I really enjoyed being interviewed today by Mark O'Donnell for the BBC because although a little tongue in cheek he made a valid point.
Why are the advertising campaigns of the anti-booze group so ineffective?
The answer is simple:
Because if they were good and people stopped drinking who would the groups wishing to abolish alcohol have to beat up on?
The reality is that the anti-alcohol lobby is reliant on the alcohol lobby being good at their jobs so there is reason for their existence.
If we want to make people change their drinking habits so as to reduce health and crime problems then we have to change their psyche. It really is that simple. That change can not be brought about by shocking people it has to be brought about through education and psychology of persuasion. We have to make people want to change.
It reminds me of the old joke about the psychiatrist and the light bulb:
How any psychiatrists does it take to change a light bulb?
Only one but the light bulb has to want to change!
And right now Great Britain doesn't want to change it's relationship with alcohol because it sees no reason to change that relationship. It is a little the battle against tobacco, we are in the same scenario. It's a legal drug that would probably be a Class A status drug if discovered today.
Please remember that I don't want people to stop drinking I want people to stop drinking in a harmful way.
That can only be achieved by consistent, loud and informed education.
Help me achieve that. Follow this blog if you have a genuine interest in alcohol, retweet me if you are on twitter and link it on Facebook and Google+.
Informed decisions start with debate and discussion. Do not hide from the question embrace it, grow with it and remember:
Enough small drops make a tidal wave!
Thursday, 19 July 2012
Wednesday, 27 June 2012
Alcohol the ultimate Atkin's diet
What a strange day it has turned out to be thanks to this story
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/329161/Heart-attack-risk-in-dieting
Strange because I've been teaching this for the last 25 years, well in a round about way that is. You see alcohol is a carbohydrate that doesn't work like a carbohydrate and effectively your body enters Atkin's mode when you live purely off booze. This is why extreme alcoholics are thin.
Yes I know you get a beer belly but that is because normal drinkers continue to consume normal food amounts alongside their normal drinking and a pint of beer holds between 180 and 300 empty calories per pint on average.
So I am really glad that this study has finally come out and shown what we've all really known about but were too scared to talk about in public for fear of masses of litigation by the massive dieting industry. It's simple really carbohydrates are required in your diet so get used to that idea. You don't need loads but you do need them and if you really want to lose weight well it's all about cutting down slightly across the spectrum of food that you eat, not targeting a food area, and exercising slightly more.And it takes time there are no quick fixes! Simples really!
On a second note you are probably aware that I have no love of this sociopathic government in power particularly the way in which the poor and needy are going to suffer as a result of benefit changes in a time when there is no serious alternative for lots of people. This is particularly true in the area of mental health called addiction. However I'm going to blog about this at a later date for in this part of the blog I actually am going to praise David Cameron.
You see there has been a massive outcry over the fact he left his young child at the pub. As a parent I can not throw any stones here because the same happened to me with my beloved youngest son when he was four and we were on a trip to Disneyland Paris. One minute he was there the next he wasn't as everyone had assumed that someone else had taken responsibility. Luckily the fantastic Disney staff had him whisked him away to the security of lost children where we found him happily drawing away after he had been found queuing for a ride! So I don't blame the Prime Minister for that aberration although I do wonder about the security team. No the reason I am talking about this is because he took his children to the pub. By taking this action he has done what any European parent knows Don't mystify alcohol! However I can't help having a dig because if he doesn't help educators like myself work to educate the body politic then his Government is doing exactly that.
Come on Dave be brave and admit that you need people like me. People who are serious about effecting change and not about creating a diversive society!
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/329161/Heart-attack-risk-in-dieting
Strange because I've been teaching this for the last 25 years, well in a round about way that is. You see alcohol is a carbohydrate that doesn't work like a carbohydrate and effectively your body enters Atkin's mode when you live purely off booze. This is why extreme alcoholics are thin.
Yes I know you get a beer belly but that is because normal drinkers continue to consume normal food amounts alongside their normal drinking and a pint of beer holds between 180 and 300 empty calories per pint on average.
So I am really glad that this study has finally come out and shown what we've all really known about but were too scared to talk about in public for fear of masses of litigation by the massive dieting industry. It's simple really carbohydrates are required in your diet so get used to that idea. You don't need loads but you do need them and if you really want to lose weight well it's all about cutting down slightly across the spectrum of food that you eat, not targeting a food area, and exercising slightly more.And it takes time there are no quick fixes! Simples really!
On a second note you are probably aware that I have no love of this sociopathic government in power particularly the way in which the poor and needy are going to suffer as a result of benefit changes in a time when there is no serious alternative for lots of people. This is particularly true in the area of mental health called addiction. However I'm going to blog about this at a later date for in this part of the blog I actually am going to praise David Cameron.
You see there has been a massive outcry over the fact he left his young child at the pub. As a parent I can not throw any stones here because the same happened to me with my beloved youngest son when he was four and we were on a trip to Disneyland Paris. One minute he was there the next he wasn't as everyone had assumed that someone else had taken responsibility. Luckily the fantastic Disney staff had him whisked him away to the security of lost children where we found him happily drawing away after he had been found queuing for a ride! So I don't blame the Prime Minister for that aberration although I do wonder about the security team. No the reason I am talking about this is because he took his children to the pub. By taking this action he has done what any European parent knows Don't mystify alcohol! However I can't help having a dig because if he doesn't help educators like myself work to educate the body politic then his Government is doing exactly that.
Come on Dave be brave and admit that you need people like me. People who are serious about effecting change and not about creating a diversive society!
Tuesday, 5 June 2012
What a Carry On
I'm sat here with the TV on half listening to a program on the late, great Kenneth Williams and it has got me to thinking about the latest headlines appearing in the Daily Mail this week.
Firstly the Oxford study claiming that 3 in 100 lives will be saved by reducing alcohol intake when looking at the 11 most common reasons for death in the UK.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2152424/Dont-drink-quarter-pint-DAY-Oxford-study-claims-slashing-official-alcohol-limit-save-4-500-lives-year.html
However this commentator thinks that this is a rather strange comment to focus upon when the reality is that the other 97 people in that 100 will still die prematurely. Look let's face it we drink too much in the UK. We're not as bad as some in the world who consume more but we are the worst in the world in the way in which we consume the alcohol.
It is Binge Drinking that really causes the problem in this country. Our bodies are simply not designed to cope with large amounts of alcohol in short spaces of time.
Physiologically speaking the group of enzymes that control the degradation of alcohol, the alcohol dehydrogenase family, are in limited supply in the human body. We know only a little about how they work and we cannot reproduce them on mass in tablet form. Put simply they are a miracle of nature that nature doesn't want mankind to make artificially. So nature has actually designed a defence mechanism against alcohol in small quantities but not for large quantities in a short space of time.
If you drink 24 units in 3 hours, roughly the equivalent of 7 to 8 pints of an average lager or cider in the UK, compared to drinking the same evenly over a 24 hour period then you cause about 33 times more damage to your body. Do it on a regular basis and you're storing up trouble for the future. If nature had not designed us to deal with small amounts of alcohol then no mechanism of coping would have ever evolved.
Now the second thing that caught my eye was a piece on Professor David Nutt. Now I like this guy and I think he is misrepresented a lot of the time but he doesn't understand the nature of drinking and driving if he thinks that putting an alcohol immobiliser in all cars will stop drinking and driving and change our national drinking habits as a byproduct.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2152586/Alcohol-sensors-cars-compulsory-says-controversial-professor-claimed-Ecstasy-safer-drink.html
A quick look at the internet tells anyone that a child of five with the right inexpensive kit can run around even the classiest of immobilisers. A serious drink driver will soon find a way around such a device and then where will we be left. If all cars have such a device then the police would have no idea who may or may not be under the influence. Before he starts talking about a world he simply has no real experience in he really needs to talk to those of us who do, and that means me. So if you want to drop me a line Professor please feel free.
The key to drinking and driving, and I've said this repeatedly, is a six fold plan that can only be implemented by Government action. It involves technology, yes, but that without effective public transport, effective education, a public psyche change to social intolerance, effective policing and effective punishment, it would not work.
Alcohol professionals in the UK well matron it really is a carry on.
Firstly the Oxford study claiming that 3 in 100 lives will be saved by reducing alcohol intake when looking at the 11 most common reasons for death in the UK.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2152424/Dont-drink-quarter-pint-DAY-Oxford-study-claims-slashing-official-alcohol-limit-save-4-500-lives-year.html
However this commentator thinks that this is a rather strange comment to focus upon when the reality is that the other 97 people in that 100 will still die prematurely. Look let's face it we drink too much in the UK. We're not as bad as some in the world who consume more but we are the worst in the world in the way in which we consume the alcohol.
It is Binge Drinking that really causes the problem in this country. Our bodies are simply not designed to cope with large amounts of alcohol in short spaces of time.
Physiologically speaking the group of enzymes that control the degradation of alcohol, the alcohol dehydrogenase family, are in limited supply in the human body. We know only a little about how they work and we cannot reproduce them on mass in tablet form. Put simply they are a miracle of nature that nature doesn't want mankind to make artificially. So nature has actually designed a defence mechanism against alcohol in small quantities but not for large quantities in a short space of time.
If you drink 24 units in 3 hours, roughly the equivalent of 7 to 8 pints of an average lager or cider in the UK, compared to drinking the same evenly over a 24 hour period then you cause about 33 times more damage to your body. Do it on a regular basis and you're storing up trouble for the future. If nature had not designed us to deal with small amounts of alcohol then no mechanism of coping would have ever evolved.
Now the second thing that caught my eye was a piece on Professor David Nutt. Now I like this guy and I think he is misrepresented a lot of the time but he doesn't understand the nature of drinking and driving if he thinks that putting an alcohol immobiliser in all cars will stop drinking and driving and change our national drinking habits as a byproduct.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2152586/Alcohol-sensors-cars-compulsory-says-controversial-professor-claimed-Ecstasy-safer-drink.html
A quick look at the internet tells anyone that a child of five with the right inexpensive kit can run around even the classiest of immobilisers. A serious drink driver will soon find a way around such a device and then where will we be left. If all cars have such a device then the police would have no idea who may or may not be under the influence. Before he starts talking about a world he simply has no real experience in he really needs to talk to those of us who do, and that means me. So if you want to drop me a line Professor please feel free.
The key to drinking and driving, and I've said this repeatedly, is a six fold plan that can only be implemented by Government action. It involves technology, yes, but that without effective public transport, effective education, a public psyche change to social intolerance, effective policing and effective punishment, it would not work.
Alcohol professionals in the UK well matron it really is a carry on.
Thursday, 24 May 2012
Janus is here
Janus is the famed Roman God with two faces facing in opposite directions. Mythology states that this is all about beginnings and transitions. Well that's what is happening today by the look of things.
Let me start with Mr Duncan-Smith's idiotic plan to cut the benefits of alcoholics and drug abusers. I'm just wondering where all the funding is going to come from to deal with all this addiction therapy because it is going to cost an awful lot more than the benefits that are handed out. Or perhaps it's going to be all those kind volunteers (sorry workplace trainees) that will be giving out the therapy for free. Secondly as drug or drink rehabilitation is a long and very complex program then where will the addicts get their money from to live? Well watch out the crime rate will rise because of the lossof those police officers laid off by the kindly Mrs May just to help out the lifelong criminals. Funnily enough they're not likely to stop drinking (current therapy success rates run at about 40 percent in a very good environment) so what part of the Private Health Service (Sorry Mr Lansley I know you're still calling the National Health Service) will be there to help them out?
Do I sound cynical in my old age? Quite possibly but that is the reality of the plans being proposed by an already discredited Work and Pensions secretary responsible for the wholesale destruction of the fundamentally needy in the United Kingdom. Disabled or ill people, we don't need them anymore do we? Well not according to the Government. So the good news is that new improved Ethnic cleansing has arrived in the UK and guess what we don't need to even buy the bullets we can just let them starve to death!
And so to the second news of the day to do with alcohol, Luke McCormick, the ex Plymouth Argyle goalkeeper involved in the fatal car crash because of his drinking and driving. The word is that he is being released from prison and that Swindon Town are going to offer him a trial. Jeremy Wray the Swindon Chairman has acknowledged he is ready for the backlash., for backlash there will certainly be, but not from this commentator.
Let me make something perfectly clear. I have nothing but sympathy for the Peak family. Losing their children in such an horrific way doesn't even bear thinking about for this father and it was absolutely right that Luke McCormick went to jail. Arron and Ben Peak should not be forgotten ever but this story should not be about vengeance it should be about hope. Hope that we can move on, hope that we can take this terrible situation and turn it into something positive.
Before people start to castigate me I want you to ask yourself a very important question.
Could I have been in Luke McCormick's position?
Well the answer to that is simply yes. Reaching twice the drink drive limit (McCormick's reading) can be a simple as drinking just TWO PINTS of Stella Artois or Blackthorn. Now think on that. You see pretty much anyone of the 22000 plus people I have worked with over the last 15 years who have been convicted of Drink Driving could have been in his position. And so could you!
Nothing will bring back Arron and Ben but with positive education to prevent things like this happening maybe just maybe this will bring the focus back to drinking and driving rather than all the baloney that is being talked about drugs and driving.
1 in 3 people in the United Kingdom drink and drive on a regular basis, that's 10 yes 10 million drivers.
9 out of 10 drivers have done it at some point in their lives
Jeremy Wray, I wish you well and in many ways I salute you. If you need my help you know where to find me.
Let me start with Mr Duncan-Smith's idiotic plan to cut the benefits of alcoholics and drug abusers. I'm just wondering where all the funding is going to come from to deal with all this addiction therapy because it is going to cost an awful lot more than the benefits that are handed out. Or perhaps it's going to be all those kind volunteers (sorry workplace trainees) that will be giving out the therapy for free. Secondly as drug or drink rehabilitation is a long and very complex program then where will the addicts get their money from to live? Well watch out the crime rate will rise because of the lossof those police officers laid off by the kindly Mrs May just to help out the lifelong criminals. Funnily enough they're not likely to stop drinking (current therapy success rates run at about 40 percent in a very good environment) so what part of the Private Health Service (Sorry Mr Lansley I know you're still calling the National Health Service) will be there to help them out?
Do I sound cynical in my old age? Quite possibly but that is the reality of the plans being proposed by an already discredited Work and Pensions secretary responsible for the wholesale destruction of the fundamentally needy in the United Kingdom. Disabled or ill people, we don't need them anymore do we? Well not according to the Government. So the good news is that new improved Ethnic cleansing has arrived in the UK and guess what we don't need to even buy the bullets we can just let them starve to death!
And so to the second news of the day to do with alcohol, Luke McCormick, the ex Plymouth Argyle goalkeeper involved in the fatal car crash because of his drinking and driving. The word is that he is being released from prison and that Swindon Town are going to offer him a trial. Jeremy Wray the Swindon Chairman has acknowledged he is ready for the backlash., for backlash there will certainly be, but not from this commentator.
Let me make something perfectly clear. I have nothing but sympathy for the Peak family. Losing their children in such an horrific way doesn't even bear thinking about for this father and it was absolutely right that Luke McCormick went to jail. Arron and Ben Peak should not be forgotten ever but this story should not be about vengeance it should be about hope. Hope that we can move on, hope that we can take this terrible situation and turn it into something positive.
Before people start to castigate me I want you to ask yourself a very important question.
Could I have been in Luke McCormick's position?
Well the answer to that is simply yes. Reaching twice the drink drive limit (McCormick's reading) can be a simple as drinking just TWO PINTS of Stella Artois or Blackthorn. Now think on that. You see pretty much anyone of the 22000 plus people I have worked with over the last 15 years who have been convicted of Drink Driving could have been in his position. And so could you!
Nothing will bring back Arron and Ben but with positive education to prevent things like this happening maybe just maybe this will bring the focus back to drinking and driving rather than all the baloney that is being talked about drugs and driving.
1 in 3 people in the United Kingdom drink and drive on a regular basis, that's 10 yes 10 million drivers.
9 out of 10 drivers have done it at some point in their lives
Jeremy Wray, I wish you well and in many ways I salute you. If you need my help you know where to find me.
Monday, 7 May 2012
Junkies of the world unite
There are different classes of drugs and different schedules of drugs, legal drugs are used illegally and prescription medications are taken incorrectly by millions of people.
With the new proposed law on drug driving and the hype surrounding it then I see a lot of pensioners and disabled people being forced from the roads. Why? Because we are about to go down the same route as we did in 1967 with drinking and driving where a political solution was a half baked badly thought out compromise with no real long term strategy,
Let's get one thing straight there is a law on the statute books that allows the prosecution of drug drivers right now. By setting a political not a physiological or psychological limit we are making drug driving as idiosyncratic as drink driving.
I do not want to see drug driving to be seen as okay but I want to turn around the whole idea of substance abuse and driving full stop. And as the person who has personally worked with more offenders than anyone else in the United Kingdom who fall into this category then it would seem wise of the Government to at least take my views into account!
Unfortunately that is unlikely to happen because this government is not a government of substance it is a government of sound bites. A government that has more cracks in it than the Giants Causeway, And it sees this as a way of gaining good publicity.
I am passionate about preventing death and serious injury on the road and those who know my story know that I will stop at nothing to change our society's perception of what is and what isn't safe when related substance abuse and driving but I do not want to see a few scapegoats.
I WANT REAL, DEFINITIVE AND POSITIVE CHANGE
And to do that we need a strategy based around investment in our future, Education, Public Transport, Cultural Intolerance, Effective Policing and appropriate punishment. Not a policy based around allowing a poorly trained police force and an uneducated public come face to face in a stand off where there can be only one loser......Society
With the new proposed law on drug driving and the hype surrounding it then I see a lot of pensioners and disabled people being forced from the roads. Why? Because we are about to go down the same route as we did in 1967 with drinking and driving where a political solution was a half baked badly thought out compromise with no real long term strategy,
Let's get one thing straight there is a law on the statute books that allows the prosecution of drug drivers right now. By setting a political not a physiological or psychological limit we are making drug driving as idiosyncratic as drink driving.
I do not want to see drug driving to be seen as okay but I want to turn around the whole idea of substance abuse and driving full stop. And as the person who has personally worked with more offenders than anyone else in the United Kingdom who fall into this category then it would seem wise of the Government to at least take my views into account!
Unfortunately that is unlikely to happen because this government is not a government of substance it is a government of sound bites. A government that has more cracks in it than the Giants Causeway, And it sees this as a way of gaining good publicity.
I am passionate about preventing death and serious injury on the road and those who know my story know that I will stop at nothing to change our society's perception of what is and what isn't safe when related substance abuse and driving but I do not want to see a few scapegoats.
I WANT REAL, DEFINITIVE AND POSITIVE CHANGE
And to do that we need a strategy based around investment in our future, Education, Public Transport, Cultural Intolerance, Effective Policing and appropriate punishment. Not a policy based around allowing a poorly trained police force and an uneducated public come face to face in a stand off where there can be only one loser......Society
Monday, 23 April 2012
Morning All
I recently saw a piece on BBC Breakfast about the morning after in relation to drinking and driving. Well about time too.
It makes absolutely no difference if you are a certain level at 9am or 9pm the alcohol will have the same impact upon your body.
1. Sleeping does not speed up the time taken to remove alcohol from your body! So when you're told to sleep it off it's not to speed up the rate of removal of alcohol it's because the person having to deal with you is fed up of playing nanny to you!
2. Drinking water will not speed up the rate of removal of alcohol but it will help you stay hydrated and lessen the impacts of the diuretic nature of alcohol
3. Drinking black coffee or heavily caffeinated energy drinks will not make the slightest of difference and actually in the long run likely to make you feel worse because of the diuretic effect of caffeine. And by the way you do not derive energy from caffeine it merely stimulates the brain and the heart and gives a false sense of energy.
4. You are less dangerous when you've had a sleep. Nonsense the level of risk is not associated with sleep it's associated with the level of intoxicant in your body and the consequential shutdown of the nervous system.
We do not talk about the morning after EVER and that potentially is a fatal mistake. It's not just about driving it's about all walks of life. People have not a clue at the rate of elimination of alcohol from the human body. This whole one unit per hour thing is total and utter nonsense. There is no physiologist,yet, on this planet who is able to precisely tell how fast any individual removes alcohol from the body. It is all about smoke and mirrors again.
Please enjoy your evening out but as Winston once famously said:
"If you fail to plan, you plan to fail"
The morning after is not just about the pill!
It makes absolutely no difference if you are a certain level at 9am or 9pm the alcohol will have the same impact upon your body.
1. Sleeping does not speed up the time taken to remove alcohol from your body! So when you're told to sleep it off it's not to speed up the rate of removal of alcohol it's because the person having to deal with you is fed up of playing nanny to you!
2. Drinking water will not speed up the rate of removal of alcohol but it will help you stay hydrated and lessen the impacts of the diuretic nature of alcohol
3. Drinking black coffee or heavily caffeinated energy drinks will not make the slightest of difference and actually in the long run likely to make you feel worse because of the diuretic effect of caffeine. And by the way you do not derive energy from caffeine it merely stimulates the brain and the heart and gives a false sense of energy.
4. You are less dangerous when you've had a sleep. Nonsense the level of risk is not associated with sleep it's associated with the level of intoxicant in your body and the consequential shutdown of the nervous system.
We do not talk about the morning after EVER and that potentially is a fatal mistake. It's not just about driving it's about all walks of life. People have not a clue at the rate of elimination of alcohol from the human body. This whole one unit per hour thing is total and utter nonsense. There is no physiologist,yet, on this planet who is able to precisely tell how fast any individual removes alcohol from the body. It is all about smoke and mirrors again.
Please enjoy your evening out but as Winston once famously said:
"If you fail to plan, you plan to fail"
The morning after is not just about the pill!
Friday, 6 April 2012
Here we go again, from the mouth of who?
A recent report from the world of dentistry suggests that dentists should be the people who quiz you about your alcohol intake and then teach you how not to drink too much.
Well to be precise to get dental nurses and hygienists to teach you.
Here we go again, walking down the only road I've ever known.
It feels like the classic Whitesnake song because I seem to have trod this path before. These people have simply no training about alcohol apart from the stuff that is in mouthwash of course. How on earth can dentists truly believe that this is the way forward. And half the time the people you are trying to reach don't go to a dentist anyway because they can't get one on the NHS!
Alcohol education should be left to the professionals, not the amateurs. It needs to be carefully manged otherwise all the old wives tales will just keep coming back, and back and back again. A bit like plaque really.
Whilst I believe that education in alcohol should be as consistent as brushing your teeth the education has to be correct in the first place. It is true that dentists search for mouth cancers etc but it is only really spirit drinkers that are at real risk of these type of cancers.
If you drink 5 units of neat spirits per day on average then the chances of you developing an upper GI cancer is increased by 80%. Now that is stunning however two things needed to be pointed out.
Firstly the incidence of upper GI cancer in the UK is far less than lower GI (bowel) cancer and it is hard enough persuading people, especially men, to get checked for this. If they are going to be quizzed by the dentist then there is a very high chance of denial. Secondly the number of neat spirit drinkers in the UK is nowhere near as high as those from say Russia or Japan where we see high rates of oesophageal carcinomas. Now the problem is that the majority of these carcinomas are lower in the oesophagus and no dentist would be able to spot them by observation. And on a further point smoking actually causes a bigger problem in this type of cancer yet I cannot ever remember being asked about my smoking habits or being educated by a dentist about this. OK you say I don't smoke which is correct but I would still like to have seen some articulation about the dangers.
Whilst I am glad that dentists appear to be joining the fight I wonder in these times of austerity is it some more smoke and mirrors.
Real education now from real educators!
Well to be precise to get dental nurses and hygienists to teach you.
Here we go again, walking down the only road I've ever known.
It feels like the classic Whitesnake song because I seem to have trod this path before. These people have simply no training about alcohol apart from the stuff that is in mouthwash of course. How on earth can dentists truly believe that this is the way forward. And half the time the people you are trying to reach don't go to a dentist anyway because they can't get one on the NHS!
Alcohol education should be left to the professionals, not the amateurs. It needs to be carefully manged otherwise all the old wives tales will just keep coming back, and back and back again. A bit like plaque really.
Whilst I believe that education in alcohol should be as consistent as brushing your teeth the education has to be correct in the first place. It is true that dentists search for mouth cancers etc but it is only really spirit drinkers that are at real risk of these type of cancers.
If you drink 5 units of neat spirits per day on average then the chances of you developing an upper GI cancer is increased by 80%. Now that is stunning however two things needed to be pointed out.
Firstly the incidence of upper GI cancer in the UK is far less than lower GI (bowel) cancer and it is hard enough persuading people, especially men, to get checked for this. If they are going to be quizzed by the dentist then there is a very high chance of denial. Secondly the number of neat spirit drinkers in the UK is nowhere near as high as those from say Russia or Japan where we see high rates of oesophageal carcinomas. Now the problem is that the majority of these carcinomas are lower in the oesophagus and no dentist would be able to spot them by observation. And on a further point smoking actually causes a bigger problem in this type of cancer yet I cannot ever remember being asked about my smoking habits or being educated by a dentist about this. OK you say I don't smoke which is correct but I would still like to have seen some articulation about the dangers.
Whilst I am glad that dentists appear to be joining the fight I wonder in these times of austerity is it some more smoke and mirrors.
Real education now from real educators!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
