The Council of the Ageing “COTA News” printed the following article in their August/September 2008 The Voice of Older Victorians:

 

A BILL, which could be loosely described as providing for voluntary euthanasia by proposing a legislated process for physician assisted dying, was presented recently in the Legislative Council in Victoria. It is no surprise that it was presented as a private member’s bill as this is such a vexed and controversial matter that neither the Government nor Opposition are keen to initiate action.

Colleen Hartland introduced her Medical Treatment (Physician Assisted Dying) Bill in the Legislative Council on 11 June2008 and debate began in the last week of July. It provides for ‘a competent adult who is suffering intolerably from a terminal or advanced incurable illness to choose whether to ask a doctor for assistance to die peacefully’. It also provides for an ‘agent’ of the patient to assist when that is necessary to carry out the person’s wishes.

Since 1988, patients have had the right to refuse medical treatment for an existing condition under the Victorian Medical Treatment Act 1988. While this has been welcomed as a legal recognition of an individual’s right to assess their own needs and plan their own end, it has raised the question of what to do when the illness is marked by ‘intolerable pain and suffering’ and the dying process is prolonged. Is it acceptable to involve medical professionals in a more active way? Should doctors more actively provide information and assistance for the dying?

Much of the public debate is around particular cases, such as that of the much admired journalist Pamela Bone who chose to have what she called ‘the knowledge’ available to her, and those cases related to the activities of voluntary euthanasia campaigner Dr Philip Nitschke.

The bill attempts to cover the ethical and practical questions often raised in a debate over voluntary euthanasia. The patient must be an adult, resident in Victoria for at least 12 months, competent to make decisions about their medical care and fully informed about their diagnosis and prognosis. Safeguards provided in the bill include:

•             the   patients   request   in writing,

•             a cooling off period,

•             a second medical opinion and

•             exclusion   of  any   person  benefiting financially from the death from providing assistance to     the patient.

In her second reading speech, Ms Hartland referred to the consequences of this sort of legislation in the USA state of Oregon, where the negative outcomes predicted by opponents of legislative changes in that state have not eventuated.

This is an important issue for seniors. It is one on which most will have an opinion, and in many cases, a strong opinion. COTA Vic encourages seniors to read the bill and the accompanying speech from Ms Hartland and to make their opinions known to local members of Parliament. The Victorian section of the Australian Medical Association has already expressed its doubts to MPs. Seniors, the group in the community most affected by this matter, also need a voice.

COTA is planning to provide you with opportunities for discussion and debate later in the year but has not adopted a position.

For more information on the Bill and Ms Hartland’s speech to Parliament see www.legislation. vic.gov.au

Footnote: I was confused to learn that the organisation in the best position to represent the views of the collective older Victorian did not hold a position on at least providing a choice for the individual which currently we don’t have.  We must live according to the medical establishment’s decree whether we want to or not.

  If a person categorically states “I Do Not Want to be Resuscitated” the doctor can over ride that person’s wishes if they deem life is worth living regardless of the outcome.  “I Do Not want to remain on Life Support Systems”   The outcome may well be the rest of one’s life sitting drooling in a nursing home, but that is not the health care worker’s concern…because they’ve saved a life and you haven’t died on their shift!

Mostly intelligent human beings who have raised families, built bridges, taught in schools, worked in service industries all of a sudden become too stupid to be able to make a decision about their end of life choices.

To those absolutely stupid idiots who feel somehow that they’ll be found wanting if they should lose the soul of a person who prefer suicide to suffering, just imagine how you would feel if the roles were reversed.   Would you want to live your life totally dependent on some one else to feed, change, bath, to read, to write for you??

Jesus himself, if one believes the stories,  did not hang around for weeks, months, years.   He chose a week of his entire 33 years “to suffer”…Why should any one else be any different in following the path of “The Lord God!”.    At least try and think about this aspect of the value of suffering which is seen by some as “godly” but to others like myself, entirely unnecessary in a technological age of medical science.  I know what is available and I want some of that for myself!

FEMALE HEART ATTACKS –  I never knew symptoms could be different in a woman to a man .  I am sharing this information in good faith. 

 

If you’ve read this before, please be sure to pass on to your female friends.  If not, please take a minute.  If could save your life or someone else’s.

 

She said she didn’t feel well and had a back ache and was going to lay down on the bed with the heating pad. A while later her husband went to check on her and she was not breathing. They were not able to revive her..

This is something we women should definitely take seriously. Please pass this on to those you love.  I was aware that female heart attacks are different, but this is the best description I’ve ever read ………Women and heart attacks MI

(Myocardial Infarction).  Did you know that women rarely have the same dramatic symptoms that men have when experiencing heart attack…you  know, the sudden stabbing pain in the chest, the cold sweat, grabbing the chest & dropping to the floor that we see in the movies? Here is the story of one woman’s experience with a heart attack.

 

I had a completely unexpected heart attack at about 10:30 pm with NO prior exertion, NO prior emotional trauma that one would suspect might’ve brought it on. I was sitting all snugly & warm on a cold evening, with my purring cat in my lap, reading an interesting story my friend had sent me, and actually thinking, ‘A-A-h, this is the life, all  cozy and warm in my soft, cushy Lazy Boy with my feet propped up.’  

 

A moment later, I felt that awful sensation of indigestion, when you’ve been in a hurry and grabbed a bite of sandwich and washed it down with a dash of water, and that hurried bite seems to feel like you’ve swallowed a golf ball going down the esophagus in slow motion and it is most uncomfortable. You realize you shouldn’t have gulped it down so fast and needed to chew it more thoroughly and this time drink a glass of water to hasten its progress down to the stomach. This was my initial sensation—the only trouble was that I hadn’t taken a bite of anything since about 5:00 p.m. After that had seemed to subside, the next sensation was like little squeezing motions that seemed to be racing up my SPINE (hind-sight, it was probably my aorta spasming), gaining speed as they continued racing up and under my sternum (breast bone, where one presses rhythmically when administering CPR). This fascinating process continued on into my throat and branched out into both jaws.

 

 AHA!!  NOW I stopped puzzling about what was happening–we all have read and/or heard about pain in the jaws being one of the signals of an MI happening, haven’t we?   I said aloud to myself and the cat, ‘Dear God, I think I’m having a heart attack!’  I lowered the foot rest, dumping the cat from my lap, started to take a step and fell on the floor instead. I thought to myself  ’If this is a heart attack, I shouldn’t be walking into the next room where the phone is or anywhere else……but, on the other hand, if I don’t, nobody will know that I need help, and if I wait any longer I may not be able to get up in moment’ I pulled myself up in the arms of the chair, walked slowly into the next room and dialled the Paramedics…

 

I told the lady who answered that I thought I was having a heart attack due to the pressure building under the sternum and radiating into my jaws. I didn’t feel hysterical or afraid, just stating the facts. She said she was sending the Paramedics over immediately, asked if the front door was near to me, and if so, to unbolt the door and then lie down on the floor where they could see me when they came in. I then lay down on the floor as instructed and lost consciousness, as I don’t remember the medics coming in, their examination, lifting me onto a gurney or getting me into their ambulance, or hearing the call they made to St. Jude ER on the way, but I did briefly awaken when we arrived and saw that the Cardiologist was already there in his surgical blues and cap, helping the medics pull my stretcher out of the ambulance.

 

He was bending over me asking questions (probably something lie ‘Have you taken any medications?’) but I couldn’t make my mind interpret what he was saying, or form an answer, and nodded off again, not waking up until the Cardiologist and partner had already threaded the teeny angiogram balloon up my femoral artery into the aorta and into my heart where they installed 2 side by side stents to hold open my right coronary artery. I know it sounds like all my thinking and actions at home must have taken at least 20-30 minutes before calling the Paramedics, but actually it took perhaps 4-5 minutes before the call, and both the fire station and St. Jude are only minutes away from my home, and my Cardiologist was already to go to the OR in his scrubs and get going on restarting my heart (which had stopped somewhere between my arrival and the procedure) and installing the stents. & nb sp; Why have I written all of this to you with so much detail?

 

Because I want all of you  to know what I learned first hand:  

 

1.    Be aware that something very different is happening in your body not the usual men’s symptoms, but inexplicable things happening (until my sternum and jaws got into the act ).  It is said that many more women than men die of their first (and last) MI because they didn’t know they were having one, and commonly mistake it as indigestion, take some Maalox or other anti-heartburn preparation, and go to bed, hoping they’ll feel better in the morning when they wake up….which doesn’t happen.

 

My female friends, your symptoms might not be exactly like mine, so I advise you to call the  Paramedics if ANYTHING is unpleasantly happening that you’ve not felt before. It is better to have a ‘false alarm’ visitation than to risk your life guessing what it might be!  

 

2. Note that I said ‘Call the Paramedics’ (000)!

 

Ladies,

 

TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE!  Do NOT try to drive yourself to the ER–you’re a hazard to others on the road, and so is your panicked husband who will be speeding and looking anxiously at what’s happening with you instead of the road.

 

Do NOT call your doctor–he doesn’t know where you live and if it’s at night you won’t reach him anyway, and if it’s daytime, his assistants (or answering service) will tell you to call the Paramedics. He doesn’t carry the equipment in his car that you need to be saved! The Paramedics do, principally OXYGEN that you need ASAP. Your Dr. will be notified later.

 

3. Don’t assume it couldn’t be a heart attack because you have a normal cholesterol count. Research has discovered that a cholesterol elevated reading is rarely the cause of an MI (unless it’s unbelievably high, and/or accompanied by high blood pressure.) MI’s are usually caused by long-term stress and inflammation in the body, which dumps all sorts of deadly hormones into your system to sludge things up in there.

 

Pain in the jaw can wake you from a sound sleep. Let’s be careful and be aware.   The more we know, the better chance we could survive.

 

 Constituent writes open letter to Helen Shardey, Shadow Health Minister in the Victorian Government.  Liberal Member for Caulfield.

 

Dear Helen,

 

    As a constituent of yours I wish to make my feelings known about the current Euthanasia Bill before Parliament.

 

    It is acknowledged in the press that this will be a conscience vote. Well my conscience tells me that this Bill is a step in the right direction.

 

    As Shadow Minister for Health you have made many statements about the current Government and there inability to overcome a lack of beds and services in the Health sector. How much of this finite resource is spent on palliative care and associated services for people who unfortunately have no ability to function as a dignified human being. Who are in pain and and have no future but to watch the distress of loved ones and carers as they exist just to satisfy some theological or mythical belief that a miracle will occur.

 

    I am not sure what your conscience says but why has the parliament decided on this option. Surely the conscience of the public is paramount and not those influenced by religious and political leaders whose agendas are well known and seek to cloud this debate with emotive and non-scientific claptrap. The churches, the political parties, the vested interests. Is it their conscience this vote will be decided on or mine and the millions of ordinary citizens. Incidentally today we will hear about the possible euthanasia of a baby whale in Sydney but nothing about the scores of people who will die today in agony when an alternative should exist.

 

    I am not a member of a political party, nor of a church. Nor am I associated with the pharmaceutical or medical industry. I don’t own shares in them either. I don’t vote for boards or on diocese elections or for that matter preselection for political parties. I do however vote in the seat of Caulfield.

 

    As Shadow Minister of Health it is your duty to ask your fellow parliamentarians to have a true peoples vote.  Ask there branches what the feelings of the electorate are. And not ask a handful of people whose views are based on doctrine not relevant in todays society or at least not relevant to me. Allow science and a fair go take the lead in this serious and well overdue debate.

 

Thank You

 

 From their August Newsletter:   Front page story of the never ending battle for justice in allowing choice, for the most vulnerable of all – the slow dying individual who seeks only permanent relief from intolerable pain.   Why should it have taken 34 long years to achieve such a compassionate outcome for those who chose it for themselves?

We Australians including tiny Victoria, need to ask ourselves how we can describe ourselves as “civilized” when modern medicine sustains life long after the body has decayed past its “use by” date.   What is “civilized” about listening and watching a person writhing in distress for months until comotose at the bitter end.    Of course, very few of us “want to die” but for goodness sake, when its “our time” make us as comfortable as modern medicine will allow us to.    Allow us the choice to die a good death and our tormented spirits,  will be very very grateful, as I am sure our loving relatives sharing the death scene will also appreciate.

I feel shamed that Victorians have to beg to be permitted to die with the same rights as my dogs – euthanased when pain becomes intolerable

Some said it couldn’t be done—getting a Physician Assisted Dying (PAD) bill into the Victorian Parliament. They were wrong.

It’s now official. After years of preparation (34 years to be exact as DWDV was established in 1974!), a Physician Assisted Dying Bill is before the Parliament of Victoria.

Known as the Medical Treatment (Physician Assisted Dying) Bill 2008, it tooksome two years to prepare. We have Prof.David Kelly, former Chairman of the Law Reform Commission of
Victoria to thank for leading the creation of the Bill. Many people worked diligently on the Bill in consultations with medical, legal, ethical, social and other community groups.

The process lead to a Bill that we believe will provide choice for Victorians suffering intolerably and unrelievably from a terminal illness or the advanced stage of an incurable illness. The Bill incorporates a basket of safeguards that provide strong protections for patients, for doctors and nurses, for pharmacists and lawyers, and, not least, for sufferers who do not want to use the provisions of the Bill to avoid having it applied to them,whether deliberately or accidentally.

The Bill was tabled as a Private Member’s Bill in the Legislative Council (upper house)by Colleen Hartland, Greens member for Western Metropolitan. It has taken a lot ofhard work and commitment, and a great deal of courage, for Hartland to table the Bill, and I am sure you will join DWDV in thanking her (and Hon. Ken Smith who will sponsor the Bill in the lowerhouse), for such dedication and support.

The debate has begun, and as has happened in other jurisdictions where PAD is now legal, opponents are busy spreading misinformation and running a fear campaign.

They shall not succeed. We are vigorous in correcting erroneous information already circulated by Christine Campbell (Labor,lower house), Peter Kavanagh (DLP, upper house), and others.

If you have hesitated to lend your support to the cause so far, now is
the time to get active. Opponents—only 13% of Victorians—are already very active.

Doctors split on PAD (Dying with Dignity Victoria’s Viewpoint)
A national survey of Australian doctors onducted by the Herald Sun found 5% of doctors supportive of Physician ssisted Dying (PAD), and 44% opposed.
Clearly, opinions differ in the medical fraternity with almost half of doctors supporting the availability of PAD, yet the AMA and Palliative Care Australia both have adopted an official position opposed to PAD.
It’s about time the AMA and PCA reflected the true range of opinion
amongst their memberships, taking a tand of neutrality towards PAD.
A letter from more than 100 doctors as recently sent to the AMA to request this change of official position.

Commentary:   Now until I saw the Herald Sun had run the survey it held some validity for me.  However in keeping with their current survey on whether terminally ill people should be given medical assistances the score was 49% agreed and 51% opposed, frankly I feel something is not quite “kosher”.

Any observer who has been watching the polls over the past ten years  know for a fact that consistently they’ve read at least into the 70 and sometimes 80% in support of PAD.   To drop 30% would indicate a manipulation of the figures to suit a specific agenda.

Frankly I didn’t believe what I was viewing on their website and I also wondered whether the 49/51% took into account the telephone calls.  Assuming in this whizz bang age of technology the numbers include telephone calls, I would want this survey verified by an independent auditor to demonstrate validity.

I’ve been feeling a bit “poorly” this past week and am unsure whether to go to Parliament or not.   Would my attending make any difference to the vote?   No!, I didn’t think so…..As I said to a friend yesterday – we are all so very tired of the ongoing political football about the right to choice for the individual….the might of the Catholic Church is alive and well – they have the money, the political clout, the “Hill Song” type fervor of the uninvolved……

It is something of a comfort in our darker hours to know that the opponents will one day be dragged kicking and screaming or perhaps moaning into a place of pain – in which the ultimate act will be Dying!!

I have a fantasy that the opponents will enter a chamber where they must endure simulated pain, and if after a time has past, they emerge they believing in the moral righteous to suffer regardless, then that’s their call,  – but for the majority they must surely appreciate that someone before them had allowed a law which gave them a choice!

It distressed me no end, learning that only 1% of Oncologists admitted to be supportive of PAD.  Cancer, one of the deadliest of diseases had so little support from the major administrators of the ultimate pain relieving drugs.

As death is inevitable, there is an argument  for making it as agreeable as possible under the stressful circumstances, not only for the sufferer but for those who love them, looking on.

Prayers around a bedside are all well and good for the living in toning down the mental stress levels for themselves, but what of the physical pain endured by the dying?

Who mouthing their reassuring prayers would make the ultimate sacrifice and share the dying one’s  pain or even change places?.

Don’t give them false platitudes – give them relief – Be Compassionate!

“Where there is a Will – People will find a Way!!”

16 August 2008 from TMC Net (Norwalk CT)

 

http://callcenterinfo.tmcnet.com/Analysis/articles/37194-suicide-cop-headache-911-call-takers.htm

 

“Suicide by Cop” a Headache for 911 Call-Takers

A phenomenon known as “suicide by cop” is gaining momentum and becoming a big headache for 911 emergency call takers.

 

Suicide by cop occurs when someone wants to commit suicide, but doesn’t have the courage to do it. So, the person tries to force a police officer to shoot him, often by using extreme methods, according to Paul Logan, a communications supervisor with the Dane County Public Safety Communications Center in Madison, Wis.

 

Suicide by cop is on the rise, says Logan, who spoke last week at a public safety conference in Kansas City. In the United States alone, he said there have been at least four “clearly documented” cases in the last five years.

 

Other names include death by cop, suicide-by-police, officer-assisted suicide or Victim-Precipitated Homicide, sources say.

 

Logan discussed an incident where a man walked into a Madison day care center early one morning armed with a meat cleaver, according to a story by Urgent Communications. The man, who had no connection to the center, whacked a worker over the head and held a knife to a teacher’s throat.

 

After two calls were made to 911, police arrived on the scene and shot the man to death within three minutes. The man knew what he was doing by going into a day care that was located near a police station. A suicide note was later found at his house.

 

“These things are very dynamic,” Logan said. “Things happen very fast, and officers have to be armed with as much information as possible when they arrive at the scene.”

 

Last month, there was a similar case in Pinellas Park, Fla., where a 44-year-old man on disability had two sons and $6,000 of debt. The man called police and told them he had a gun. When they arrived, he fired 30 shots at them.

 

Police returned fire, killing the man in his home. A suicide note said he’s not a bad person, but that life “gets away” from him sometimes, according to an article in The Tampa Tribune.

 

Often the person trying to kill themselves makes the emergency call, Logan said. In such cases, it’s essential for the call-taker to gather crucial information, such as: have they taken any drugs or drank alcohol and, if so, what did they consume.

 

Other questions to consider include: do they have a weapon and have they pointed it at anyone; have they made any threats; are there any family or personal problems; are they agitated, yelling or screaming; or has anything happened that might have gotten them fired up.

 

It’s also critical to keep them on the phone because “information flow” is crucial in this type of situation, Logan said. Call-takers develop certain instincts, insights and intuitions over the years and draw on that when dealing with suicide-by-cop incidents, he added.

 

“Tell the police your gut feelings,” Logan said. “It’s better to be wrong than not to say anything. Officers would rather hear gut feelings, even if they don’t pan out.” Also, he advises call-takers to try to keep the caller calm, so you don’t “crank up” an already volatile situation.

 

________________________________________

 Hey what an alternative to trying to obtain Nembutal in Australia?.   Pity the Police Commissioners  in Australia make such a fuss about police shooting suspects first and asking questions later.  Again the frail elderly are penalised even at this level because the police already know they pose no threat, so they can’t rely on the cop to help them out with voluntary euthanasia with a quick bullet!  When I read this article I must admit I was impressed with the method that people will use in order to die!  Their Choice in Dying, but perhaps for all the wrong reasons!  

 

We should have access at some point to alternative methods of dying rather than to involve others in the process, when terminally ill.  Physician Assisted Dying would have been a great leap forward but unfortunately Victorian in name and mind, means Victorian Politicians in the main are too “wimpish” about death to face its reality.

13 August 2008 from the Whitehorse Leader (Victoria, AU)

 

http://www.whitehorseleader.com.au/article/2008/08/13/41117_whv_news.html

 

Whitehorse MPs, Blackburn group confront euthanasia

Jon Ryan

13Aug08

 

UPPER House MPs will confront the divisive issue of euthanasia today, with a Blackburn-based group at the heart of the debate.

The state’s Legislative Council will discuss legislation that would make assisted suicide legal in Victoria for a person with a terminal or incurable illness.

Neil Francis, president of Blackburn’s Dying with Dignity Victoria, said surveys showed the majority of Australians supported giving patients the right to decide.

“We respect the right of people who are opposed to not using that option, but they should not refuse that right to others,” he said. “There is 82 per cent (for euthanasia) it’s time to get on with it.”

Mr Francis emphasised that the proposed Medical Treatment (Physician Assisted Dying) Bill would apply only to patients who were suffering “intolerable and unrelievable” pain.

The Bill has been introduced by Greens MP Colleen Hartland. If it passes, Liberal MP Ken Smith will then propose it in the Lower House.

Eastern Metropolitan state Labor MP Brian Tee backed the principle of assisted suicide, but had some reservations about the Bill. “Having looked at the Bill, and spoken to many people about it, I do support the right of terminally ill people who are in extreme pain to decide when they die,” he said.

“But I am concerned that this Bill is poorly drafted and I am carefully considering it to see if it provides the necessary safeguards.” He said many terminally ill people were “extremely vulnerable” and could be taken advantage of. He wanted safeguards against that.

Eastern Metropolitan state Liberal MP Bruce Atkinson said he was “still listening to the debate”, but described it as a difficult issue that MPs should “canvass more widely than their own personal viewpoints”. He said he would like to see the Bill go to the legislative committee “to go through the detail clause by clause” before it was voted on by the Parliament.

 

________________________________________

 

The Age Newspaper article (News pg8) dated July 31, 2008

Mengele or mercy? Parties divided over right-to-die bill

By DAVID ROOD

STATE POLITICAL REPORTER

Divisions emerged within the Labor and Liberal parties yesterday over the issue of euthanasia, as State Parliament began a historic debate on so-called “dying with dignity” legislation.

MPs spoke passionately for and against the Greens-backed private member’s bill that would give terminally ill people the right to die with a doctor’s help.

Former Labor minister Candy Broad said the current law was a barrier to honest discussions about when life becomes intolerable: “This bill is about having the freedom to choose.”

But Labor colleague Evan Thornley said that, although he sat in the “uneasy middle” of the debate, he would vote against what he called a bad bill. He said the safeguards were “flagrantly inadequate”, and the bill had all the hallmarks of a marketing document crafted by a lobby group “certain of its own cause”.

Liberal frontbencher Gordon Rich-Phillips said he would reject the bill because the attempt to codify euthanasia through legislation would cause more problems than it solved.

But Liberal Andrea Coote said the bill was “more about dignity than it is about dying”.

“Faced with a terminal illness, who are we to deny people the right to decide what their own personal threshold is?” Ms Coote said.
Democratic Labor Party MP Peter Kavanagh condemned the bill, saying it diminished the value of human life. “It is wrong in principle to deal with the problems of human beings by killing them,” Mr Kavanagh said.

He said the very title of the legislation — Medical Treatment (Physician Assisted Dying) Bill — was deceptive as it was about unnaturally shortening life. “The so-called medical treatment that would come from this bill would be no more medical than Dr Mengele’s experiments (in Nazi Germany).”
Mr Kavanagh said the safeguards against people benefiting from an assisted death were naive as “betrayal… is almost always done with a kiss”

 Premier John Brumby does not want to change the exist: laws, while Coalition leader Ted Baillieu has said there is a need for euthanasia legislation.

MPs will have have a conscience vote on the bill, which would give mentally competent adults suffering from terminal illnesses or diseases the right ask a doctor to help them die.

With PAUL AUSTIN

Commentary:   I feel so depressed reading articles like this.  It really shows that politicians who oppose the Bill have little understanding of how people live their lives with a terminal illness where God and faith alone are sometimes insufficient to support them with their intolerable suffering.  

The pain of enduring a life not worth living!!! without any chance of recovery, or improvement. Where pain is both physical and mental, unless drugged to the eyeballs, and that could be some politicians definition of pain relief.

At a personal level I feel betrayed as a person who believed Labor politicians were so much more socially aware to the needs of the individual and yet it is the Liberals who lead the way with the help of the Greens.  

Evan Thornley who I went and scrutinized for in the last State Election in a Count Back to secure his Seat as an Upper House Representative, is one of the politicians interviewed for the Age article.  He is reported as voting against the proposed legislation.

If he sat in the “uneasy middle” of the debate – on the fence – for heaven’s sake he could have at least considered the needs of the person who requires the legislation sometime in the future. 

It could be any one’s aged parents as serious health issues do hit us the older we get! or it could me that needs help to die peaceful.  Or Evan Thornley himself may wish for the OPTION to be in place for himself sometime in the future.  Right now,   I’m the one who’s lived through ovarian cancer and know first hand the ugliness of living with cancer.  It took some five years for the nerve damage to start to settle so that I could stand for long period of time again and even walk a straight line!!!

As I said to a Labor member recently about Evan Thornley’s words, he agreed that the Hansard records are vacillating on the subject.  I said quite angrily that no one is holding a gun to the head of anyone to end their lives, but we should at least have the opportunity to be assisted by a doctor in preference to stumbling through suicide attempts by ourselves.

Common sense tells me to appreciate others who stand up and be counted such as Candy Broad who has always being an advocate for choice and dignity in dying.

Mengele analogies are just plain stupid.   Get over the Nazi usage in referring to VE.   Seventy years have passed and many many ugly mean killers live the high life throughout the world today – guilty of genocide….from that of the Palestinians to many countries in Africa and unless there is oil to be had, those same sanctimonious politicians who talk of the value of a life -  don’t give a SHIT!

 

Cancer Docs Warn Staff Of Cell Phone Risks

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/07/23/health/main4285279.shtml
The head of a prominent cancer research institute issued an unprecedented warning to his faculty and staff Wednesday: Limit cell phone use because of the possible risk of cancer.

The warning from Dr. Ronald B. Herberman, director of the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, is contrary to numerous studies that don’t find a link between cancer and cell phone use, and a public lack of worry by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

Herberman is basing his alarm on early unpublished data. He says it takes too long to get answers from science and he believes people should take action now – especially when it comes to children.

“Really at the heart of my concern is that we shouldn’t wait for a definitive study to come out, but err on the side of being safe rather than sorry later,” Herberman said.

No other major academic cancer research institutions have sounded such an alarm about cell phone use. But Herberman’s advice is sure to raise concern among many cell phone users and especially parents.

In the memo he sent to about 3,000 faculty and staff Wednesday, he says children should use cell phones only for emergencies because their brains are still developing.

Adults should keep the phone away from the head and use the speakerphone or a wireless headset, he says. He even warns against using cell phones in public places like a bus because it exposes others to the phone’s electromagnetic fields.

The issue that concerns some scientists – though nowhere near a consensus – is electromagnetic radiation, especially its possible effects on children. It is not a major topic in conferences of brain specialists.

A 2008 University of Utah analysis looked at nine studies – including some Herberman cites – with thousands of brain tumor patients and concludes “we found no overall increased risk of brain tumors among cellular phone users. The potential elevated risk of brain tumors after long-term cellular phone use awaits confirmation by future studies.”

Studies last year in France and Norway concluded the same thing.

“If there is a risk from these products – and at this point we do not know that there is – it is probably very small,” the Food and Drug Administration says on an agency Web site.

Still, Herberman cites a “growing body of literature linking long-term cell phone use to possible adverse health effects including cancer.”

“Although the evidence is still controversial, I am convinced that there are sufficient data to warrant issuing an advisory to share some precautionary advice on cell phone use,” he wrote in his memo.

A driving force behind the memo was Devra Lee Davis, the director of the university’s center for environmental oncology.

“The question is do you want to play Russian roulette with your brain,” she said in an interview from her cell phone while using the hands-free speaker phone as recommended. “I don’t know that cell phones are dangerous. But I don’t know that they are safe.”

Of concern are the still unknown effects of more than a decade of cell phone use, with some studies raising alarms, said Davis, a former health adviser in the Clinton Administration.

She said 20 different groups have endorsed the advice the Pittsburgh cancer institute gave, and authorities in England, France, and India have cautioned children’s use of cell phones.

Herberman and Davis point to a massive ongoing research project known as Interphone, involving scientists in 13 nations, mostly in Europe. Results already published in peer-reviewed journals from this project aren’t so alarming, but Herberman is citing work not yet published.

The published research focuses on more than 5,000 cases of brain tumors. The National Research Council in the U.S., which isn’t participating in the Interphone project, reported in January that the brain tumor research had “selection bias.” That means it relied on people with cancer to remember how often they used cell phones. It is not considered the most accurate research approach.

The largest published study, which appeared in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute in 2006, tracked 420,000 Danish cell phone users, including thousands that had used the phones for more than 10 years. It found no increased risk of cancer among those using cell phones.

A French study based on Interphone research and published in 2007 concluded that regular cell phone users had “no significant increased risk” for three major types of nervous system tumors. It did note, however, that there was “the possibility of an increased risk among the heaviest users” for one type of brain tumor, but that needs to be verified in future research.

Earlier research also has found no connection.

Joshua E. Muscat of Penn State University, who has studied cancer and cell phones in other research projects partly funded by the cell phone industry, said there are at least a dozen studies that have found no cancer-cell phone link. He said a Swedish study cited by Herberman as support for his warning was biased and flawed.

“We certainly don’t know of any mechanism by which radiofrequency exposure would cause a cancerous effect in cells. We just don’t know this might possibly occur,” Muscat said.

Cell phones emit radiofrequency energy, a type of radiation that is a form of electromagnetic radiation, according to the National Cancer Institute. Though studies are being done to see if there is a link between it and tumors of the brain and central nervous system, there is no definitive link between the two, the institute says on its Web site.

“By all means, if a person feels compelled that they should take precautions in reducing the amount of electromagnetic radio waves through their bodies, by all means they should do so,” said Dan Catena, a spokesman for the American Cancer Society. “But at the same time, we have to remember there’s no conclusive evidence that links cell phones to cancer, whether it’s brain tumors or other forms of cancer.”

Joe Farren, a spokesman for the CTIA-The Wireless Association, a trade group for the wireless industry, said the group believes there is a risk of misinforming the public if science isn’t used as the ultimate guide on the issue.

“When you look at the overwhelming majority of studies that have been peer reviewed and published in scientific journals around the world, you’ll find no relationship between wireless usage, and adverse health affects,” Farren said.

Frank Barnes, who chaired the January report from the National Research Council, said Wednesday that “the jury is out” on how hazardous long-term cell phone use might be.

Speaking from his cell phone, the professor of electrical and computer engineering at the University of Colorado at Boulder said he takes no special precautions in his own phone use. And he offered no specific advice to people worried about the matter.

It’s up to each individual to decide what if anything to do. If people use a cell phone instead of having a land line, “that may very well be reasonable for them,” he said.

Susan Juffe, a 58-year-old Pittsburgh special education teacher, heard about Herberman’s cell phone advice on the radio earlier in the day.

“Now, I’m worried. It’s scary,” she said.

She says she’ll think twice about allowing her 10-year-old daughter Jayne to use the cell phone.

“I don’t want to get it (brain cancer) and I certainly don’t want you to get it,” she explained to her daughter.

Sara Loughran, a 24-year-old doctoral student at the University of Pittsburgh, sat in a bus stop Wednesday chatting on her cell phone with her mother. She also had heard the news earlier in the day, but was not as concerned.

“I think if they gave me specific numbers and specific information and it was scary enough, I would be concerned,” Loughran said, planning to call her mother again in a matter of minutes. “Without specific numbers, it’s too vague to get me worked up.”

NOTE: Cell Phone Hazards – The Evidence Is In
http://www.rense.com/general82/evi.htm
The evidence is in – and it is overwhelming. Even at typical low power, cell phones and wireless technology cause severe biological disturbances in human cells. In August 2007, 26 medical and public health experts their Bioinitiative Report – available online – reviewing all the literature on the effects of electromagnetic radiation.
See the rest of the story:
http://www.willthomasonline.net/willthomasonline/The_Evidence_Is_In.html

Cell Phones – More Damning Evidence
http://www.rense.com/general76/celkll.htm

Cell Phones Damage Eyes And Entire Visual System
http://www.rense.com/general82/cellpp.htm
From Dr. Gayle Eversole, PhD

Hidden Dangers of Cell Phone Radiation
http://www.lef.org/magazine/mag2007/aug2007_report_cellphone_radiation_01.htm
Every day, we’re swimming in a sea of electromagnetic radiation (EMR) produced by electrical appliances, power lines, wiring in buildings, and a slew of other technologies that are part of modern life. From the dishwasher and microwave oven in the kitchen and the clock radio next to your bed, to the cellular phone you hold to your ear—sometimes for hours each day—exposure to EMR is growing and becoming a serious health threat.

Westerman R, Hocking B. Diseases of modern living: neurological changes associated with mobile phones and radiofrequency radiation in humans. Neurosci Lett. 2004 May 6;361(1-3):13-6.
http://www.ijhg.com/text.asp?2005/11/2/99/16810.
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/408066_1.
http://www.starweave.com/reflex/.

Microwaves From Cell Phones May Be More Potent Than Lower Frequency Electromagnetic Fields In Promoting Cancer
Dr. Mae-Wan Ho
Source: http://www.i-sis.com.uk
http://healthtruthrevealed.com/full-page.php?id=10594616506&&page=article
Cancer Risks from Microwaves Confirmed
Male Fertility Diminished By Cell Phone Use (Or laptop computers)
http://www.roguegovernment.com/news.php?id=6516

Wi-Fi, Wireless Shown To Damage Sleep, Body Functions
http://piers.mit.edu/piersonline/piers.php?volume=3&number=7&page=1148

Germany warns citizens to avoid using Wi-Fi
http://environment.independent.co.uk/lifestyle/article2944417.ece

Cell Phone and Laptop Bad for Your Health? YES!
http://www.alternet.org/healthwellness/58354/?page=1
For years, opponents of cell towers and wireless technology have voiced concerns about potential health effects of electromagnetic fields. Once ridiculed as crackpots and Luddites, they’re starting to get backup from the scientific community.

Cell Phone War Documentary
http://www.thelastoutpost.com/site/1285/default.aspx
The truth of cell phones has been buried by the industry, the health officials, and governments. Health effects from radiation exposure is being allowed to continue.
http://www.mcw.edu/gcrc/cop/cell-phone-health-FAQ/toc.html
http://www.geocities.com/healthmoon/cell-phones/
http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20030222/fob1.asp
http://www.mercola.com/forms/ferrite_beads.htm