Pneumonia tragedy of girl sent home by three doctors who told parents to give her headache remedy (paracetamol)

Indifferent NHS doctors kill again. If she’d just been put on oxygen promptly, she might have survived

A toddler died of pneumonia after her parents were told by three doctors to take her home and give her Calpol. Leanne and Andrew Wright took 15-month-old Eloise to their GP twice, repeatedly called NHS Direct and took her to casualty twice.

But only when Eloise began struggling for breath did a hospital doctor finally realise what was wrong. Tragically, by then it was too late, an inquest heard. Eloise was rushed to a children’s hospital near her home in Grappenhall, Cheshire, but died less than an hour later with her parents by her side.

When contacted by the Daily Mail, Mr and Mrs Wright said they had been left ‘devastated and heartbroken’ by her death. ‘Eloise was a beautiful, bubbly little girl,’ said the couple, who have a one-year-old son Ethan. ‘We feel let down by the treatment. ‘If she had been admitted during our first visit to A&E, her condition could have been properly monitored and she could possibly have been saved.’

The inquest in Liverpool heard that Eloise fell ill after Christmas 2008 with a cough and cold. On New Year’s Eve, Mrs Wright, a 28-year-old teacher, took her to their GP. He diagnosed a virus and told her mother to give Eloise the children’s paracetamol Calpol.

But her condition worsened and Mrs Wright took her back to the surgery. A second doctor told her mother to continue with Calpol.

The following day, January 2, Eloise had a high temperature and was very pale. Mr and Mrs Wright called their out-of-hours clinic, which advised them to take Eloise to A&E at Warrington Hospital.

She was seen by a doctor who also sent her home with Calpol. By midnight, Eloise was struggling for breath and at 4am, her parents took her back to casualty. She was connected to a machine to monitor her oxygen levels and her chest was X-rayed. Medics discovered a shadow on her left lung and diagnosed pneumonia.

When consultant Nisar Mir saw the readings from the machine a few hours later, he said her oxygen levels were low. Eloise was taken to Alder Hey Children’s Hospital, Liverpool, but died that evening.

Dr Omnia Marzouk, clinical director of paediatric emergencies at Alder Hey, told the hearing it was ‘not easy’ to diagnose early pneumonia. She said the ‘virulence and rapidity’ of the infection made it unlikely Eloise could have been saved even if treated earlier.

Coroner Andre Rebello recorded a verdict of death by natural causes.

The Wrights, who are expecting their third child, have instructed clinical negligence specialists Pannone and Partners to take legal action against ­Warrington Hospital.

A hospital spokesman said: ­‘Nothing could have been done to prevent the tragic outcome.’


Special report: Will the white British population be in a minority in 2066?

When future historians consider the most significant legacy of 13 years of New ­Labour rule, what will they decide upon? Chapter upon chapter will focus on the spending binge and subsequent debt crisis. Likewise, much will be written on the weakening of this country’s moral authority in the world, caused by the last government’s shameful complicity in torture, and military misadventure in Iraq.

But, in an article for this month’s left-of-centre Prospect magazine, the Oxford University academic Professor David Coleman indicates the longest-lasting impact on society may well be something else: the demographic upheaval brought about by the policy of mass immigration.

To quote Prof Coleman, an expert in population change, ‘the inflows of the last decade’ — which took place with no debate, or public mandate — ‘have been more sudden and on a bigger scale than ever before’.

And if they continue on a similar scale, he says ‘they will transform the demography of this country’ to the extent that, in the lifetime of a young person alive today, the ‘white British population’ will become a minority group. It is a startling, controversial assertion — but so are the figures on which Prof Coleman bases his claim.

At this point it should be stressed that the professor, a government adviser who is one of Britain’s foremost experts on demographics, is hugely respected for his academic ­rigour and for the avoidance of ­emotion and prejudice in his work.

As recently as 1998, he points out, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) projected that the UK population would peak at about 65 million in 2051, and then slowly decline. Yet the latest projection — revised by the ONS in 2008 to take into account the unprecedented levels of net migration under Labour— expected Britain’s population to rise to 77 million by 2051, and to 85 million by 2083. To put this in simple terms, it is the equivalent to adding the population of the Netherlands to the UK by 2050.

Moreover, if Britain continues along current trends, with net immigration staying at its long-term level of around 180,000 a year, the make-up of the country will change dramatically.

The white British-born ­population — defined by Prof Coleman as white English, Welsh, Scottish and Irish-born citizens — would decline from 80 per cent of the total now to 59 per cent in 2051.

Further into the future, and also taking into account factors such as changing birth and death rates, the ‘white British population’ would become the minority after about 2066.
Many observers will question the definition of ‘white British’ or consider it anachronistic or irrelevant. If you are British, it really does not matter what colour or race you are

Britain will become — as Prospect magazine’s headline puts it — a ‘majority minority’ country. ‘Majority minority’ is a phrase designed to encapsulate the fact that groups traditionally viewed as being in the minority will, when combined, become the majority. This is something that has already happened in two London boroughs (Tower Hamlets and Newham), with six more local council areas projected to join them by 2031, according to the Greater London Authority.

Many observers will question the definition of ‘white British’, or consider it anachronistic or irrelevant. If you are British, it really does not matter what colour or race you are. However, it is the official classification used by academics to gauge the pace of change, and the impact which immigration is having on society.

And, as a YouGov opinion poll revealed this week, it is also something that appears deeply to concern the British public. Asked what their opinion would be, should Prof Coleman’s projection about the make-up of Britain post-2066 prove accurate, 73 per cent of the public said they would feel ‘unhappy’.

Some 85 per cent of Tory ­voters hold this view. Interestingly, so do 67 per cent of Labour supporters and 55 per cent of Lib Dems — the two parties widely considered to promote open-door immigration policies. Only a fifth of the public said they would be neither happy nor unhappy. Two per cent, or one in every 50 people, said they would be ‘happy’.

The primary reason there is such widespread concern about immigration is the belief that Britain simply does not have the infrastructure or ­public services to cope with such a rapidly growing population. More than two million new homes will have to be built over the next 25 years for immigrants — a figure that may not be possible to achieve.

The alternative will be more cramped living standards, or increased prices because ­supply cannot meet demand. Water supply in the South-East, in particular, would come under enormous strain.

In schools, the MigrationWatch think-tank, with which Prof Coleman does research, estimates that more than a million additional places will be needed over the next ­decade, at a cost of £100 billion – an extraordinary sum, at a time of government spending restraint.

The worry is that if adequate schooling cannot be provided for the children of immigrants, they will be unable to learn English and prosper in the same way that past generations of new arrivals have done or fully integrate into society.

Which leads to the main issue raised by Prof Coleman’s ­article: how to manage the ‘enormous change to national identity — cultural, political, economic and religious’ which would be brought about by ‘white ­Britons’ becoming a minority group.

The fear is that the scale of the population increase will not provide sufficient time for proper integration between different cultures and religions. Of course, had the last government chosen to pursue a policy of integration, there may be far fewer grounds for concern.

The new Coalition Government faces the huge challenge of trying to promote integration, particularly among Muslim communities who, under Labour were only ever spoken to in the context of counter terrorism. But instead, it wedded itself to the failed doctrine of multiculturalism which almost encourages immigrant communities to live in social and cultural isolation with little attempt to integrate them into the host community.

It was this that led to the social tensions that erupted into riots in the early years of this decade in northern towns such as Bradford and Oldham.

Significantly, an official inquiry by the former local government chief Ted Cantle blamed this state-approved policy of allowing communities to lead ‘parallel lives’ for the social unrest.

When Labour finally realised there was an urgent need to foster a sense of ‘Britishness’ among newcomers, their ­proposals to achieve this were utterly inadequate. For example, there was the belated introduction of the so-called Life In The UK test for foreign nationals seeking a British passport. Yet this eschewed questions on British history in favour of risible sections on how to claim welfare benefits.

Then there was the idea of a ‘Britishness Day’ to be the focal point of a campaign for ‘stronger shared standards’ — a ‘celebration of what we like and love about living in this country’ — with street parties, carnivals and sporting events. But the idea fell flat and was abandoned by ministers.

Now the new Coalition ­Government faces the huge challenge of ­trying to promote ­integration, particularly among Muslim communities who, under Labour, were only ever spoken to in the context of counter-­terrorism policy. For example, after the July 7 London bombings, parents were asked to spy on their sons and daughters for signs of extremism or radicalisation.

It is not an exaggeration to say that there is no more daunting or important task for the future happiness and wellbeing of this country than developing a sense of shared British identity.

The urgency for this is underlined by this week’s YouGov poll, which graphically reveals that the overwhelming majority of the public appears not to ­support the rapid demographic change that is under way.

According to Prof Coleman: ‘In Britain, judging by the opposition to high immigration reported in opinion polls over recent years, it seems likely that such developments [the “majority minority” scenario] would be unwelcome.’ However he notes: ‘Some argue that a changed population would be for the better, and in any case inevitable in a globalised world.

So long as there was an adequate degree of integration, a more diverse population would be more creative, innovative, stimulating, open-minded and tolerant.’ This, says the professor, is a view ‘that has become orthodox among the educated elite, though not with the UK population as a whole’.

Prof Coleman’s comments chime with the anger of a large rump of the public at never ­having been consulted by politicians over a policy that allowed three million migrants to enter the UK between 1997 and 2010.

New Labour’s 1997 manifesto, offering not a clue to the future, said disingenuously that ‘every country must have firm control over immigration and Britain is no exception.

Certainly, Tories have long believed that Labour encouraged mass immigration in the belief that as newcomers to a nation tend to be more Left-wing, Labour’s electoral chances would be enhanced.

Meanwhile, in the absence of proper debate or consultation with the British people, odious far-Right groups were able to cynically capitalise on the sense of alienation felt by working-class voters in particular.

If Prof Coleman’s views have one dominant theme, it is that the same mistakes must not be repeated. (And it is encouraging to note that his thought-provoking ­article should be published by a Left-leaning magazine, suggesting that — finally — we may be moving to a time when adult discussion of immigration policy is considered possible.)

The Oxford academic rightly stresses that his population ­projections are just predictions. If the Coalition shows the political will to reduce net migration — the difference between the number of people arriving in the UK and those leaving — to the ‘tens of thousands’, his ­scenario of Britain post-2066 will not happen. The growth in population would be significantly reduced.

Conservative ministers have made a strong start, despite having to fight a constant turf war with their Lib Dem partners who — seemingly misjudging the mood of their own supporters — continue to want open-door policies. Yet their task keeps getting harder and harder, with the ONS this week revealing that net migration, in the last year of Labour rule, was 215,000 — around 35,000 a year more than the assumptions used by Prof Coleman.

Meanwhile, Labour does not yet appear to have found the resolve to change course. Ed Miliband, the new party leader, admits ‘losing touch’ with the voters over immigration. But, in almost the same breath, he allows his MPs to attack the Coalition’s plans to impose a cap on economic migration, with the aim of reducing work visas by a fifth.

Referring to his scenario for 2066 onwards, Prof Coleman writes: ‘If the changes projected here came to pass, they would be perhaps the biggest unintended consequence of government action — or inaction — in our history.

‘It would be curious if embarrassment or demographic ignorance permitted an old society to marginalise itself in its own homeland without discussing it.

‘In a democracy it is surely appropriate, at the very least, for these considerations, for good or ill, to be at the forefront of debate on migration — not the short-term interests of employers and others grown dependent on migration in our distorted economy.’

Whatever the view a person holds on immigration, nobody should disagree with his desire to see the subject fully — and maturely — debated.

When properly controlled, there is much to celebrate and promote about immigration. It brings expertise and industry to the economy, and enriches ­everything from cuisine to our music, culture and theatre.

But the way the last government circumvented the electorate over immigration policy, while silencing any dissenting voices with cries of racism, was an insult to democracy.


Angry British boss walks through police cordon and grabs ‘bomb’ to prove it’s just bag of old clothes (and is arrested under the Terrorism Act)

This is so typical of official British stupidity. How is it terrorism to show that there is no danger? It seems the opposite of terorism to me. In a decent country he would be praised. But “proper procedure” is all in Britain — JR

A businessman has been charged under the Terrorism Act after he broke through a police cordon and tipped open two suspect packages to prove they were harmless.

James Mullan ducked under police tape and emptied old clothes and shoes from bags left in Ipswich town centre after become frustrated by the lengthy wait for a bomb scare to be resolved.

Mullan, a watch repairman, was given a conditional discharge at South East Suffolk magistrates’ court after his ‘reckless’ behaviour last month.

Police closed the market on the Cornhill in Ipswich and evacuated nearby buildings and a market after the bags were found abandoned at 2.30pm on November 17.

Mullan, of Kesgrave, Suffolk, became upset about the closure continuing while police waited for an Army bomb disposal team to arrive from Colchester, Essex. And at 5.10pm he took the law into his own hands and dodged around police to open the bags in a council customer service centre beside the town hall.

The 62-year-old was arrested when he emerged from the office and told police that the bags were harmless.

The watch repairman said he had become frustrated by a perceived lack of police activity during the drama and wanted to resolve the situation himself. The court heard how a number of market traders had also become frustrated because they were losing trade.

Jeremy Kendall, defending Mullan, said: ‘The defendant knew from previous experience that a bomb disposal team would have to come up from Colchester and he wanted to act sooner.

‘He went through the cordon and into the building and opened the bags which were full of clothes and shoes. ‘What he did was stupid,’ Mr Kendall admitted. ‘Had the device been explosive then he would clearly have endangered his own safety. But he felt there was an unexplained delay and wanted to help, not hinder. ‘Ironically, he did help the operation by revealing there was nothing explosive there.’

Mullan admitted a charge of breaking through a police cordon, an offence under Section 36 (2) of the Terrorism Act 2000. District Judge David Cooper gave him a conditional discharge for a year and ordered him to pay £85 costs. Judge Cooper told him: ‘You were reckless and impatient. As an upstanding member of the community you must abide by police cordons.’

The court heard how police reopened the area to the public at 5.30pm after Mullan’s actions proved the rucksack and holdall did not contain explosives.


Anger as British schools drop Christian assemblies in favour of multi-faith sessions or ‘moments of reflection’

Such assemblies once offered moral guidance

Christians have criticised the growing number of schools which have dropped their traditional assemblies in favour of multi-faith sessions or ‘moments of reflection’ which include children staring at rocks, meditating or discussing the news.

More than 140 primary and secondary schools across Britain have won the right to opt out of the legal requirement to provide a daily act of worship which is ‘broadly Christian’ in character.

Several hold Islamic assemblies with readings from the Koran, while others hold sessions giving weeksequal prominence to all faiths and sometimes incorporate events such as Black History Month and Chinese New Year.

The disclosure that so many schools have ditched the Christian service has upset traditionalists. Mike Judge, of The Christian Institute, said: ‘It is part of an attempt to airbrush Christianity from public life. Of course it is important to be sensitive to other faiths but I think all children should be made aware of our Christian heritage. It is as much part of our island story as 1066 and the Battle of Hastings.

‘A lot of Muslim parents don’t mind their children learning about the nature of Christianity. I think it’s a question of other people being offended on their behalf.’

Schools which no longer feel a Christian assembly is relevant to their pupils can seek permission to opt out from their local authority Standing Advisory Council for Religious Education (SACRE), which is made up of council representatives and local faith representatives.

Schools must provide an alternative form of worship. The highest number of opt-outs, which are also known as determinations, are in areas where there are a large number of ethnic minority residents.

Bradford, West Yorkshire, which has a large Muslim community, has the highest number of opt-outs at 47. In 40 of these schools pupils attend one assembly a week which is devoted to Islam and four other sessions which have a multi-faith approach. In the other seven schools there are five multi-faith sessions.

An increasing number of schools in London are also changing the nature of their assemblies. In the past five years 37 schools in the London borough of Brent have made successful applications to their local SACRE committees.

In Ealing, where 12 schools have opt-outs, one school head proposed introducing a ‘thought spot’ with children reflecting on a single object on a table such as
a candle, a rock or an artefact.


British Labour party’s failure on schools exposed: Billions spent, but standards plunge to a new low

If you base your policies on wrong theories, you will not get the results you expect

Britain plummeted down the world education league under Labour, despite the millions poured into schools. A major international study will reveal next week that in less than a decade our schools have nosedived in rankings of teenagers’ performance in reading, maths and science.

Previous studies have shown how the UK slid 16 places in maths between 2000 and 2006 and ten places in science and reading, leaving our schools trailing smaller nations such as Estonia and Liechtenstein.

Education experts are predicting that the latest snapshot of school standards, which is being published on Tuesday, will fail to show an improvement. There are claims our place in the tables – based on tests taken by 15-year-olds in 64 nations – could be worse than in 2006.

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development created its Programme for International Student Assessment in 2000. In that year, Britain came seventh in reading, eighth in maths and fourth in science. Three years later our schools were ranked 11th, 18th and 12th respectively.

By 2006, Britain had fallen further, to 17th, 24th and 14th. Education Secretary Michael Gove has used previous international studies to attack Labour’s record. He is likely to renew his assault when the latest findings are published next week.

The findings will cause renewed concern that extra resources ploughed into schools since 2000 have been swallowed up in red tape and ill-conceived initiatives. Tony Blair’s mantra when he came to power in 1997 was education, education, education. But a recent analysis suggested that schools’ productivity – taxpayers’ value for money – slumped by 6.7 per cent between 2000 and 2009. Over the same period, education spending nearly doubled from £35.8billion to £71billion.

One of the architects of Labour’s numeracy strategy – designed to raise maths standards in primary schools – said he believes next week’s international study ‘won’t be good for England’, although it would continue to be ahead of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

Professor David Reynolds told the Times Educational Supplement: ‘Little has happened that would have changed what was a downward trajectory in England’s performance.’

The professor, now an education academic at Plymouth University, said 15-year-olds who took the latest OECD tests would have benefited from Labour’s multi-billion pound initiatives aimed at boosting performance in the three Rs. But he added: ‘I don’t believe the strategies necessarily had the kind of legs that one might have expected.’

Professor Reynolds admitted efforts to improve patchy maths knowledge among teachers had come ‘a wee bit late’.

Other critics say next week’s rankings will also cast fresh doubt on year-on-year increases in GCSE and A-level grades.

Ministers want to introduce a set of school league tables to help parents judge standards for five-year-olds in school reception and nursery classes. At present they are assessed on 13 subjects, but these are only published at national and local authority level.


Permanently entrenched liberalism for Britain?

Three parties sharing a liberal consensus

The monstrous birth of a new Liberal Conservative Party is now certain. One of its midwives is Sir John Major of Maastricht and Black Friday.

A few weeks ago I drew attention to the amazing remarks of Francis Maude, a close ally of David Cameron, who said he would prefer a coalition to a Tory majority after the next Election. I am sure Mr Cameron agrees with this. Now, Sir John – another close Cameron ally – has called for a permanent alliance of two of our three parties against the people of Britain.

Not that he put it quite like that. In a little-noticed but important speech in Cambridge, he said that he liked the Coalition and hoped some way could be found ‘to prolong co-operation beyond this Parliament’. This, he said, could lead to a realignment of British politics.

He recalled that the Tories had an informal pact with the Liberals in 1951, which probably saved that party from oblivion. He didn’t say – but most Liberals know – that they will need something similar to save them from massacre at the next Election.

This is revolutionary stuff. And I am grateful to Mr Major, whose strange, mealy, roundabout way of speaking often reveals more than he means it to. Because he also explained the attraction of coalitions – to politicians: ‘Two parties are more likely to enjoy a tolerant electorate for policies that are painful.’

Or, in other words, that a coalition can ram through unpopular policies (Mr Major is an expert on those) more easily than one-party governments.

This is, of course, even more the case when the third party actually agrees with the Coalition about almost everything, and is still trying to work out how to pretend to be the Opposition, when it doesn’t really want to oppose.

What a perfect outcome for the political class – two liberal parties in permanent power, pro-EU, pro-crime, anti-education, anti-marriage, warmist. And an Opposition that doesn’t oppose. A pity about the rest of us.


It had to happen eventually: Roast dinners now under attack

This is all just theory by “campaigners”. There is absolutely no evidence of harm coming from roast dinners. But there IS harm coming from low salt usage. Salt is an important preservative and one of the safest. Food can spoil without it

High levels of salt in Sunday roasts are putting Britons at risk of deadly heart disease and strokes, according to a study by health campaigners. A survey of 600 roast lunches in supermarkets and pub chains found that they can contain up to one and a half times the maximum recommended adult daily intake of salt.

“Sunday lunch is an iconic British meal but filling it with salt puts both adults and children at risk of developing high blood pressure,” said Professor Graham MacGregor, a leading expert in cardiovascular medicine and chairman of Consensus Action on Salt and Health (CASH), which carried out the research. “I don’t want supermarkets and restaurants to add the unnecessary amounts of salt still being hidden in our food.”

He said eating one less gram of salt per day would save 6,000 lives a year.

The study found that a ‘peppered beef brisket joint with mustard & pepper stuffing’ from Asda’s new ‘Chosen By You’ range contains 2.3g of salt per portion, one third of the recommended adult daily maximum of 6 grams and more than the 2.1g found in a McDonald’s Big Mac.

A large half roast chicken meal from a J D Wetherspoon pub contains eight grams of salt. Even a children’s roast chicken breast meal contains four grams close to the recommended daily maximum for a 7-10-year-old of five grams.

Pre-prepared vegetable dishes contained up to 1.6g of salt per portion (Tesco Finest root vegetable mash) and roast potatoes contained up to 1.3g of salt per portion (Tesco Finest goose fat roast potatoes).

A portion of Morrisons or Tesco English Mustard contains 0.5g of salt – as much as a packet of crisps.

If the saltiest ingredients found in the survey were used to make a Sunday lunch it would add up to 9.6g per person, 60 per cent higher than an adult’s recommended daily maximum.

However, Peter Sherratt, of the Salt Association, which represents the salt industry, described CASH as “extremists”, adding: “There is not enough evidence to prove a link between salt and high blood pressure. “Besides, one of the great enjoyments in life is food and the way it tastes and that sometimes means seasoning.”

But Katharine Jenner, campaign manager for CASH said: “With all we know about the dangers of salt on our health, it is disappointing that a portion of vegetables or a small amount of mustard could still contain more salt than a packet of crisps.”

Julian Hunt, director of communications at the Food and Drink Federation said: “This research does a huge disservice to a great British tradition. The Sunday roast is a time when families sit together to enjoy a hearty and healthy meal compiled from a wide range of fresh ingredients.

“British food manufacturers are leading the world when it comes to changing the recipes of their products to contain less salt. Those who want a lower salt option can find one simply by looking at the labels.”

A spokeswoman for Asda said: “We all love a traditional Sunday roast, especially now the weather has got a bit nippy. We always clearly label all our food so customers can see at a glance what’s in it. “We all need to watch the amount of salt we eat and we have worked hard to ensure that all our own-label food is not only delicious but adheres to the FSA targets on salt content, which we achieved two years ahead of the 2010 deadline.

“In 2008, we removed 280 tonnes of fat, 284 tonnes of saturated fat, 521 tonnes of sugar & another 83 tonnes of salt from our food.”

A spokesman for JD Wetherspoon said: “We are working closely with food suppliers, development chefs and the Food Standards Agency to reduce the amount of salt in all of our meals.”



About jonjayray

I am former member of the Australia-Soviet Friendship Society, former anarcho-capitalist and former member of the British Conservative party. The kneejerk response of the Green/Left to people who challenge them is to say that the challenger is in the pay of "Big Oil", "Big Business", "Big Pharma", "Exxon-Mobil", "The Pioneer Fund" or some other entity that they see, in their childish way, as a boogeyman. So I think it might be useful for me to point out that I have NEVER received one cent from anybody by way of support for what I write. As a retired person, I live entirely on my own investments. I do not work for anybody and I am not beholden to anybody
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s