|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Wed 30 Aug 14:45
21,000 alcohol related deaths in England last year 38 per 100,000
1,200 in Scotland 18 per 100,000
Maybe England should introduce minimum pricing
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: McCaig`s Tower
Date: Wed 30 Aug 15:26
Where are you getting those figures from, LA?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parboiled
Date: Wed 30 Aug 15:39
Office of National Statistics alcohol related deaths figures for England and Wales 2022 is 7423.
Somebody must be pissed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Wed 30 Aug 16:04
In 2021 in England there were 20,970 deaths related to alcohol 38.5 per 100,000 population.
According to ONS those figures are expected to be increased to an all time high for 2022.
Someone playing with figures, or all the pubs and off licences have closed?
Or someone has been drinking!
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/local-alcohol-profiles-for-england-lape-march-2023-update/local-alcohol-profiles-for-england-short-statistical-commentary-march-2023#:~:text=Alcohol%2Dspecific%20mortality,-In%202021%2C%20there&text=The%20mortality%20rate%20was%20highest,per%20100%2C000%20population)%20in%20Barnet.
Post Edited (Wed 30 Aug 16:37)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: McCaig`s Tower
Date: Wed 30 Aug 16:20
Alcohol Specific or Alcohol Related?
The ONS report I`m looking at (released in December 2022) suggests there were 9,641 deaths registered in the UK as being from alcohol-specific causes, 1,245 of which were registered in Scotland.
I can`t immediately find figures for alcohol related or alcohol attributable - do you have a link?
Are we comparing like with like?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Wed 30 Aug 16:23
The numbers for England that LA is quoting are for alcohol related and the one Parboiled is using is alcohol specific.
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/local-alcohol-profiles-for-england-lape-march-2023-update/local-alcohol-profiles-for-england-short-statistical-commentary-march-2023#:~:text=of%20updated%20indicators-,Alcohol%2Dspecific%20mortality,(10.3%20per%20100%2C000%20population).
Post Edited (Wed 30 Aug 16:25)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Wed 30 Aug 21:17
Those figures are wrong.
I don`t believe the UK (England and Wales) figures are issued yet but it`s nowhere near 21k. It`s more like 8k.
I believe that figure came from someone on twitter who can`t read.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Wed 30 Aug 21:25
Also, whilst MUP has worked to some extent, those who REALLY want a drink will find it. If they can`t find it, there are cheap benzos that will get people equally off their face.
Things like MUP, safe consumption rooms, decriminalising drugs etc only go so far. Education, tackling poverty and ensuring support is available needs to happen. A massive issue at the moment is the awful waiting times for mental health support.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Wed 30 Aug 23:41
Jake the 21k figure is for alcohol related deaths in England and Wales. The 8k figure is for alcohol specific deaths in England and Wales. Those figures are from the ons as detailed in the link I provided above (I`ve long since gave up trying to to do a proper link on this forum from a mobile browser).
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Thu 31 Aug 07:03
So comparing apples with oranges. The correct comparison is the 8k figure, not the 21k one. Per capita, it`s still higher in Scotland, mainly around Glasgow as it massively skews the figures.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Thu 31 Aug 09:00
Indeed LA and Parboiled were getting them mixed up but the figures weren`t just made up by some bloke on twitter.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parboiled
Date: Thu 31 Aug 09:49
Following a a complaint to the ONS the Scot gov have had to delete a whole paragraph from a press release that claimed a a review iof 40 independent studies showed that MUP had been effective in reducing deaths.
In fact the only report that supported that was one by Public Health Scotland sponsored by Scotgov, the other 39 were “either contradictory, inconclusive, or unrelated to the subject”
ONS stated that this one report was misleading, claims are mere estimates which are statistically unreliable.
Utter mince in other words.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Thu 31 Aug 10:55
Personally I think minimum pricing is worth persevering with. Five years or whatever it is now isn`t long enough to tell if it will work long term or not in my opinion. If in another five years there is no significant impact on alcohol specific deaths, alcohol related death or alcohol related hospital admissions then it will be right to call this policy a failure. However the rate of alcohol specific and related deaths has risen across all four of the nations so the in the short term something other than the affordability of booze is driving this. Of course the pandemic years have surely got to be taken into account here.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parboiled
Date: Thu 31 Aug 12:32
Indeed TOWK, analysis of stats over a meaningful period.
Humza and his halfwits decide the result they want and invent stats to support it. Think they are clever but their innate stupidity lets them down.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Thu 31 Aug 14:03
Is this a variation on the theme of `too stupid to run your own affairs`? Is your bigotry `innate` or have you had to work at it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parboiled
Date: Thu 31 Aug 16:31
You’d have to be awfy stupid to think you’d get away with stats referencing 40 studies, 39 of which did not support your case or had no input to the the subject, the other one a homer falling apart under the merest scrutiny...then there are the gullible sheep who vote for you.
Post Edited (Thu 31 Aug 16:33)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Thu 31 Aug 17:26
No answer as usual.
I see BBC Scotland have admitted a graph they showed exaggerated the increase in alcohol-related deaths between 2021 and 2022 by using a different scale on the top and bottom parts of the Y-axis. They are supposed to be neutral of course.
Post Edited (Thu 31 Aug 17:27)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Thu 31 Aug 18:59
The main impact of minimum pricing that I`ve noticed is that street drinkers tend to eat less now.
The enemy travels by private jet, not by dinghy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Thu 31 Aug 20:35
Quote:
The One Who Knocks, Thu 31 Aug 09:00
Indeed LA and Parboiled were getting them mixed up but the figures weren`t just made up by some bloke on twitter.
Yeah, sorry, what I meant was the same figure was being bandied about by a guy on twitter. I`m assuming that`s where it came from as it was the same narrative of "not as bad as England though".
There is, of course, some interesting arguments here around independence. On one hand, this is a failure. On the other, it`s a failure under the status quo.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parboiled
Date: Thu 31 Aug 21:22
No, it’s a home grown failure, a fully devolved failure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Thu 31 Aug 21:35
But is lower than the rate under Labour so...mmm.
Any suggestions for approaches to lowering alcohol deaths, Parboiled? Which Tory policies do you think could be adopted in Scotland to help with this?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parboiled
Date: Thu 31 Aug 21:58
Pathetic Eck.
The Beeb’s graph doesn’t matter a hoot. Deaths are deaths, numbers are numbers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Thu 31 Aug 22:02
If the national broadcaster can`t report accurately what can we depend on? Why don`t you answer Jake`s question?
If only we had a multi-talented guy like Grant Shapps to sort things out then move on to the next problem area.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: hurricane_jimmy
Date: Fri 1 Sep 03:34
Honestly find it hilarious to see the usual suspects opposed to a policy such as MUP, simply because it was implemented by the SNP.
Just for context, minimum unit pricing has been in place in Sweden, Norway, Finland and Iceland for decades and enforced mainly via the existence of State-owned alcohol monopolies. The results on public health are public for all to see.
Once again, the faux outrage by certain slaverers on here demonstrates a complete ignorance of events outside of their own wee bubble, which sadly is typical of too many beyond a certain age in Scotland.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parboiled
Date: Fri 1 Sep 08:50
Admin! This is ageism! “A certain age” indeed…and what would that be?
But don’t be too hard on the chap. Long cold winter ahead, nationalised booze, and the smell of Holy Book burning in the air..not much to cheer about!
Post Edited (Fri 01 Sep 08:56)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: McCaig`s Tower
Date: Fri 1 Sep 10:45
Honestly find it hilarious to see the usual suspects opposed to a policy such as MUP, simply because it was implemented by the SNP.
Isn’t it the other way round (as well)? People support a policy such as MUP simply because it was implemented by the SNP, when there appears to be little evidence that it is working, instead clutching at dubious or misleading stats
I’m sure* I read somewhere that alcohol is differently regulated in many Nordic countries, creating a different social environment, which makes comparisons difficult. What are the rates of alcohol-related deaths in these countries?
* of course at my advanced years my eyesight is fading and my memory is going so I may be slavering. Although I’m not as old as Mike Russell. Presumably he is not disputing the numbers? Is he having a go at the weather maps as well?
Of course, the idea of using taxation as an implement to enforce social reform is fraught with difficulties. It’s a bit like the use of LEZs, targeted at those who can least afford to comply.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parboiled
Date: Fri 1 Sep 11:52
Good points there. It’s not so much the policy, it’s the Scotgov getting caught red handed for making claims with no evidence to support them.
Thank goodness for the independent ONS, one public agency that is safe from being leaned on, unlike the ones up here stuffed with SNP sycophants.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: hurricane_jimmy
Date: Fri 1 Sep 15:52
Parbroiled, getting a wee bit sensitive are we? Quite obvious that the majority of your views will come from reading the likes of the Express and Mail which are far more popular among those around your age. Quite honestly, you really need to realise that your British Imperialist views are outdated and just not acceptable to the vast majority in Scotland.
And the repeated resorting to playing the "Anglophobia" card is just absolutely childish and shows you`ve got hee haw in the locker.
Personally, I also have no problem with burning the Quran, Bible or any other work of fiction. The Swedish Government are correct to protect the right of Freedom of Expression in the constitution. If people wish to be religious then they need to realise that their religion is open to criticism.
McCaig, MUP is implemented in Norway, Sweden, Iceland and Finland via the taxation system. Each of these countries have their own alcohol monopolies (Vinmonopolet, Systembolaget, Vinbudin and Alko respectively) and each country basically has a base ABV above which alcohol cannot be sold privately - for example anything in Sweden above 3.5% has to be sold through Systembolaget, Norway is 4.75% and Finland I believe is 5% although craft breweries have recently been granted the right to sell direct to customer on site. Pretty much any doctor in any of these countries will tell you that the monopoly system and its price controls have saved lived and curbed alcoholism since they were implemented. The argument now is that measures need to be introduced to help artisanal producers.
From raking around a wee bit, the latest figure I can find is that in Sweden there were somewhere in the region of 2100 alcohol related deaths in 2021 and that works out as a bit less than 2.1 deaths per 100,000.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parboiled
Date: Fri 1 Sep 16:57
I’d rather live where I can load up the boot with as much 5% beer as I like from Aldi or Asda than any of those Scandi control freakery states..they must even be banned from getting a round in..I bought a Norwegian a beer twenty years ago and never got one back!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Fri 1 Sep 21:20
I’ll sign up on that front Parboiled; even when I worked in Qatar I could still legally fill the boot of my car with cheap booze. But unfortunately in the UK the Puritans and the Wee Frees have never gone away; they simply adopt different guises. With the decline of Christian religion many have gravitated to the religion of Environmentalism to find a new home for their belief in original sin. Our carbon footprint is the mark of Satan. Their desire to create smokeless cities has all but been achieved, despite my best efforts, and they are now turning their attentions to alcohol. Presumably eating chocolate will follow suit on their list of heresies.
Such self-righteous zealotry is nothing new and not confined to any generation or culture or even rooted in fact. If I have smoked nicotine and drunk alcohol for over 50 years and remain fitter than the average person who denounces me for doing so, then the reality must be portrayed as an aberration or suppressed. That suppression is advocated by HJ in his previous post where he supports burning books in the name of Freedom of Expression. (His capitals- not mine.) ‘Today they burn books, tomorrow they will burn people,’ was the quote from Heinrich Heine, a German Jewish philosopher from the early 1800s. In 1933 the Nazis did indeed burn his books in a joyous public celebration, before they went on to fulfil his prophecy.
I find Parboiled’s knee-jerk anti Scottish independence stance rather tiresome, but the dangers of succumbing to the cold house of Calvinism has to be addressed. Holyrood is full of such types.
sammer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tad Allagash
Date: Sat 2 Sep 13:11
Great post Sammer.
Puritanism - the haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be having a good time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: hurricane_jimmy
Date: Sat 2 Sep 14:06
Parboiled - Once again, an extremely intellectual response. Personally, as a citizen of both the UK and Sweden, I`d be far more concerned about the UK government`s nefarious activities than those of the Swedish Government. Could you actually afford to go to Norway these days on your UK state pension?
Sammer - You honestly talk nonsense on so many different subjects. Putin, the Environment...the list goes on. It is genuinely hilarious to hear a authoritarian shill talk about suppression.
The simple reason that folk are more concerned about health and the environment these days is because the science is better understood and there is proof gathered over decades that shows the effects of alcohol abuse, tobacco abuse and the increase of Carbon and NOX gasses in the atmosphere.
Back in your youth (at least 60 years ago from what I understand), there was not the same means to verify facts as there is now. You claim to read both Western and Russian sources of news, yet very often you say the Western Source is wrong while you accept the Russian source at face value, pretty much parroting what the Kremlin says. Quite often you just disappear from the debate when you`re faced with irrefutable facts that contradict your narrative. Did you ever actually look up the Press Freedom Index from RSF and Russia`s placing in there? Russia is in place 164 of 180. (https://rsf.org/en/index) That SHOULD be some food for thought for you instead of buying in to the Putin and CCP "de-dolarisation" propaganda that you seem to believe is true. Then again, you live in the Moscow-Peterburg bubble which Putin is desperately trying to shield from the effects of war in order to maintain his power base, so I don`t really blame you for thinking as you do!
My Grandmother smoked pretty much all her days and lasted to 87 in 2008 with a dormant lung cancer. My grandfather lasted until the same age having never smoked in his life. It`s completely luck of the draw. Whether you choose to smoke and drink heavily is absolutely your choice, but then you should pay more tax for doing so because its proven that you will cost the public healthcare system more than somebody who doesn`t. There`s you`re freedom of choice, old bean!
As for religion, the Abrahamic religions (i.e. Christianity, Judaism and Islam) do not deserve respect as they spread originally by the sword. Moreover, the majority in Scotland are non-religious and have been for quite some time - the first data that shows this was from the mid 2010s.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Sat 2 Sep 23:43
HJ says something of note: that your life span is pretty much the luck of the draw. So forget your diet and nutrition guff: smoke or not smoke, drink or not smoke, it won’t’ make much difference. His own family support for this claim is probably the best evidence he has ever produced for any argument he has voiced on this forum.
HJ is a great believer in the ‘bubble.’ In almost every post, he suggests that the rest of we contributors are corralled in some sort of propaganda echo chamber but that he alone has managed to find some independent truth. Yet his bubble is the religion is that of science, a non mathematical source of knowledge, which is ever changing. The greatest scientists all understood they had merely established the best truth available: HJ thinks they wrote the 10 commandments. On this basis, and I do not think I am being unfair to him, he advocates the burning of books in order to broaden the range of human understanding. (This is me speaking- not George Orwell.) The Nazis claimed the same in 1934, before they burned the authors. Their visceral hatred of Christianity was based on Nietzsche’s concept of the superman, a call for the strong to obliterate the weak. HJ echoes much of NATO propaganda which assumes they are the strong. The rest of the world sees things a little differently. Meanwhile HJ is eager to join up with NATO forces to spread goodness by the very sword he condemns in all the major religions, without a hint of irony.
It must follow that HJ’s position is ultra-authoritarian, that he claims the right to say what is good or bad not just for himself- which we would all respect- but for you and me as well. He will do this in the name of science, but as man who salutes officers as part of his weekend soldiering that is the norm. His belief in hierarchy- which extends to NATO imperialism and health fascism- is absolute. He wants us, as mere privates, to salute him in return but I for one have never been tempted towards that display of deference. I would advise others against that course and get a good bevy so long as you are able.
sammer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: hurricane_jimmy
Date: Sun 3 Sep 03:43
Sammer - Once again, you spout at absolute load of drivel. DotNets own George Galloway.
Getting cancer is pretty much luck of the draw, although some are genetically disposed to getting it. But do feel free to put words into my mouth if it makes you feel better.
Classic bit of deflection from you there again RE Science. Where exactly do I say that scientists understand everything? Conveniently though, you ignore the fact that the points about alcohol abuse, tobacco abuse and the environment stand firm. Quite obviously you have never studied science to any great level or is it just that you don`t want to lose face? Do you have an idea of how cancer develops on the cellular level? I`d bet not. This is something that really wasn`t understood during your youth and still isn`t fully understood but is far better understood today.
Tell me though, if NATO isn`t strong, why is the Kremlin so terrified of provoking them? Could it be the huge technological gulf? I mean, Russia losing 2000+ T model tanks compared to the 5 leopard IIs that the Ukrainians have lost is pretty laughable. Even if you go into the old Soviet stock tanks, the Ukrainians have lost about 500 by comparison and then the two Russian tank factories can only produce about 20 per month between them. The Ukrainians are beating the Russians on the ground despite fighting without air cover, but it seems that the F-16 and perhaps also the Gripen will change that very soon. You`ve shown time and again that you lack even a basic understanding of military tactics and technology, so why even bother?
It seems you support those young Russian lads being sent to their deaths by a scared old gangster. You`ve previously talked about former Communist countries "selling out", yet you support a gangster selling out the Russian people and destroying the future of the country`s youth. You could also argue that he is ethnically cleansing many of Russia`s ethnicities to fight his war, but I guess you`ll conveniently ignore that as well. China, who you have spoken in favour of many a time, are doing something similar with their minorities. But, aye, it`s the democratic nations that are the Fascists - Bandera and Nazis everywhere! 😂
Erse.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Sun 3 Sep 09:14
I absolutely promise you that smoking greatly increases your chances of developing cancer. Doesn`t make it a 100% certain which is why there will be many cases of people smoking a pack everyday all their lives and living to a ripe old age. Many more though will die years before they otherwise would have because of heavy smoking.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBP
Date: Sun 3 Sep 10:11
Exactly, some people may be genetically prone to develop cancer regardless and some lucky ones may be able to do what they like without consequence…
But to suggest that smoking (or even passive smoking) doesn’t increase your risk in any way is nonsense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Sun 3 Sep 11:20
Interesting docuseries on Netflix studying longevity, bit boring at times, but identifying certain areas in the world where people reach 100.
Okinawa was the first place, despite being obliterated during the war, many citizens in their high 90`s and 100`s.
Have to tell my 94yr old Maw to keep going!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBP
Date: Sun 3 Sep 12:44
Yeah from the episodes I’ve seen, the common themes were:
- lowering your meat based protein to about 3 % - think we’re about 8% on average
- being social (not pub social) as a community and multi generational family units
- active lifestyle as part of daily life, eg walking most journeys, living on a as hillside, etc
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parboiled
Date: Sun 3 Sep 15:05
HJ is obsessed with how many birthdays folk have had. Bringing Sammer into his ageist sights now.
Is he jealous because he never got out of his teens?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Sun 3 Sep 18:41
I think social interaction, whether in the pub or otherwise, must be a key in helping people reach their natural lifespan. A society where people are free to associate and where they feel they can make a useful contribution will surely result in healthier citizens. Governments are not so keen to acknowledge this and would rather lay the responsibility for poor health outcomes on to poor choices made by the individual.
But the individual takes a much broader view of his or her health than does any government. He understands that good health is not merely something that can be measured by doctors, but also includes mental health and (if he is religious) spiritual health as well. Finding a balance between these- which may include partaking of drugs- is well within the capabilities of most adults and requires no coercion on the part of any government.
Providing social interaction in the form of secure employment is probably the one thing that governments could do to make a country healthier. Instead, they prefer to rather lecture and impose tariffs in order to cover their own inadequacy, all the while adopting an offensive air of moral superiority.
sammer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBP
Date: Sun 3 Sep 19:44
Agreed, for info, I said not pub because it wasn’t socialising around alcohol with only those aged 18-60
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Sun 3 Sep 21:39
No problem, understood. I was probably conscious of earlier posts which referred to ‘alcohol abuse’ and ‘drug abuse.’ You can shove the word ‘abuse’ at the end of anything and by highlighting the associated problem then offer to ‘solve’ it by harsh legislation. It’s an old trick.
Around half of the people I ever worked with smoked tobacco and that was in the workplace. A greater number imbibed alcohol on a regular basis, outwith the workplace, although the amounts consumed would have been vastly different. But they were all able to come to their work every day and contribute towards society. Maybe they might have lived longer if they had abstained. But maybe if they had abstained they would have triggered chain reaction medical problems and mental health problems. No doctor could ever be certain.
When I was a teenager we were confidently informed that mini skirted girls would end up with thrombosis in old age, and that tight trousers would lead to male impotence. Long hair, common to both sexes back then, would produce nits and baldness. None of this, over 50 years later, has transpired so far as I can see. But the same language is still being used by Holy Willies around our approach to alcohol and drugs.
sammer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Bletchley_Par
Date: Mon 4 Sep 21:05
Privatise healthcare.
Base insurance premiums on lifestyle choices.
If you are an alky, you pay more.
If you are a junkie, you pay more.
If you are obese, you pay more.
If you smoke, you pay more.
Give people responsibility for their own health.
Of course very few are interested in this solution because drink deaths are just a political football as are drug deaths and smoking and all the rest of it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: red-star-par
Date: Mon 4 Sep 21:56
Quote:
Bletchley_Par, Mon 4 Sep 21:05
Privatise healthcare.
Base insurance premiums on lifestyle choices.
If you are an alky, you pay more.
If you are a junkie, you pay more.
If you are obese, you pay more.
If you smoke, you pay more.
Give people responsibility for their own health.
Of course very few are interested in this solution because drink deaths are just a political football as are drug deaths and smoking and all the rest of it.
Not sure if you are trolling, but you do come across as the type of person that does think along these lines.
What if you don`t have enough money to pay for it? I doubt that people suffering from addiction issues, "alky", "junkie", as you call them would have the money to pay for them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Mon 4 Sep 22:22
Charging people for societal issues wouldn`t stop poor health decisions. Isn`t the USA, with it`s private health care, the fattest nation on Earth? Their drug users are far more visible too. I`m not sure if they have more or less but my experience was there were lots of downtrodden people.
Just did a quick check. Probably different measures, but it would appear drug deaths in the USA were considerably higher per head than Scotland so punishing those who can't afford to be drug addicts clearly doesn't work either.
The age of the people dying from drug deaths in Scotland is also considerably older and would suggest the ones dying now likely started in the 90s (which was a long time ago despite how it may feel!)
Post Edited (Mon 04 Sep 22:33)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Bletchley_Par
Date: Mon 4 Sep 23:44
Quote:
Topic Originator: red-star-par
Date: Mon 4 Sep 21:56
Not sure if you are trolling, but you do come across as the type of person that does think along these lines.
Really? I did not think I`d revealed enough for anyone to make such a call.
Quote:
What if you don`t have enough money to pay for it?
Oh we can have a coupon day or something.
Quote:
I doubt that people suffering from addiction issues, "alky", "junkie", as you call them would have the money to pay for them.
Yeah, they have chosen debauchery over health, their choice...I wish them well.
Just like the politicians, I really don`t care about drink deaths unless it is a family member or a close friend because ultimately I know addiction is not a disease it is a life choice.
I`m happy for there to be services to break the cycle of addiction, but if you are a happy drunk or drug user unless you have a epiphany in your life these services will be of no use to you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Bletchley_Par
Date: Tue 5 Sep 00:43
Quote:
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Mon 4 Sep 22:22
Charging people for societal issues wouldn`t stop poor health decisions. Isn`t the USA, with it`s private health care, the fattest nation on Earth? Their drug users are far more visible too. I`m not sure if they have more or less but my experience was there were lots of downtrodden people.
3 constants of the universe...
Death.
Taxes.
And NHS fanboys going straight to the USA, ignoring the many good private healthcare systems in other countries.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: hurricane_jimmy
Date: Tue 5 Sep 02:33
Parbroiled - Frankly, despite your advanced years, its quite obvious to anyone with a modicum of sense that I have both far more and a far more varied life experience than you do in spite of your advanced years. Your behaviour is quite reminiscent of a school bully: act brazen until called out and then play the victim card. So far we`ve had Ageism and Anglophobia. What`s next?
Sammer - Once again, very telling how you simply ignore all the points made to you regarding your position supporting authoritarian regimes. What is it this time, can`t be bothered responding? (which happens conveniently often) Or don`t want to lose face again?
Jake - I`ve seen you make this point about the current drug deaths being related to a pandemic in the 90s a few times. Can you link me up to some literature on the subject?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Tue 5 Sep 06:43
Quote:
hurricane_jimmy, Tue 5 Sept 02:33
Parbroiled - Frankly, despite your advanced years, its quite obvious to anyone with a modicum of sense that I have both far more and a far more varied life experience than you do in spite of your advanced years. Your behaviour is quite reminiscent of a school bully: act brazen until called out and then play the victim card. So far we`ve had Ageism and Anglophobia. What`s next?
Sammer - Once again, very telling how you simply ignore all the points made to you regarding your position supporting authoritarian regimes. What is it this time, can`t be bothered responding? (which happens conveniently often) Or don`t want to lose face again?
Jake - I`ve seen you make this point about the current drug deaths being related to a pandemic in the 90s a few times. Can you link me up to some literature on the subject?
No you haven`t. It`s the first time I`ve mentioned it 😂 I`m working on an assumption that the biggest group of deaths being people in their late 40s suggests they started 20-30 years ago. It`s all broken down in the stats.
Here you go:
"When drug deaths started to rise in the mid-2010s, the term "Trainspotting generation" became popular shorthand.
A hangover from the 1990s, this group of people had started using drugs young but were only now dying in their 40s and 50s.
It was theorised that those deaths were the cause of Scotland's ever-increasing rate."
Though worth noting the younger generation is also rising so it's not just the 90s users, but that group is the highest for deaths (probably because they're older).
Post Edited (Tue 05 Sep 06:54)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tad Allagash
Date: Tue 5 Sep 12:41
I don’t like to be negative, but we’re all going to die.
So a reduction in alcohol deaths leads to an increase in deaths from other causes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: parsfan
Date: Tue 5 Sep 13:00
Quote:
Tad Allagash, Tue 5 Sep 12:41
I don’t like to be negative, but we’re all going to die.
So a reduction in alcohol deaths leads to an increase in deaths from other causes.
Perhaps, but what puzzles me is how Scotland seems to have the worst death figures in everything. Surely there`s some double counting going on here, unreliable counting going on elsewhere or is the life expectancy every other country in the 90s?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The universe is ruled by chance and indifference
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parboiled
Date: Tue 5 Sep 13:34
HJ, there is a difference between boiled and broiled. Also a difference between turnip and swede.
Swedes are large, rough skin with yellow flesh. Turnips have smooth skin and are nice and white.
I’m not sure happens if you cross them..
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: hurricane_jimmy
Date: Wed 6 Sep 13:43
Jake - apologies, must have been somebody else but I`ve seen that point made a few times. Interesting reading though and I think the next one to be concerned about is the use of these vapes which will cause all sorts of issues.
Parboiled - I`m sure that sounded humorous in yer heid but it just makes me more sure that there`s a wee bit of Asperger`s involved in there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Wed 6 Sep 17:35
The announcement yesterday of banning single use vapes in Scotland is significant. Whilst I`m sure people will still be able to buy them online, it will hopefully discourage some people, especially young people, from even starting.
I don`t smoke/vape but at least with cigarettes you know what crap you`re inhaling. God only knows what could be in a cheap bottle of vape liquid bought online.
If nothing else it will stop the bloody things being dropped all over the place. At least fag ends disintegrate and float away. All these vapes are metal/plastic with lithium batteries in them!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Wed 6 Sep 18:26
Much of the 1990s opiates epidemic was probably related to the rave scene. People used heroin aafte a night out as a way to come down from ecstasy and other party drugs.
A part of this was that the focus of our harm reduction messaging at the tme was towards discouraging injecting - as a way of trying to ccontrol the sppread of HIV/AIDS.
This led to some young people in the raving scene thinking that smoking smack was fine and, to be fair, it worked a treat on the comedowns. Eventually though, a lot of these folk started taking smack on weekdays, started injecting and stopped going raving.
The enemy travels by private jet, not by dinghy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Thu 7 Sep 19:59
Alcohol is an addition as severe as any drug and just as hard to stop .. Its a disease that has taken many good pals .. Its a culture that is prevalent in our society due to a cheap escapism back in the day that has nurtured and manifested into many family`s culture
Charging more for a bottle of wine or whisky won`t or ever will cure or reduce alcohol related deaths .. The poor will just spend less on essentials .. while those who can afford it will carry on as normal .. just saying
We are forever shaped by the Children we once were
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parboiled
Date: Thu 21 Sep 10:09
MUP planned to rise from 50p to 65P next May, when current charge expires. Cheapest whiskey up from £14.50 to £18.
With alcohol related deaths now at record levels there is not a scintilla of evidence this policy has had, or is likely to have, any impact whatsoever.
|
|
|
|
|
|
