OK. I freely admit this has nothing to do with railways, real or model, but it has been baffling me for many a year and i thought I'd throw it out to our erudite 'collective to see if someone can educate me.
Where have all these allergies and syndromes etc come from? We have wheat, gluten, nut, dairy and Lord knows what allergies and this morning a new one on me has popped up in the news i.e. '22Q Deletion Syndrome' (who came up with that moniker?) I confess to being in my mid 60s and can't remember all these tribulations being visited on anyone I knew when I was younger. Maybe it's just they were there and no one understood them or had given them any credence/importance? I suspect despite best efforts to pollute this world with plastics, fossil fuels etc society has become too sanitised to the extent our immune systems can't fight the 'bugs'. I can remember playing in the gutter with melted tar, living with steam railways, making mud pies and my Mum always wondering where I got the water from and so on. I do feel great sympathy for those afflicted by allergies and think it's quite horrific someone can die simply from a nut or sting.
Did I just live in a bubble in my youth or is it really a more recent thing? I would really appreciate those living in other countries giving their views so I can get an idea if this is a world wide thing or more localised.
Same situation here, Mick. When I was teaching, info on kids with nut allergy were posted in every staff room, and we had to do training on how to punch the adrenaline needle into kids legs.
I do think that maybe we are all to over sanitised as Mick says.
My mother used to say "You have to eat a peck of dirt before you die".
Maybe these conditions have been on the rise but a big factor is better diagnosis. We have tests that did not exist a generation ago for conditions that are mostly uncomfortable, rather than life threatening (peanut allergies excepted obviously). This is the reason for the increase in conditions like ADHD, Dyslexia and Aspergers. It is not that the conditions have become more common, we have just got better at recognizing and diagnosing them. 50 years ago, kids with one or more of the above conditions would have simply been called "difficult" (or worse) and left to struggle. Now we know that they can achieve just as much as their neruo-typical counterparts with the right support.
Another reason for this increase in diagnosis is that paradoxically, we are in fact healthier. Huge swathes of childhood diseases that have killed or crippled millions throughout history are largely banished thanks to immunisation. As a nation, we have the longest life expectancy in history. That frees up medical effort to diagnose and treat people with conditions that affect quality of life rather than just quantity.
Just a personal hunch but I wonder how much the drop in breast-feeding has affected health. My wife chose to breast-feed all 3 of our kids until they were fully weaned, they never had formula at all and continued to receive breast milk until just before they started school. They are now 13, 10 and 5 respectively and none of them has any sign of allergies. Furthermore, between them, they have only ever had one course of antibiotics in their combined 28 years.
A lot of this can be put down to what we could call the 'Zanussi Syndrome' - that is, the 'apply-ance of science'. ;)
And then to the explosion in scientific understanding of the human condition, you have to add in the effect of all those chemicals we now inflict upon our delicate human mechanisms, from pills, to aerosols, to additives, and to anything else you care to mention that has a chemical formula that man has devised for the improvement of the human race.
How we personally define or understand 'improvement' is a matter for debate - and one I won't join.
The obvious counter to the above is that life expectancy is up, and infant mortality is down compared to 50 years ago. You could certainly conclude we're not "less healthy".
We are fatter though.
I was going to say "sickly" children as some were known in my day as well as "difficult"
So as well as more diagnosis we have more names (for the same things) to worry about.
Also we have a greater tabloid and other media appetite for alarm.
The few cases per year of a child dying from a badly labelled sandwich would not have made the lofty papers and the Home Service, they were all about calm and reassurance (in my day, which precedes even NPN's advanced lofty years :) )
Quote from: njee20 on November 22, 2018, 11:00:48 AM
You could certainly conclude we're not "less healthy".
We are fatter though.
I don't think anyone has implied we are less healthy - more a case of asking whether allergies etc are a relatively new development or just something 'hidden' all those years ago. I think the 'fat' point might be contentious as it's not something humans are born with and, to start off the contention, I lay obesity firmly at the door of digital technology and computers. My argument is when I was a kid we'd go out and play all day every day and parents had difficulties in getting us in for meals. Nowadays there is so much to just sit and do/watch it's no wonder obesity is rife.
I haven't yet had the courage to say to a heart consultant "don't tell me to cut down on this and that while (at my best guess) 70% of your nurses are clinically obese" :worried:
Now I must get off the forum and put this packet of choc chip cookies away :-[
Yes, the irony of so many healthcare professionals being obese certainly isn't lost on me!
Quote from: Newportnobby on November 22, 2018, 10:15:05 AM
a new one on me has popped up in the news i.e. '22Q Deletion Syndrome' (who came up with that moniker?)
I dont know is the simple answer ! :)
but it is a new(ish) name for DiGeorge., from at least 1965, and probably other names before that (cleft palette amongst them )
I added (ish) because it isnt all that new, just that it has risen to the attention of today's media !
Oh, yes, another thing - we didnt have Google to get us all worried about things when we self-diagnose on-line. :laugh3:
Quote from: njee20 on November 22, 2018, 11:00:48 AM
We are fatter though.
we may be, but We are not, We are a sylph-like 8&1/2 stone 5'7" oldie, and a metric-free zone as well.
:laugh:
It's all my :censored: boss's fault! :veryangry:
Quote from: Newportnobby on November 22, 2018, 10:15:05 AM
Where have all these allergies and syndromes etc come from?
Nobody knows. Lots of hypotheses. Better/earlier diagnoses explain some, but not all.
Quote from: Newportnobby on November 22, 2018, 10:15:05 AM
i.e. '22Q Deletion Syndrome' (who came up with that moniker?)
It's how genetics works as a science. A deletion implies that certain bases (the A, C, G and T you learned at school, perhaps) are missing. The first number in any genetic condition denotes which of the 23 pairs of chromosomes is involved. So in this case, some bases are missing from the 22nd chromosome. Some mutations simply swap one base for another, which may have no effect (a silent mutation) or alter the particular gene involved (often for the worse if the resulting protein no longer works properly). But deletions are much more serious because they cause frame shifting -- i.e, every single subsequent gene is now messed up.
It's like this. A normal set of bases might be represented by these words:
CAT HAT CUP DOG BEE THE...
They're in threes to represent the way each triplet of bases corresponds (theoretically) with one amino acid. There's more to it than that once you start accounting for triplets that don't code, introns, but for now, this'll do. Anyway, if I change one base, one of those words is messed up:
CAT HIT CUP DOG BEE THE...
That one messed up gene is now faulty. But delete a base, i.e., a letter, and things become much different:
CAT HTC UPD OGB EET HE...
See the difference? I'm not sure this is the case here, not being "that kind of doctor", but deletions are bad news. Sometimes the deletions remove multiples of three bases, which isn't so bad because the subsequent bases aren't messed up so much, as here, if I remove HAT:
CAT CUP DOG BEE THE...
Quote from: Newportnobby on November 22, 2018, 10:15:05 AM
Did I just live in a bubble in my youth or is it really a more recent thing?
Absolutely, yes, the bubble is the explanation here. Go back 70 years and the British were less healthy by any objective measurement. Life expectancy; prevalence of childhood diseases such as polio; infant mortality around childbirth; you name it. What's changed are a number of things that affect your perception, such as:
- You didn't see all the dead babies and/or weren't aware of them. Mortality rate of infants at birth in 1960 around 22 per thousand; now fewer than 5 per thousand.
- We're living longer so the nature of the most common diseases has shifted from those affecting children and infants towards diseases affecting older people.
- Our lifestyles, including diet, has changed, trending the population towards diseases caused by, for example, too much food rather than nutrient deficiencies. So we see more obese children, but fewer with rickets.
In a sense what's happened is that while fewer children die per thousand, the proportion of children dealing with things like obesity has increased. Since you didn't see the dead children in, say, 1950, but do see the obese children today, it's very easy to "read" the situation as "children are getting unhealthy". Make sense?
Another massive factor among children is that they're growing bigger, and faster, and that means some things, notably menstruation in girls, kicks in much earlier than it did in the 1950s. This in turn brings with it all sorts of new health issues that didn't exist in the past.
A big misunderstanding among the general population is the difference between "health" and "fitness". Britain's population is, by and large, healthy. But their fitness has declined for all sorts of reasons. Less physical activity at work is a major factor, but children also do less sport or even simple active play today than they did in the past.
Whether any of this is directly linked to increasing food allergies, for example, is unknown. But there aren't any simple solutions, and anyone telling you "it was better when I was growing up" almost certainly hasn't a clue about what they're talking about. A baby born today has a much greater chance of survival than one born in 1950, and on top of that, can expect to live a much longer lifespan.
Cheers, NeMo
Quote from: MalcolmInN on November 22, 2018, 11:48:26 AM
Quote from: njee20 on November 22, 2018, 11:00:48 AM
We are fatter though.
we may be, but We are not, We are a sylph-like 8&1/2 stone 5'7" oldie, and a metric-free zone as well.
I am definitely fatt
er than I was, currently at 74kg and 5'10", to mix my measurements. My waife like 65kg days are behind me, along with the fitness of the time!
There is a simple reason for many of these allergies, many of these things people people can't take weren't eaten 50 Years ago. Back in those days you were lucky to get a bacon roll. These days you get some sesame seeded roll filled with all sorts of strange things..
PS i am a lot heavier, that's because all those sports I had to do to keep fit in the past, have left me with so many injuries, it gets painful to walk around at times..
Mind yyou the RAF had some strange targets they reckoned someone 6ft (183cm )should weigh 11 stone (70kg)
A great reply @NeMo (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=profile;u=945) . Thanks.
I'm a heavier version of the skinny kid I was back in my youth, but I'm still a relatively lithe 6 footer at 12st 7lbs. Problem for me, according to more than one of my Doctors over the past 27 years, is that as that skinny child I never had any of the childhood diseases. I'm thinking of things like Chicken Pox, Measles, etc, and even Flu and Colds were not something I experienced until I was well past my teens. Consequently, so they surmise, I didn't build up my body's auto-immune system, leaving me open to later problems - those same problems that have, until very recently, plagued every day of my life since 1990, and at times before that.
Some are healthier, some of us are fitter, and some of us will live longer than our parents. But I look around the crazy World about me and sometimes, just sometimes, I wonder if living longer is all it's cracked up to be.
Quote from: Newportnobby on November 22, 2018, 10:15:05 AM
OK. I freely admit this has nothing to do with railways, real or model, but it has been baffling me for many a year and i thought I'd throw it out to our erudite 'collective to see if someone can educate me.
Where have all these allergies and syndromes etc come from? We have wheat, gluten, nut, dairy and Lord knows what allergies and this morning a new one on me has popped up in the news i.e. '22Q Deletion Syndrome' (who came up with that moniker?) I confess to being in my mid 60s and can't remember all these tribulations being visited on anyone I knew when I was younger. Maybe it's just they were there and no one understood them or had given them any credence/importance? I suspect despite best efforts to pollute this world with plastics, fossil fuels etc society has become too sanitised to the extent our immune systems can't fight the 'bugs'. I can remember playing in the gutter with melted tar, living with steam railways, making mud pies and my Mum always wondering where I got the water from and so on. I do feel great sympathy for those afflicted by allergies and think it's quite horrific someone can die simply from a nut or sting.
Did I just live in a bubble in my youth or is it really a more recent thing? I would really appreciate those living in other countries giving their views so I can get an idea if this is a world wide thing or more localised.
Most of them are not new only these days being specifically identified as people don't die of them first. Some are new and are due to the level of environmental pollution.
For instance air pollution raises the incidence of type 2 diabetes.
It is clear death rates have dropped, why? the weakest in our population are surviving longer with modern medicine and therefore the percentage of ill people still living goes up (along with the cost to the health service).
A hundred years ago children were classified as sickly or ailing but no one knew why and in many cases and they died before becoming adults.
Sorry if this is a miserable response but it what is happening and at least more people these days get to live longer and I appreciate that.
You never hear of diseases like Diptheria these days a serious killer that weakens your heart. My grandfather had it three times and was invalided in WW1 because of it.
Some very interesting replies especially that of @NeMo (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=profile;u=945) which has certainly expanded my knowledge of genetics. I had always thought diarrohea was hereditary as it seemed to run in my jeans.
Seriously, though, the flip of better health and longer life is, of course, keeping everyone fed and finding space for them on the planet. If anyone likes Dan Brown novels try "Inferno" and that will really give you pause for thought.
Quote from: Karhedron on November 22, 2018, 10:54:36 AM
Just a personal hunch but I wonder how much the drop in breast-feeding has affected health.
I agree, we should all breast feed more. I'll speak to the wife to see if I can start tonight :(
Quote from: Newportnobby on November 22, 2018, 04:21:59 PM
I had always thought diarrohea was hereditary as it seemed to run in my jeans.
:D :laugh:
SWMBO still laughing after I read that line to her. Thanks Mick. :thumbsup:
Quote from: Newportnobby on November 22, 2018, 11:28:08 AM
I haven't yet had the courage to say to a heart consultant "don't tell me to cut down
the forum and put this packet of choc chip cookies away :-[
Ah ha ! so that is what you get up to when the forum is slow :)
It's all the forum's fault >:D
But dont worry, despite not smoking, not drinking excessively, plenty of excersize (2acres on a hillside to look after ), not a desk-bound job (up and down to the computer suite and in-out of the lab ) , etc&etc, in other words a modestly model lifestyle, I also have a tame heart consultant :(
Quote from: daffy on November 22, 2018, 01:19:18 PMthings like Chicken Pox,
so you probably will not have to suffer shingles later in life ! (or even not so very late in life,,,dont ask )
Quote from: MalcolmInN on November 22, 2018, 05:51:35 PM
Quote from: daffy on November 22, 2018, 01:19:18 PMthings like Chicken Pox,
so you probably will not have to suffer shingles later in life ! (or even not so very late in life,,,dont ask )
That's what I thought. At least until three years ago when I finally went down with Chicken Pox at the age of 63. :(
And then late-onset asthma a year and a half later. :( :(
Doctors told me I would grow out of hay fever.
To quote Diana Ross "I'm still waiting".
Best regards,
Joe (61 years)
Quote from: daffy on November 22, 2018, 06:20:38 PMuntil three years ago when I finally went down with Chicken Pox at the age of 63.
Argh!
I dont know any statistics on elapsed time between CP and Shingles onset, but in my case (statistical sample of one) it was about 35y,, soooo, you may be lucky 63+35=98
(or not!!!)
:laughabovepost:
Only one attack that I wish not to be repeated, so I have accepted our wonderful NHS offer of an anti-S jab :thumbsup:
Quote from: daffy on November 22, 2018, 01:19:18 PM
I'm thinking of things like Chicken Pox, Measles, etc, and even Flu and Colds were not something I experienced until I was well past my teens. Consequently, so they surmise, I didn't build up my body's auto-immune system, leaving me open to later problems - those same problems that have, until very recently, plagued every day of my life since 1990, and at times before that.
Indeed. Chickenpox is interesting, because the immune response is actually the thing that causes the most discomfort. Hence, infants, with much weaker immune responses, largely sail through chickenpox without the need for antiviral medications. But adults have a much harder time because their immune system reacts so much more violently, not just in terms of the symptoms (e.g., fever) but also being more likely to develop additional complications, such as pneumonia.
A wise doctor once said that the secret of good health is "50% keeping clean, 50% getting dirty". The so-called hygiene hypothesis suggests that if infants and children are kept too clean, too isolated from pathogens, their immune system doesn't properly develop, for example being more likely to treat something harmless as a pathogen -- in other words, an allergy.
This is by no means widely accepted, and there's plenty of evidence cited against it, not to mention the fact it doesn't entirely fit with how we believe the immune system works. In any event, it seems pretty unlikely that any infant is truly isolated from pathogens, particularly in homes with other children, pets, even adults who leave the house and come back in presumably laden with bacteria they've been exposed to.
The reality is that we don't have anything like a convincing theory as to why allergies are more common. It's likely a mix of things, and the precise explanations may well vary from person to person.
Our diet is probably one factor, containing too much meat, fat and refined sugar, and not nearly enough fibre and green plant material. This will, in turn, dramatically change the biome of bacteria in our guts, and these seem to play an important role in food intolerances especially.
There's some evidence that avoiding potential allergens (like peanuts) when feeding very young children actually makes allergies more common, and what we should be doing is exposing infants during the weaning process to the sorts of foods they're going to encounter, rather than waiting until they're much older.
The decrease in breastfeeding, and even when done, its relative brevity, is another possible factor. Consider that "wild" humans would have weaned their babies after 2-3 years, that's a very long period of time through which the baby would be exposed to chemicals in the mother's diet. Very few women breastfeed that long nowadays, at least in the West.
As I say, it's incredibly complicated, and as you've observed, if the immune system is off-kilter in some ways, it can cause all sorts of problems. Diabetes (type 1) and rheumatoid arthritis are just two examples of autoimmune diseases that aren't often thought about in this way.
Cheers, NeMo
Quote from: joe cassidy on November 22, 2018, 06:23:06 PM
Doctors told me I would grow out of hay fever.
61 years
I did.
bad in my 20's (inherited from maternal g.mother) diminished by 40's gone in 50's,,, till the morning of my 65th birthday (65 ! someone up there was having a larf ) when I had my first heart attack, now returned during winter as well ! go figure - I blame all the pills I am now on.
I have coeliac disease which means I have a gluten intolerance. If I consume gluten it will damage my intestines and I will quickly become very ill. A gluten free diet controls the condition. (Not cheap by the way £3 for a loaf of bread.)
I was apparently born with the condition but was not diagnosed until I was 55!
When my GP suggested I had coeliac disease I had never heard of it. When he printed off all the possible symptoms it was obvious all my previous GP's hadn't either!
I had had all of the symptoms at one time or another while growing up.
Medicine is developing all the time as my case proves.
Chris
Re breast feeding:
I think the major benefit arises in the early feeding, colostrum, so even mothers who start but dont continue pass on most of the benefit.
I cannot quantify it, not my field ! I only know of it from my daughter's amateur pig keeping hobby :) where abandoned piglets (oh, and lambs, been ther done that as well !) can be raised quite well artificially if they have had that early feed.
What an odd thread :)
Quote from: Kesdrive on November 22, 2018, 07:02:00 PM
I have coeliac disease which means I have a gluten intolerance. If I consume gluten it will damage my intestines and I will quickly become very ill. A gluten free diet controls the condition. (Not cheap by the way £3 for a loaf of bread.)
I was apparently born with the condition but was not diagnosed until I was 55!
When my GP suggested I had coeliac disease I had never heard of it. When he printed off all the possible symptoms it was obvious all my previous GP's hadn't either!
I had had all of the symptoms at one time or another while growing up.
Medicine is developing all the time as my case proves.
Chris
your GP can provide a lot of GF foods on free prescription.
https://www.coeliac.org.uk/gluten-free-diet-and-lifestyle/prescriptions/ (https://www.coeliac.org.uk/gluten-free-diet-and-lifestyle/prescriptions/)
anyway, down here in the Big Smoke ( or La LA land) everything is GF !!
At my GP appointments are booked for 3 weeks ahead, alternative is practice nurse 2 days or sit in the waiting room and wait and wait while car is parked on road outside at £1.80 an hour; if you can persuade them it's urgent you might be lucky to get a house visit - from a locum or or the most junior person on the payroll. They will only accept telephone requests for prescriptions if you are housebound, yret strangely enough on line monthly repeats are OK. It took over 3 months of losing my voice before they thought a hospital appointment for a trans nasal endoscopy might be an idea, cancer on a vocal chord was the eventual diagnosis.
After the radio therapy I was on serious pain killers for about 6 weeks & I was unable to drive and often hardly knew what day it was, Shock horror I missed an appointment for an annual check up, now they have withdrawn me from such check ups; I'm changing my GP.
In answer to Railwaygun:
I used to have bread on prescription and some pasta products but our local authority, along with many more nationwide have cut budgets and also prescribing for coeliacs.
C'est La vie unfortunately.
Chris
Quote from: Kesdrive on November 22, 2018, 07:53:09 PM
I used to have bread on prescription and some pasta products but our local authority, along with many more nationwide have cut budgets and also prescribing for coeliacs.
C'est La vie unfortunately.
Well, that and the fact gluten-free products are now extremely widely available. Is there any reason the NHS -- which is cash-starved already -- should subsidise people's sandwiches when they can buy gluten-free loaves themselves?
Ten years ago this absolutely wasn't the case, so gluten-free products on prescription made sense.
Cheers, NeMo
Well, that and the fact gluten-free products are now extremely widely available. Is there any reason the NHS -- which is cash-starved already -- should subsidise people's sandwiches when they can buy gluten-free loaves themselves?
Ten years ago this absolutely wasn't the case, so gluten-free products on prescription made sense.
Cheers, NeMo
[/quote]
I'm not complaining it is true that GF products are now widely available.
Eating out is another issue although improving.
I am going to Warley on Saturday and taking my own food as I know, from previous experience, that there will be no gluten free offerings available.
Chris
Quote from: MalcolmInN on November 22, 2018, 06:32:53 PM
I dont know any statistics on elapsed time between CP and Shingles onset, but in my case (statistical sample of one) it was about 35y,,
Only one attack that I wish not to be repeated, so I have accepted our wonderful NHS offer of an anti-S jab :thumbsup:
Flippin' 45 years in my case!! And no, I don't want to repeat it neither :'( (And no anti-S jab here!).
A very interesting thread.
Thank you @NeMo (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=profile;u=945) for your posts which are, I think, excellent.
John
Quote from: dannyboy on November 22, 2018, 08:11:40 PM(And no anti-S jab here!).
Do you mean not at all, or not via your state system ?
There are now two vaccines. Historically: Zostavax now thought to be only about 50% effective and not long lasting, so you need not lose too much sleep !
and a new one, Shingrix, has not (yet?) been offered to me. In fact I dont know if it is yet approved here.
@MalcolmInN (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=profile;u=3699) As far as I am aware, the vaccine is not available via the state system - most healthcare over here has to be paid for, depending on earnigs, but having said that, I went to the Opticians today and got a free eye test and contribution to new glasses, (can be handy being an OAP here :)). But I digress, again. Boots the chemist offer the vaccine, don't know which one, for €199 - about £176. :o
So, back to NPN's topic "What is happening to health... "
I offer :
Health in this country is considerably better than wot it was on account of our improved standard of living and our improved personal wealth* (other opinions are available ) ;D
As an example I can update my previous shingles postings with :-
In the UK Zostavax is available privately to anyone over 50 for £160 - and NHS free between 70-80
In the UK Shingrix is privately available over 50y for £460 (course of two at £230 each). Not available NHS.
I would call those good value considering the effect of shingles, and * quite affordable.
Going on Ireland having the name 'rip off Ireland', (well it does in Ireland :)), my £176 compares well with your £160! :o The 'rip off' label is well justified in some areas though, hence the fact that I go to Asda in the North once a fortnight - but I am going off topic - again.
:doh: Sorry.
@MalcolmInN (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=profile;u=3699)
Quote from: dannyboy on November 22, 2018, 09:35:29 PMmy £176 compares well with your £160!
I thought that too :thumbsup: :D
Oh yes, how we could go
on off about north/south trips and things ! but best not methinks.
PS have you noticed some negotiations are going on about , , ,
, , medical standards in the EU
oooofff that was a close shave ;) :smiley-laughing: :laugh:
I think that is enuf from me for now.
Quote from: MalcolmInN on November 22, 2018, 06:32:53 PM
I dont know any statistics on elapsed time between CP and Shingles onset, but in my case (statistical sample of one) it was about 35y
That looks to have been very accurate for me too, Malcolm. My shingles was treated in hospital by ultrasonics and, I have to say, it cleared up quite quickly.
I've mentioned this on the forum before, but in the context of "new" medical conditions, I feel it's relevant.
Back near the end of 2010, I started feeling so ill I though the end was nigh. It even got to the point of not being able to face a beer - and believe me, for Bealman, that may as well have been the end!
Anyway, it turns out I had an hereditary condition known as hemochromatosis, which I was told was only recognised as recently as 1990. If that's true, there must have been a lot of sick people around before then!
It is basically iron overload. In terms of unit figures, the high end of ferratin levels in the blood is around 300-400 - at the time of my diagnosis, mine was 2300! Talk about Iron Man... Robert Downey Jnr had nothing on me! But I sure was sick.
The treatment involves me dumping a bag of blood every couple of months so my body makes new blood which reduces the iron level. This I could really do without, but it works. (The blood is thrown straight into the waste, by the way.)
I'm feeling fine these days, and have travelled widely since the initial diagnosis (calling in on NewportNobby twice, and Railsquid in Tokyo this year).
There must have been a lot of people walking around sick in the past and not knowing why.
Quote from: dannyboy on November 22, 2018, 08:11:40 PM
Quote from: MalcolmInN on November 22, 2018, 06:32:53 PM
I dont know any statistics on elapsed time between CP and Shingles onset, but in my case (statistical sample of one) it was about 35y,,
Only one attack that I wish not to be repeated, so I have accepted our wonderful NHS offer of an anti-S jab :thumbsup:
Flippin' 45 years in my case!! And no, I don't want to repeat it neither :'( (And no anti-S jab here!).
if you had CP as a child the antibodies are still produced for about 30 years in your body and may still have an effect for some years after that to prevent CP or shingles recurring.
The problem is that about the time you have grand children you acquired immunity is all, but gone. In the old days when your body encountered CP throughout your life as there was more of it in the population you immune system, still recognising it, would re-boot and start the clock again.
The moral of the story is it can be more dangerous to part eradicate a disease, it really has to be all or nothing.
Look at the mess the kids whose parents stopped them getting the MRI jab are now getting into.
Quote from: MalcolmInN on November 22, 2018, 06:32:53 PM
I dont know any statistics on elapsed time between CP and Shingles onset, but in my case (statistical sample of one) it was about 35y,, soooo, you may be lucky 63+35=98
(or not!!!)
The NHS states that about 1 in 4 people (in the UK) will develop shingles.
However, it should be stressed that most of these people will be over 70. When you have had chickenpox, the virus remains in your body. It is normally dormant inside your nerve cells. So long as your immune system is healthy, it will prevent the virus becoming active again. People who get shingles usually have a weakened immune system, hence this disease being, mostly, a disease of the elderly. Anything else that weakens the immune system, such as chemotherapy or even severe long-term stress, can also allow the chickenpox vaccine to become reactivated, and so cause shingles.
There is a shingles vaccine on the NHS for those over 70, being the most at-risk group.
There is a discussion among doctors about whether offering a chickenpox vaccine to children would actually make shingles more common. The 'memory' white blood cells that provide you with immunity only last for up to 10 years. So once you have had chickenpox, you need to be periodically exposed to the chickenpox to regenerate a new generation of these memory cells. Ordinarily this happens whenever an adult encounters a child who has the chickenpox virus, in a sense 'topping up' your memory cells so they don't run down. If you immunise all the children in the UK, there'd be fewer encounters with the virus, and the adults would gradually lose their immunity. This, in turn, would mean that the chickenpox virus inside their nerve cells could become active again, leading to shingles.
Cheers, NeMo
the good news about being a GP is that you are never short of customers!
the bad thing is so bad that 700 GPs left the service last year, and most GPs can only stand it if they work part-time.
Quote from: MalcolmInN on November 23, 2018, 09:04:45 PM
Quote from: Railwaygun on November 23, 2018, 04:41:47 PM
the bad thing is so bad that 700 GPs left the service last year, and most GPs can only stand it if they work part-time.
Were those 700 also part time ? ! we need to know !!
I think mine does 3 days a week and one of those is only a part day :(
But it does have the advantage that I get to see others in the practice, so it is an auto-second opinion service :thumbsup:
So if those 700 who left were also only about 1/2time they would be equivqlent to 350 full time GPs.
How many GPs thought it enough good fun to remain ?
and how many new entrants were about to be surprised at what they had begun ?
No GPs were harmed in the preparation of this analysis
And my GPs, and all the local NHS are absolutely top notch first class and cannot be praised highly enough. I should know having needed them quite a lot these past few years, including one by helicopter ! - no dont ask, it isnt something for one's :( bucket list :(
http://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/home/finance-and-practice-life-news/qualified-gp-workforce-shrinks-by-almost-700-in-12-months/20037840.article (http://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/home/finance-and-practice-life-news/qualified-gp-workforce-shrinks-by-almost-700-in-12-months/20037840.article)
The number of fully-trained full-time equivalent GPs working in the NHS in England has continued to decline, with a reduction of almost 700 between September 2017 and September 2018.
Official figures from NHS Digital show that there has been a decrease in the number of substantive FTE (Full Time Equivalemt) GPs - excluding registrars - from 28,874 last year, down to 28,278.
the official figures show no change, but include GP registrars (in training) and F1 Drs (yr 1 after qualification getting GP experience) ie not experienced GPs.
the situation is dire, and will not improve, even after B***T when many more EU drs/nurses/care staff are likely to leave the service.
Be careful what you wish for
Quite frankly - NO.
Sorry to say you are being borderline offensive in dissecting someone's post in that way IMO.
Free speech and all that applies to all.
What started off as a discussion about illnesses in my youth compared to today is getting into realms I'd never have thought, such as attacking the NHS. :unimpressed:
Personally I think this thread has gone awry. A shame, because it could have been so much more.
Quote from: Newportnobby on November 24, 2018, 08:38:36 AM
Sorry to say you are being borderline offensive in dissecting someone's post in that way IMO.
Must have missed something! Sounds exciting, but scrolling upwards not really seeing (or at least understanding) anything nearly this entertaining!
Quote from: Newportnobby on November 24, 2018, 08:38:36 AM
Free speech and all that applies to all.
The thing about free speech is that people often assume it applies to them rather than the other guy. More to the point, free speech also implies taking responsibility for what your words cause to happen.
Quote from: Newportnobby on November 24, 2018, 08:38:36 AM
What started off as a discussion about illnesses in my youth compared to today is getting into realms I'd never have thought, such as attacking the NHS. :unimpressed:
Not sure where the NHS bashing was. But in any event, to summarise, yes, your perception health is worse now than it the past was largely incorrect because you weren't aware of much of the mortality and morbidity of the time, but yes, fitness has declined somewhat as people's lives have become less active. On the other hand, allergies have increased, for reasons unknown, even as the incidences of childhood diseases such as polio and whooping cough have declined almost to zero. You can probably lock up this thread now! ;-)
Cheers, NeMo
QuotePerhaps @daffy (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=profile;u=5634) would like to steer us in a particular direction, lest we stray further awry ? :)
Ha ha! :D. Only too happy to oblige. :thumbsup:
Food allergies and intolerances are something close to my heart. While it has been proven that I don't have any actual allergies, such as to peanuts, I do have rather annoying and life affecting intolerances to many food items. These range from sugars, to wheat products (not gluten intolerance), coffee, alchohol, spices, acidics like grapefruit, onion, and vinegars, and a whole panoply of others.
All in all these seriously affect my everyday living, usually giving me sleepless nights, nerve irritations, headaches, feelings akin to 'the flu', and an overall tiredness that at times renders me pretty well useless.
These problems stem from a long term illness in the 1970's, and a second and far more profound illness that had its genesis in 1990. Without the amazing scientific developments in the understanding of the human body's complex systems and processes, particularly over the last twenty years or so, I would have no real insight into what was making me feel so ill. I now know that I have a compromised immune system, and that my IgE (Immunoglobulin E ) count is considerably above the norm. Further, tests have been carried out to identify many of the triggers that can lead to my symptoms, and through such I am beginning to live what is often called a 'normal' life.
There is a long way to go before the scientists and medics get a full handle on such matters, an understanding of just what it is that leads one person's sytems to react in the way mine do, while others show no such symptoms, but instead thrive on the very foods that lay me low. In days gone by I wonder how many who have shared my symptoms in varying degrees would have simply been seen to be merely 'sickly'.
So that's just me. I see all the new names emerging to describe this and that condition, be it a syndrome or otherwise, and think how refreshing it must be for all those who, until that naming, and by inference, recognition of their particular condition, finally see some light at the end of their particular dark tunnel.
Quote from: MalcolmInN on November 24, 2018, 10:40:00 AM
Free speech is almost as peculiar as "being offensive". I dont think it is possible to give offense (unless one does something that is agin the law of the land ), it is only possible to "take offense".
Indeed, it is often said that people choose to take offence, implying that it is their fault that are offended, or their desire to be a martyr. But if you recall, I also said that free speech involves taking responsibility. If you have offended somebody (even if you don't think it's your fault) then the humane thing to do is enquire how you hurt their feelings, and to offer apologies for that fact, even if you stand by your original point.
Oftentimes people confuse free speech with being crass or tactless. Everyone is free to express their opinions; nobody has the right to be rude or cruel in doing so.
Cheers, NeMo
Quote from: MalcolmInN on November 24, 2018, 12:27:09 PM
In which case I would have expected a rebuke in private also, with the opportunity to sort it proper !
It's a public forum, so you can't realistically assume that apologies (or any other sorts of discussions) would be done in private. Otherwise it's a bit like 'The Daily Mail' printing a scandal on the front page, but then finding out they were wrong and apologising in a letter sent privately. For sure they'd *like* to do that, but in terms of press standards, we also would expect them to print an apology in their newspaper -- though very rarely, sadly, are such made on the front page, and more likely towards the bottom of p. 94!
Cheers, NeMo
I think this has run its course. If anyone disagrees please PM me.
:locked: