Life in Canada

NHS should use term fat instead of obese, says minister
By Nick Triggle Health reporter, BBC News
Flabby torso of an obese boy Using 'fat' may encourage people to take more personal responsibility, says Anne Milton

GPs and other health professionals should tell people they are fat rather than obese, England's public health minister says.
Anne Milton told the BBC the term fat was more likely to motivate them into losing weight. She said it was important people should take "personal responsibility" for their lifestyles.

But health experts said the word could stigmatise those who are overweight.
Ms Milton, who stressed she was speaking in a personal capacity, said: "If I look in the mirror and think I am obese I think I am less worried [than] if I think I am fat."

She said too many staff working in the NHS were worried about using the term, but suggested it could help encourage "personal responsibility".

" People don't want to be offensive. There is a lot of stigma to being a fat person”
Professor Lindsey Davies UK Faculty of Public Health

"At the end of the day, you cannot do it for them. People have to have the information," she added.

A white paper is expected to be published in the autumn, which she said would stress the combined role of the individual, state, business and society.

The comments come after Health Secretary Andrew Lansley last month attacked the "lecturing" of recent public health campaigns, such as the drive on school meals that followed Jamie Oliver's TV shows.

Professor Steve Field, of the Royal College of GPs, said he agreed with Ms Milton and already tried to use the term fat as much as he could.
"I think the term obese medicalises the state. It makes it a third person issue. I think we need to sometimes be more brutal and honest. "You can be popular by saying the things people want to hear and in the NHS we too often do that when we should be spelling things out clearly."

The history of the term obesity

* The term obesity comes from the Latin word obesus, which roughly translated means intensive eating
* Societies have long been worried about problems of excess weight with Greek philosopher Hippocrates even writing about the dangers
* But it was not until the mid 1600s that obesity started being used as a medical term and then in time directly linked to other diseases
* Between 1830 and 1850 a Belgian scientist invented the BMI index to measure obesity by dividing weight by height
* The Journal of Chronic Diseases reported in 1972 that BMI was the best way of measuring excess fat
* Over the last three decades the terms BMI and obesity have been getting more and more popular with health professionals as a result

But Professor Lindsey Davies, president of the UK Faculty of Public Health, which represents public health professionals, warned against using 'fat' when dealing with patients.

"People don't want to be offensive. There is a lot of stigma to being a fat person."
She said health professionals started using the term obesity to encourage patients to think about the condition in a different way.

"Obesity is something that happens to people rather than something they are. The language you use all depends on the relationship you have with a patient.

"I would probably be more likely to say something like 'can we talk about your weight' rather than obesity, but that is a judgement you make on a patient-by-patient basis."

US 'fails to account' for Iraq reconstruction billions
A US federal watchdog has criticised the US military for failing to account properly for billions of dollars it received to help rebuild Iraq.

The Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction says the US Department of Defence is unable to account properly for 96% of the money.

Out of just over $9bn (£5.8bn), $8.7bn is unaccounted for, the inspector says.

The US military said the funds were not necessarily missing, but that spending records might have been archived.

In a response attached to the report, it said attempting to account for the money might require "significant archival retrieval efforts".
Reconstruction money

Much of the money came from the sale of Iraqi oil and gas.

Some frozen Saddam Hussein-era assets were also sold off.

The funds in question were administered by the US Department of Defence between 2004 and 2007, and were earmarked for reconstruction projects.

But, the report says, a lack of proper accounting makes it impossible to say exactly what happened to most of the money.

This is not the first time that allegations of missing billions have surfaced in relation to the US-led invasion of Iraq and its aftermath.

No-one from the Iraqi government was immediately available for comment.

HALIFAX - Nova Scotia's regulatory agency opened hearings Monday into a large biomass fuel proposal that has environmentalists worried about the future of the province's forests and ratepayers uncertain about the cost of electricity.

Nova Scotia Power Inc. and Newpage Port Hawkesbury Corp. are asking the Utility and Review Board to approve a plan to burn 650,000 metric tonnes of wood a year to fire a steam generator at the Cape Breton paper mill. The project would take advantage of the unused capacity on Newpage's main boiler by adding a steam turbine generator and associated equipment.

In documents filed with the board, the proponents say the project would produce about 400 gigawatts of power — about three per cent of the province's total electricity needs — while meeting the mill's need for steam.

Robin McAdam, Nova Scotia Power's executive vice president of sustainability, said the project would help the company take a "large step" toward meeting renewable energy targets for 2013.

They would like a decision from the board by October.

"We need this project for 2013 compliance and it does put us on track toward that," he said as the hearing got underway. "We'd like to see this plant running by the end of December 2012."

The applicants say the $200-million project would create 150 new forestry jobs and help Newpage maintain 550 jobs at its mill.

The provincial government is demanding 25 per cent of Nova Scotia's energy supply come from renewable resources by 2015.

The utility says it has relied almost exclusively on wind generation to help it meet initial targets, but now it needs to look at biomass.

Consumer advocate Bill Mahody pressed utility officials during the hearing for clarity on the effects of a 40-year biomass supply contract on power rates.

"It is the ratepayers who bear this risk entirely in relation to the way this project is currently structured," said Mahody.

"Ratepayers want to know that the deal has been done with as much certainty and that the costs are as certain as they can be."

The plan is opposed by a coalition of environmentalists and woodlot owners who fear it will lead to an increase in clear cutting.

Jamie Simpson, a forester with the Ecology Action Centre, said he finds it hard to believe the harvest could be sustainable even though the proponents plan to use stem wood only, leaving trunks and branches to restore soil nutrients.

"There's undoubtedly a role for biomass energy in Nova Scotia but this proposed project is not the responsible route to take," he said in his opening remarks to the board.

"While we do not oppose the use of biomass per se, it is critical that Nova Scotia go down this path with a clear understanding of the impacts on our forest resources and greenhouse gas emissions."

The Ecology Action Centre's concerns about wood supply were echoed by Neal Livingston of the Margaree Environmental Association.

"Our concern is that this plant is too big for Cape Breton. ... We think that there will be as much as a 50 per cent increase in cutting on the island and eastern Nova Scotia," he told the board.

"NSPI and Newpage are essentially locking up the wood supply, which could be used for other things."

Canadian and Americans alike already know that we aren’t fighting a war with Islamic radicals or terrorists anymore. We are fighting an overseas contingency operation. Just recently our Commander in Chief Barack Hussein Obama, removed the terms ‘Islamic extremism’ from the main document which describes our national security strategy. Islamic extremism, radicalism, fundamentalism is not to be used with military operations and focus anymore. After all, that would be a kind of religious racism wouldn’t it?

Obama is aggressively shifting and redirecting how we interact with Islam and Islamic nations. We have seen Obama scrub honest and real national security and war terms from the book. He is openly at odds with his new commander in Afghanistan, General Petraeus, who has coined the Petraeus doctrine, which defines the enemy as Islamic insurgents, Islamic extremists, and Islamic subversives. He talks of endless connection and support between Muslim support groups and Islamic terrorists. The obvious rolls on by Obama as usual.

Obama has never been happy with the obvious, that we are at war with Islamic radicals throughout the world. So, beyond changing the names and making everyone in the military, media and country pretend we aren’t fighting Islam anyway, he has made other notable changes. He has appointed ‘devout Muslims’ to critical Homeland Security positions. Among this growing list are: Kareen Shora, ADC National Executive Director as a member of the Homeland Security Advisory Council and Arif Alikhan, Assistant Secretary for Policy Development.

Maybe if Obama can change all the honest names of who we are fighting with and appoint ‘devout Muslims’ into critical posts of power for national security he can put Islam and its power where he wants it over the American people. After all, it is a Religion of peace. Don’t the American people realize that yet?

Obama has to do more to manipulate Islam to power and control. How about turning our historical and leading space program NASA into an Islamic apologist, with the main goal of honoring the scientific achievements and space interests of Islam? Oh yeah, he already did that.

Along with all the name changes and appointments, we see media intimidation, compromise and controls regarding Obama, his roots and agenda. Doug Hagmann Homelandsecurityus.com and Judi McLeod, editor of Canada Free Press, investigated for over a year intimidation and threats into silence of some anchors and any staff that would have dared cover Obama’s eligibility story. At least one, major, national host was scared into silence and contacted Hagmann.

Even with the intimidation and threats to media from the Obama administration for those who dare to question the holy one, is the complicate and shameful sell out of most media itself. Much of the media decided to ignore the sea of compromising voting records, un-American and dangerous associations, inconsistent statements and evidence regarding what Obama really believes in and operates from. Our country is paying dearly for that disgraceful sell out today.

Obama’s final strategy to elevate Islam, the Religion he says he will side with in his own book and own words, is to demonize, patronize and minimize Israel, thus lifting up the threatening Islamic nations and Islamic terrorists surrounding Israel.

We have seen Obama give over a billion dollars to the Islamic serial killers, Hamas, who do nothing but attack, murder Israelis and plan more attacks while playing the persecuted victim. We have seen Obama import Hamas ‘victims’ to the U.S. and Canada

Naturally it is not enough to fund the enemy. Therefore, Obama has to insult and harass Israel the entire first two years he is in office. Biden and Hillary had their knickers in a twist when Prime Minister Netanyahu wouldn’t stop building homes on their sovereign land, per their mandate.

Obama also managed to support the lies and international distortion surrounding the Turkish flotilla incident, where Israeli commandos were forced to stop ships heading straight for the Gaza. It didn’t matter that Israel had already warned Turkey not to send any ships to Gaza. It didn’t matter that over 50 people on terrorist watch lists were found on one of the boats. It didn’t matter that Israel wasn’t trying or planning to hurt people on the boats but to re route them to another port where they could search them. Why would the Israelis want to search boats full of aid and help??? Maybe because they had apprehended all kinds of terrorist equipment, personnel and bombs going to the Gaza before. Israel ended up being 100% right that this was more of the same. Obama didn’t care. He, along with the Islam worshipping, UN rebuked Israel and demanded investigations….bla bla bla.

OK, OK, Islam is a Religion that wants peace. They just have peppered through their teaching, preaching, traditions and Holy books, statements of hate for Jews and Christians, agendas to conquer societies, import Sharia law and have a world wide caliphate again. Jihad is really just an internal struggle, so they say. Tell that to the thousands who have been murdered at the hands of Islamic radicals here and abroad.

We have seen non stop honor killings, murder of US soldiers by Islamic US soldiers in our country and abroad; near miss plane attacks and car bombing attempts! 9/11 just started a new wave of what we had been experiencing for years.

More from the Religion of peace. This week 64 people were murdered by Somali Islamists who bombed a ton of people as they watched the World Cup finals in Uganda.

Finally, is there any question about the loyalties of this President when his attorney General Eric Holder has thrown out the case against the New Black Panther leadership who were caught threatening, menacing and intimidating voters outside a precinct in 2008? Most of us have heard the famous words of Malik Zulu Shabazz by now, screaming his hate for white crackers and urging people to murder whites and their babies. He did this while brandishing a weapon and scaring voters. What we also must remember is that the Black Panthers are historically anti Semitic and pro ‘black Islam.’ Gee, they hate Jews and love Islam. Any questions as to why the slam dunk case against them was thrown out by the Obama administration and Holder???
Reality check

We are in a war with radical Islam, not all Islamics, but many. We have a President who is Muslim and kisses up to Muslim nations. We have a President who insults and shreds our treasured relationship with Israel. We have a President who compromises our national security by appointing Muslims to high level, national security positions and lies about who is threatening us and constantly attacking us.

Blog author has not qualified all the report and info contained in this blog

B.C. slashes generic drug costs

The price of generic prescription drugs in B.C. will drop by almost 50 per cent under a new deal reached with drug stores and pharmacists, according the Health Minister Kevin Falcon.

"Quite simply, we were paying too much for some of the most popular drugs for high blood pressure, heartburn, depression, epilepsy and cholesterol," said Falcon on Friday morning. "Change was needed if we want to keep drug costs sustainable and redirect the money to cover new drugs and provide better services."

Under the deal, the cost of generic prescription drugs will drop from 65 per cent of the brand name cost to 35 per cent.

Just as Ontario did when it moved to slash generic prices this spring, B.C. will achieve the savings by scaling back the rebates pharmacists get from generic drug manufacturers for selling their drugs, which can run as high as 60 to 70 per cent of the dollar value of the drug.

Ontario eliminated those rebates completely (B.C. is merely reducing them) and mandated that generics cost no more than 25 per cent of the brand drug, down from 50 per cent, effective July 1.

The new prices in B.C. will apply only to drugs covered by PharmaCare but will be available to employee and union drug plans and customers who pay for drugs out of pocket.

Ontario has made the deepest cuts to generic drug prices, but Alberta and Quebec have also recently reached similar cost-cutting deals with the industry.

The B.C. deal is expected to save the government about $170 million a year in PharmaCare purchases while union- and employer-sponsored drug plans and individuals buying their own drugs are expected to save another $210 million per year.

The deal, which will be phased in over three years, will also increase dispensing fees for pharmacists to help them cover the decline in revenue from the reduced prices.

The province spends more than $900 million a year on prescription drugs through the PharmaCare program, with generic drugs accounting for nearly $300 million of that amount.

PharmaCare covers some of the cost of prescription drugs for British Columbians who fall into a specified income bracket.

TORONTO - Rogers Communications is a "$20-billion bully" that aims to crush competition in Canada's wireless telecom industry with its planned unlimited talk and text service Chatr, says the head of recently arrived rival Mobilicity.

"I didn't launch this business to be dealt an underhanded card by someone who's much bigger," Mobilicity chairman John Bitove said Friday, adding that his company plans to pursue legal action under the Competition Act if Rogers launches Chatr as it announced June 30.

Bitove alleges Chatr's offerings are suspiciously similar to Mobilicity plans offering unlimited calling and texting overseas for flat-fee plans ranging from $15 to $65.

"You look at the markets they're targeting, they're our markets. You look at the plans they're offering to the consumer, they're basically ripping off the plans that we've put in place," Bitove said.

Bitove said the timing of Chatr's launch is no coincidence, Rogers having had years to introduce a discount service but choosing to do so only now that Mobilicity has entered the market.

"What they're basically being is a $20-billion bully to try and destroy the competition as quickly as they can."

Bitove — who also heads up the Priszm Income Fund, operator of most of Canada's KFC, Taco Bell and Pizza Huts — claimed Rogers would have to subsidize the new service and is launching it only to stifle new competition.

"The only reason you'd subsidize is to kill the competition. This is not a practical business plan," Bitove said at a news conference.

Mobilicity was one of the new competitors that emerged after the federal government sold additional spectrum — the radio frequencies used to carry wireless messages — in a 2008 auction that raised $4.25 billion for Ottawa.

Part of the available spectrum was set aside for newcomers, as part of the government's goal of promoting competition in Canada's wireless industry — which had been reduced to three national players after years of takeovers.

Rogers acquired the Fido service and its customers when it bought Microcell Telecommunications, which had challenged the larger players with a low-price strategy. Prior to that, Telus acquired Clearnet Communications and combined it with Telus Mobility.

Chatr is set to join Rogers Wireless and Fido as the third wireless service offered by Rogers Communications Inc. (TSX:RCI.B).

The company wouldn't say Friday when it plans to launch the service other then "when it is ready," said John Boynton, executive vice-president and chief marketing officer at Rogers.

However, Boynton denied Bitove's allegations as to his company's motives, saying the idea of providing a low-cost service to those with below average incomes had been pioneered not by Mobilicity but wireless carriers in the United States like MetroPCS and Leaf.

Rogers has been watching the progress of those American concerns and decided it was time to "fill that customer need," he said

Asked about Bitove's allegation that Chatr would be a subsidized operation, Boynton replied: "I don't know where he gets his information because he doesn't work for Rogers so he couldn't possibly know that."

Boynton described Chatr as a separate division within Rogers with a separate staff, its own billing system and separate profit and loss statement.

"So just like Mr. Bitove's company, and we wish him all the best of luck, Chatr will also compete vigorously for the same customer segment," he said.

Like any other startup, Chatr would start with no customers and a lot of expenses and try to attract as many customers as it can.

Boynton said the issue is about competition, adding that there was a little "bewilderment" at Rogers over Mobilicity's response to the challenge.

"We thought competition was good" for fulfilling the needs of customers, he said. "... You have to really worry when somebody doesn't want competition."

Mobilicity said it will file a complaint with the Competition Bureau alleging that Rogers has contravened the "abuse of dominant position" section of the Competition Act, which disallows the "use of fighting brands introduced selectively on a temporary basis to discipline or eliminate a competitor."

Bitove said he believes that Rogers will eliminate the discounts once it has driven Mobilicity out of the market, citing Canada's largest wireless service's earlier move to buy smaller discount carrier Fido in a bid to stifle competition.

The Competition Bureau examines whether there is evidence that a behaviour is having an adverse effect on the marketplace in order to determine whether there has been an abuse of dominance, said its spokesman Greg Scott. He said he could not comment on whether the bureau was investigating this case.

"There are certain marketing practices that might raise questions from the point of view of the rival company, but we clearly need to look at all of the issues before we can make a determination as to whether there is any anti-competitive behaviour," Scott said.

Telecom analyst Iain Grant believes Mobilicity has a strong case against Rogers under the Competition Act, given the timing of the launch and the language Rogers has been using in introducing the brand.

Many incumbents have so-called flanker brands or "fighting brands," including Telus's Kodoo and Bell's Solo and Virgin Mobile, which launched a few years ago.

"The difference is when you do it and how you do it," Grant said. "This is almost a perfect example of what the act was trying to (prevent)."

"Now, when Mobilicity and Public Mobile and Wind poke their heads up with their new competitive plans, if you introduce your flanker brand at that time, you might be thought to be a little opportunistic."

Grant believes Mobilicity decided to announce its plans in advance to delay Rogers' launch by weighing it down in legal wrangling and buy itself time to sign up more subscribers.

"For Canadians, the benefits to us are that we are getting a much more interesting, much more vibrant marketplace," he added.

Bitove argued that Chatr is a way for Rogers to compete with it without having to bring down prices for about 8.5 million current customers.

"They're not repricing their whole base, they're just trying to create a certain segment to go after us in a targeted fashion."

He said Rogers has a cosy connection with handset providers and has already flexed its muscle to limit availability for others.

Meanwhile, Mobilicity has already retained legal counsel and could pursue other legal actions, including a possible civil lawsuit, he said.

Mobilicity launched its advanced wireless network in the Greater Toronto Area in May, one of several new companies that have launched wireless services in recent months.

The company, which targets Canada's urban ethnic communities with unlimited international calling, also plans to be up and running in Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary and Ottawa later this year.

Mobilicity competes with the big three established players and new cellphone entrants like Globalive's Wind Mobile, the first new wireless players in Canada's cellphone industry in about a decade.

Public Mobile is another recent new entrant and Quebecor's (TSX:QBR.B) Videotron will also launch its new wireless business in Quebec and eastern Ontario later this year, delaying a planned summer launch, while Shaw Communications (TSX:SJR.B) has said it will launch in late 2011.