborn baby girl, all died at the hospital due to carelessness and malpractice. The baby had to be delivered by her grandmother because the midwife was not paying attention. Upon birth, the baby was not breathing, but workers resuscitated her. However she died four days later because a junior pediatrician went against the family's wishes and decided to release the sick baby.
-Patients were regularly released prematurely because medical workers feared they would lose their jobs for perceived "delaying".
-Hospital wards were filthy and contaminated with blood, used needles, and dirty dressings.
Those workers who had concerns about the horrible conditions at the hospital were bullied by managers into not coming forward with the truth. And what researchers initially perceived as having caused 400 deaths ended up burgeoning into 1,200.
Those responsible for the atrocious conditions have either retired with generous pensions or found other jobs in the field. None have had to bear the responsibility for their crimes, and many have not even responded to the allegations.
According to the accusing parties, hospital officials were so concerned with cost-cutting and pursuing "elite foundation trust status" that they lost sight of actually caring for their patients.
Part of the problem also lies in what has been termed "box-ticking", or merely checking a box and sending a patient off to a ward to die. The formulaic method to which the hospital philosophy of care had devolved is the subject of investigation, as concerned officials pursue justice in the matter. Many are demanding a full public inquiry into the case.
The report also outlined that the hospital staff count was allowed to dwindle so low that there were simply not enough caretakers to handle all the patients. And while some did their best to provide care, many displayed a disturbing lack of compassion and simply discarded patient needs, resulting in hundreds of deaths. Even basic needs like changing bedpans and sheets and bringing food and water were neglected.
Former chief executive of the hospital, Martin Yeates, was suspended from his job, but with full pay for six months and a hefty pension.
Sources for this story include:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...
It all started when an independent review of the U.K.'s Mid Staffordshire National Health Service (NHS) hospital found that patients there were routinely neglected, bullied, abused and treated poorly. The details of the report include evidence that:
-Nurses regularly ignored patients and left them unwashed in their own filth for as long as a month, and even ignored requests by patients to use the restroom or have their sheets changed.
-Four family members, including a newborn baby girl, all died at the hospital due to carelessness and malpractice. The baby had to be delivered by her grandmother because the midwife was not paying attention. Upon birth, the baby was not breathing, but workers resuscitated her. However she died four days later because a junior pediatrician went against the family's wishes and decided to release the sick baby.
-Patients were regularly released prematurely because medical workers feared they would lose their jobs for perceived "delaying".
-Hospital wards were filthy and contaminated with blood, used needles, and dirty dressings.
Those workers who had concerns about the horrible conditions at the hospital were bullied by managers into not coming forward with the truth. And what researchers initially perceived as having caused 400 deaths ended up burgeoning into 1,200.
Those responsible for the atrocious conditions have either retired with generous pensions or found other jobs in the field. None have had to bear the responsibility for their crimes, and many have not even responded to the allegations.
According to the accusing parties, hospital officials were so concerned with cost-cutting and pursuing "elite foundation trust status" that they lost sight of actually caring for their patients.
Part of the problem also lies in what has been termed "box-ticking", or merely checking a box and sending a patient off to a ward to die. The formulaic method to which the hospital philosophy of care had devolved is the subject of investigation, as concerned officials pursue justice in the matter. Many are demanding a full public inquiry into the case.
The report also outlined that the hospital staff count was allowed to dwindle so low that there were simply not enough caretakers to handle all the patients. And while some did their best to provide care, many displayed a disturbing lack of compassion and simply discarded patient needs, resulting in hundreds of deaths. Even basic needs like changing bedpans and sheets and bringing food and water were neglected.
Former chief executive of the hospital, Martin Yeates, was suspended from his job, but with full pay for six months and a hefty pension.
Sources for this story include:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
