A message to doctors prescribing flucloxacillin to toddlers because it's "cheap"

My granddaughter has been put on the antibiotic syrup Flucloxacillin.

I believe doctors prescribe it on the National Health Service because it works, but most of all because it's cheap.

I would like all doctors in England to know that this medicine is the most ghastly tasting concoction ever invented by a drug company (presumably for the NHS). The idea that you might think toddlers should take it is is quite extraordinarily ignorant. The idea that it is designed by to be "children's medicine" is bizarre.

It is not cheap, in fact. The anguish that parents go through as they force their toddler to swallow the vile stuff, watching them as they gag and struggle to escape in every way possible is a dreadful ordeal for the parents. But, more importantly, psychologically, the child endures the situation of actual child abuse as their once loving parents' hands now manacle and overpower them and they are force-fed viciously bitter fluid that makes them retch and choke. Doing this to your child is abuse at the hands of our doctors prescribing "cheaply". Doing it four times a day for five days is costly in terms of emotion and trust.

My granddaughter is supposed to take flucloxacillin syrup for five days to treat one tiny school sore (impetigo) on her lip.

I am not an ignoramus about this topic having lived in Africa where impetigo is rife. No-one had to undergo such outrageous torture to get rid of it!

So, I ask all doctors in England to re-think prescribing flucloxacillin to toddlers. If you think I'm exaggerating, test it out on your own toddler. I bet you would not cause yourself to endure the experience for five days.

No, you would prescribe something a little more expensive, and palatable.

The following exerpt  is laughably out of touch with reality in the case of small children especially "It is important that you give your child the whole dose each time."

This is from the NHS Website

 Liquid medicine: Shake the medicine well. Measure out the right amount using a medicine spoon or oral syringe. You can get these from your pharmacist. Do not use a kitchen teaspoon as it will not give the right amount. You can also dilute the right amount of medicine (measured with a spoon) in a small amount of water or milk. Make sure your child takes it all straight away.

It is important that you give your child the whole dose each time.

When should the medicine start working?

Your child should start to get better after taking the medicine for 2 days. It is important that they take the whole course of medicine that has been prescribed. Do not stop early.

What if my child is sick (vomits)?

• If your child is sick less than 30 minutes after having a dose of flucloxacillin, give them the same dose again.
• If your child is sick more than 30 minutes after having a dose of flucloxacillin, you do not need to give them another dose. Wait until the next normal dose.
  

On the insane world of You Tube again

I am at screaming point. Has anyone tried "cropping" their channel art for the banner on You Tube? what a performance! I have now decided it's totally bloody useless to even try. "Cropping" involves moving the selection by about one millionth of a pixel! The only picture I can use is the red part above the mangy white cat in their gallery. The gallery is pauce - shameful in fact - a miserable offering of boring, boring, boring.

And as I said in my last post, everything I try to upload is "too small". So I downloaded gimp to scale my pictures just for blinking You Tube.

AND they have allocated me pages I don't want and another You Tube channel (blank!) AND my original channel name (which is easily google-able) HAS TOTALLY DISAPPEARED!

I am really fed up.

If anyone else has entered the land of the insane, I have discovered that if you click on the option to "disconnect my accounts" SOME of the problems come right.

I do still have TWO YouTube channels - one is blank, TWO Google+ accounts - one is blank - and a You Tube "page" (blank).

I was perfectly happy with what I had.

Fortunately when you "disconnect my account" you are given the opportunity to tell them why. So I DID!

You Tube - have you gone NUTS? Just leave me alone!

You Tube is driving me crazy.  Now I have channels that I don't want, pages that I don't want and pictures that won't upload because they are "too small".

It's all connected to Google+ and confusion reigns. My Google+ now doesn't match my You Tube channel or my Googlemail. What a cock-up.

I think others are havig the same problems because I am seeing lots of little blue and white boxes where once there were perfectly good recogniseable avatars.

Come on You Tube - put up a help page for people who think they're at the mad hatter's tea party.

The growth of The World Health Organisation, scientific evidence purveyors, neurons and frogs

I listened to Anti Nanny with Ravengrim episode 32

Ravengrim said something that resonated with me. She asked if The World Health Organisation, that once dug wells for those in need of water, or worked at stamping out Malaria in Africa, still did such things. Those were the things she remembered them doing. I do too. It was a wonderful group of concerned people "doing good". 

Nowadays, I think of them as interfering busybodies forcing countries to do their bidding, meddling in herbal medicines, clamping down on small businesses, warning us of imaginary global pandemics, insisting on vaccinations, collaborating with big Pharma and most of all Tobacco Control. I think of them as having World Governance.

So have they changed or have I just got old and cynical?

The World Health Organisation was established by the new United Nations after the war, in place of the Health Organisation of the old League of Nations."Its first priorities were to control the spread of malaria, tuberculosis and sexually transmitted infections, and to improve maternal and child health, nutrition and environmental hygiene. Its first legislative act was concerning the compilation of accurate statistics on the spread and morbidity of disease"

Thats what I remember it to be doing.

But in 1974, it partnered with The World Bank, The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO),  and the United Nations Development Programme.

It started to grow in power and influence. In the 1980's, 1990's  it entered the "lifestyle" arena - and that's the annoying part for libertarians. It started to address the problem of tobacco smoking. At first it suggested - then it directed.

Now " The WHO and the World Bank constitute the core team responsible for administering the International Health Partnership (IHP+). The IHP+ is a group of partner governments, development agencies, civil society and others committed to improving the health of citizens in developing countries. Partners work together to put international principles for aid effectiveness and development cooperation into practice in the health sector."

It has partners  - partners that collaborate. That's the secret. It's partners are like the neurons in the World Brain, triggering action in the World Body.

It has a massive data handling sector and influences World Action via publications advancing its power. 

(You needn't read this if not interested but I include it to make my point - Wikipedia information )

My point is that The WHO has grown! Just look how it has GROWN!

With such neuronal pathways lighting up the World Brain, they have done amazing work in getting action happening on all kinds of levels.

So what's the trouble? Why do they make me cynical?  Well, they are AUTHORITY. Every country uses their data in creating legislation that binds people up, removes spontaneity, reduces personal liberty.

The influence of the WHO has grown, as the idea of scientific evidence has grown. It is a vast scientific evidence purveyor. I find The WHO unsettling by that power. It indirectly governs the World.  And I wonder if, for all the good it does us living in it's world health laboratory, that we aren't like frogs on the slab, who are made to move by the electricity in the prod controlled by THEM. That's what I don't like.

The Tobacco Control Industry's Numpty box

To confirm to me what a strange place this planet is - containing gullible humans, that is, The Irish Times  opened this article on the new plain packaging drive in Ireland with "The Cabinet decision to introduce plain packaging on all tobacco products for sale in the Republic from early next year reinforces Ireland’s position as a campaigning nation at the forefront of tobacco control." And I would say "No it does not. it just shows what a bunch of numties they are !"

Clive Bates article Are we being manipulated? wisdom of the WHO examined. is an excellent read - it explains the difference between tobacco consumption reduction and Tobacco Control Antics - and they are two very different things. Do check it out!


In Ireland they are aiming for a tick in their Tobacco Control Industry's "good boys" box.

The lady with the big boobs

There is a way to display boobs (with cleavage) in the most tasteful way. I am not against cleavages - or boobs!

But I am really tired of seeing large ladies displaying big boobs, wobbly and folded under the armpits with uplift, cleavages that disappear in the infrastructure of underclothing, when boobs of that magnitude and flaccidness should be absolutely hidden from view. No question.

Large ladies with uplifted big boobs in skimpy tops or evening wear. are not sexy. They would never display their large gnarled thighs in an attempt to look sexy because it is understood by most, that doing so would bring on them derision rather than admiration.

Yet so many women in the UK flaunt their boobs. Going out is boob flaunting time. It's the strangest thing to me. It's a cultural "flaunt it if you've got it" mentality it seems to me. But just having big boobs doesn't mean they are good enough to show off or that we like looking at them. There are nice big boobs and there are horrid big boobs that should be hidden.  Every woman should have the sense to tell the difference.

But it seems they don't. Ladies with the horrid kind of uplifted creasing, in-your-face look-at-me-flaunting-it boobs make me cringe with shame for showing how ugly boobs can look. They confirm to onlookers that what they have deluded themselves to think desirable that is not really up to much at all.

An eye for a drone and a tooth for shock and awe.

No UK Media, nor the police or government seem to have mentioned that the attack in Woolwich was a beheading. Yet it is assumed? and reported by independent news sources. I find that strange. In the UK we have only been told the attackers "hacked" at their victim.

If it had been a beheading, done clean and neat, one could assume it was a well planned terrorist event.

But it was botched, incompetent and brutal. Barbarous. A home-made botch up job.

I find it strange that the police took so long to arrive on the scene, and didn't shoot to kill, only to wound. Isn't that surprising? Did they not kill on purpose? The attackers hung around waiting for the police. Did they expect to sacrifice their lives in a hail of bullets? By not not shooting them dead, the police have not made martyrs of them, but made them accountable. Even so, these men have become notorious their message indelible, but they are not martyrs.

“We swear by almighty Allah we will never stop fighting you. The only reasons we have done this is because Muslims are dying every day. This British soldier is an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. We must fight them. I apologise that women had to witness this today, but in our land our women have to see the same. You people will never be safe. Remove your government. They don’t care about you.” see here 

I find it most frightening that ordinary men, made unbalanced by hatred, planned this "home made"? protest in a democratic country which they don't call "our land", and that modern technology will spread their message around the world as clearly as any sophisticated terrorist plot.

 Here is an audio eyewitness account that is very moving.