Great grandmother dies after NHS doctors fail to diagnose broken neck
A great grandmother died just two weeks after banging her head because doctors failed to spot her broken neck. Maud Cole, 86, was admitted to hospital after a fall but medics discharged her on the same day, claiming an X-ray was unnecessary.
An inquest ruled that the pensioner, who was recovering from a stroke, died of a broken neck and her family are now considering legal action against Doncaster Royal Infirmary.
Retired caretaker Mrs Cole, who lived in a care home at Askern, Doncaster, was described as mobile and independent by staff. After being discharged she was readmitted to the hospital eight days later after her condition deteriorated. Five days later Mrs Cole, who was complaining of neck pain, went for a CT scan and the break was detected.
Her condition worsened rapidly after she was considered unsuitable for surgery and she died the next day.
The Doncaster hearing was told Mrs Cole, who had a pacemaker, had a bone infection which made her more susceptible to broken bones.
Mrs Cole’s son Michael told the inquest: ‘The circumstances that surround her death make me feel uncomfortable, not for vengeance or financial gain, but the fact is an 86-year-old lady had a broken neck that was missed on examination.’ He said staff at the care home were ‘surprised’ his mother had been discharged so quickly from hospital after she banged her head in the fall on February 7 last year.
Mr Cole said: ‘They said they were extremely surprised she had been let back to the care home on the same day as her neck was distorted so much that they couldn’t administer eye drops without laying her down.’
The pensioner was examined at hospital but doctors thought she was uninjured. Dr Rashed Hussain said she was not complaining of neck pain and he decided there was no need for an X-ray.
Dr Jason Stone told the inquest that it could only take a ‘minor trauma’ to cause a fracture.
Recording a narrative verdict, Doncaster’s deputy coroner Fred Curtis said it was ‘more likely than not’ she sustained the broken neck but it was not found on examination. He said: ‘Following readmission to the same hospital on February 15, 2009 a CT scan confirmed such fracture which in post mortem investigations revealed to be influenced by a pre-existing bone infection. ‘Her condition deteriorated and she died at Doncaster Royal Infirmary on February 21, 2009.’
After the hearing, Mr Cole said he is considering taking legal action against the Doncaster Royal Infirmary.
A hospital spokesman offered condolences to the family and said officials would be happy to meet relatives to discuss any ‘outstanding concerns’. [Mealy-mouthed scum!]
TV programs in curriculum for British High School exams in English
Teenagers will be encouraged to study reality TV programmes such as The Apprentice, Dragon’s Den and Britain’s Got Talent as part of a new English GCSE. Pupils will be being asked to assess the delivery style and features of contestants’ language in a course designed to boost speaking and listening skills.
In one specimen paper, students are ordered to study the use of language in the Apprentice boardroom – the culmination of the BBC1 programme where Lord Sugar “fires” the weakest candidate.
Another task involves “presenting a product” based on Dragons’ Den, in which would be entrepreneurs attempt to sell ideas to successful businessmen.
And in another unit, pupils are encouraged to assess the different interviewing skills of Jeremy Paxman and Michael Parkinson.
The questions form part of a GCSE in English language created by the OCR examination board. It is designed to teach children how language can be adapted for the workplace and different social situations.
OCR said pupils taking the course would “become more conscious of which registers are more appropriate in which scenarios, making them more likely to succeed when it comes to influencing and negotiating in everyday life, their education and the world of work”.
The new English language GCSE will be available for teaching alongside an English literature GCSE from September. Under plans, teachers will be encouraged use reality TV, stand-up comedy routines, political speeches and chat shows to develop pupils’ language skills. As part of the GCSE, pupils will write a 1,000 word essay under teachers’ supervision.
A specimen question paper suggests that The Apprentice could be used as the basis of the work.
Pupils are asked to assess the “use/misuse/uncomfortable nature of certain registers (eg. the language of the professional discussion) and how this compares to candidates’ more natural speech styles”. Teenagers should also analyse the “language of self-promotion” and the pre-prepared or formulaic language used in the boardroom.
In one task, pupils are asked to create a presentation of their personal skills, based on Britain’s Got Talent.
Another question asks students to study a particular interviewer, such as Jeremy Paxman or Michael Parkinson.
The paper says pupils should consider “how rapport is established between interviewer and interviewee”, the use of pre-planned and follow-up questions, the impact of open and closed questions, how the interviewer challenges or supports a guest and the use of pauses and body language.
Another section encourages pupils to study speakers – listing Barack Obama, Eddie Izzard and Ronnie Corbett as possible subjects. Pupils are asked to consider how diction, register and rhetorical devices are used to create an impact, as well as the relevance of timing, pace, pauses and movement.
Bethan Marshall, senior lecturer in English at King’s College London, told the Times Educational Supplement said there was a risk that the syllabus would ignore the literary perspective of speech, but added: “Looking at spoken English and developing pupils’ consciousness of the spoken form is a very good thing.”
However, spokesman for the Plain English Campaign said: “I’m struggling to see the relevance of this. “Kids need a strong foundation for communicating in a useful way. This just confuses the issue.”
Warmists are consistent only in their Warmism
Britain’s Met Office warned that cities might become a lot warmer at night, which of course will kill old people:
In 30 years time the Met Office predicts that average temperature will have risen by 3.6F (2C), but that this will be accompanied by an increased frequency of extremely hot spells. In the summer of 2003, thousands more elderly people died than normal due to the hot weather. Across Europe, there were up to 35,000 “excess deaths”. This was largely due to high night time temperatures. When temperatures do not drop below 68F (20C), the body finds it harder to recover from the heat stress experienced during the day.
According to the Met, the cause of hot city nights is a combination of global warming and the urban heat island effect.
That would be the same urban heat island effect that the Met tried to disprove in 2004:
A major argument used by sceptics of global warming is flawed, a UK Met Office study in Nature magazine says. This argument maintains that much recorded climate data is inherently unreliable because of where weather instruments are situated. Most are in or near cities, which produce their own heat; so the rapid warming measured over the last century could be just a record of urbanisation. The Met Office believes its study shows this “urban heat island” idea is wrong.
The lesson is simple, when skeptics point to the urban heat island effect, they are flawed and wrong. When the urban heat island effect can be used to prop up the global warming hoax, it is sound science. Any questions?
U of East Anglia Learns Nothing — still in coverup mode
In breach of calls for openness and transparency in climate science, the University of East Anglia, together with Eugene Wahl and Caspar Amman, have refused to provide documents critical to the inquiry that Muir Russell should be undertaking.
One of the most notorious Climategate emails was Jones’ request to Mann, Briffa, Ammann and Wahl that they delete correspondence pertaining to AR4 review, which included correspondence carried out between Eugene Wahl and Keith Briffa in violation of IPCC procedures. Jones even told FOI Briffa that Briffa “should say” that no such correspondence existed.
The Climategate letters contain references to attachments to Wahl’s surreptitious correspondence with Briffa, but the attachments themselves were not included in the Climategate documents.
On April 5, 2010, I sent an EIR (FOI) request to the University of East Anglia for the attachments (as well as an attachment of the Wahl and Ammann version used in the First Order Draft, sent to Briffa directly and not now available at IPCC.) My request was as follows:
Pursuant to the Environmental Impact Regulations, I request copies of the following documents (reference is attached to Keith Briffa letter):
Wahl_MBH_Recreation_JClimLett_Nov22.pdf (attachment mentioned in Jan 4, 2005 458. 1104855751.txt)
Wahl-Ammann_3321_Figures.pdf; Wahl_Ammann_3321_Final_21Feb.doc – attachments mentioned in Feb 21, 2006 647. 1140568004.txt
Wahl_Ammann_3321_Final_21Feb-Revision1.doc – attachment mentioned in 650. 1140838402.txt Feb 24
AW_Editorial_July15.doc; AR4SOR_BatchAB_Ch06_ERW_comments.doc; Ch06_SOD_Text_TSU_FINAL_2000_12jul06_ERW_suggestions.doc – attachments to 716. 1153470204.txt July 18, 2006
Ch06_SOD_Text_TSU_FINAL_2000_25jul06KRB-FJ-RV_ERW_suggestions.doc – attachments to 733. 1155402164.txt from July 27, 2006
Thank you for your consideration, Regards, Steve McIntyre
On May 5, 2010, I received a response from UEA extending the response time
Further to your request for information received 5 April 2010, I am writing to advise you that we are, pursuant to Regulation 7(1) of the Environmental Information Regulations 2004, extending the statutory deadline for our response to your request from the 20 working days set out in Regulation 5(2) to the 40 working days allowed by Regulation 7(1). This will alter the deadline from 5 May 2010 to 2 June 2010. I apologise for the late notification of this extension but it was only this week that it became clear that we would require the extension.
This extension is claimed because of the age and relative obscure provenance of the information requested, we quite simply are having difficulty identifying and locating some of it. An initial search indicates that some of the information is not held but I wish to ensure that we have not overlooked any possible location prior to making that formal assertion.
It is my opinion that, at this particular time, it is impracticable to either comply with the request or to formulate any other response within the statutory period as set out in Regulation 5(2) We are addressing your request currently and I expect that we will be able to provide a substantive response in advance of the revised deadline.
Today, on the last day of the extension period, they refused virtually everything that I had requested….
I’ll post up a longer chronology showing precisely where the Wahl correspondence fits into Climategate – Mosher and Fuller and touch on it in CRUtape but additional context has emerged over time. The Wahl correspondence was undertaken in direct contravention of IPCC rules and procedures. Briffa knew that the correspondence violated IPCC rules – the correspondence is marked burn-after-reading. It’s quite natural that Wahl and Ammann (and CRU) want to keep these violations secret.
I’m sure that Muir Russell panelist David Eyton of BP understands.