Surgeon sparks child HIV scare after using unsterilised scissors

I’m betting that Dr Samuel is one of the many “overseas trained” doctors in the NHS

A surgeon sparked a HIV scare for over 100 children after he failed to sterilise his scissors while operating on dozens of children.

Dr Madan Samuel was sacked by Addenbrooke’s Hospital, in Cambridge, after the blunder in March 2009 lead to 121 children being tested for the virus.

Dr Samuel denies failing to wear gloves while operating on the children during the tongue operations between 2004 and 2009. The incidents took place as he carried out surgery on “tongue tied” children at the hospital on 26 March 2009.

The procedure corrects a shortness of the tissue membrane connecting the tongue with the base of the mouth.

After discovering the mistake, which was later admitted by the surgeon, the hospital wrote to the parents of 121 children who had undergone the tongue operations since 2004 to offer blood tests.

It is thought none of the children contacted by the hospital tested positive for Hepatitis B, C or HIV.

In the letter sent to parents in April 2009, released under the Freedom of Information Act, the hospital’s medical director, Dr Jag Ahluwalia, said: “A recent review of practice has identified that a health care worker may have failed to properly utilise the sterile equipment which was available. “The sterilisation of instruments is done to eliminate the risk of transmitting infections.”

Dr Ahluwalia apologised to parents, saying: “Measures have been taken to prevent this from happening again.”

A General Medical Council hearing was told Dr Samuel also lied about the disciplinary investigation to get a job at Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust in January 2010. He answered “No” on an application form for employment when asked whether he was subject to fitness to practise investigations, had been removed from the Register or had had conditions placed on his registration.

The GMC committee found Dr Samuel guilty of failing to sterilise his scissors and lying on his application but will report its full findings and verdict next month.

A spokesman for Addenbrooke’s said: “We cannot comment on this disciplinary matter until any action that may be taken by the individual’s professional body reaches its conclusion.”


Britain’s intolerant and oppressive Left

Labour frontbencher Sadiq Khan should be thoroughly ashamed of his despicable, though utterly predictable, ­attack on David Cameron. Far from bolstering the Far Right, the Prime Minister has commendably reclaimed the debate about state-­sponsored multiculturalism. His speech was measured and not in the slightest way inflammatory.

For too long, anyone who has questioned this pernicious doctrine has been smeared as ‘racist’. Labour spent a decade and a half trashing those who expressed ­concerns about unlimited immigration and the refusal of some ethnic groups to integrate into British society.

And as a consequence, decent people found themselves smeared as extremists and a minority regrettably sought refuge in the arms of the BNP. Some of those same people are now ­flirting with the street thugs of the English Defence League. It’s because they feel they have nowhere else to go.

But be under no illusion, Nick Griffin is the bastard son of Jack Straw and every other Left-wing politician who has consistently tried to close down debate on this sensitive subject and routinely rubbished their opponents as racists and ‘Little Englanders’.

Falsely accusing someone of racism is as repellent as racism itself. But Khan will keep his job. You can hurl the most vile smears at anyone these days, provided you insert the word ‘Tory’.

Take the case of the Conservative MP Paul Maynard, who suffers from cerebral palsy and was cruelly mocked by Labour members in the Commons. Can you begin to imagine the reaction if some Conservatives had abused a disabled Labour MP?

They’ll get away with it, though, because he’s a ‘Tory’, so deserves all the contempt he gets. If the lads from Top Gear had insulted Tories instead of Mexicans they would have been hailed as heroes by the Left.

Most of the real hatred and bitterness in Britain comes from those who noisily ­proclaim their own ‘tolerance’ and are quickest to take offence at any real or ­perceived slight. After ‘homophobe’, ‘Islamophobe’, ‘sexist’ and ‘racist’, ‘Tory’ is their favourite slur.

Last week a moderate students’ union leader in Leeds was subjected to a barrage of abuse from demonstrators who called him ‘Tory Jew scum’ — despite him being neither Jewish nor a Conservative. But like ‘Tory’, ‘Jew’ is now an acceptable insult on the Left. So virulent is their hatred of Israel that all Jews are ­considered fair game.

As I exposed in a TV documentary a couple of years ago, the worrying rise in anti-semitism in Britain stems from an unholy alliance between the fascist Left and ­militant Islam.

If these protesters had been screaming ‘Muslim scum’ there would have been a whole host of arrests, questions in the House and a Panorama special on the BBC.

You might expect the Labour leader to have a view on this. Yet Ed Miliband, who is himself Jewish, has stayed silent. His energies are employed in denouncing the wicked ‘Tory cuts’.

There’s an entire industry devoted to seeking out offence and persecuting people for inoffensive remarks. In Wiltshire, a health watchdog has had its funding withdrawn because its chairman was overheard referring to ‘jungle drums’ at a ­public meeting in a local scout hut.

What unites these seemingly different examples of the Prime Minister, a disabled Tory MP, the students’ leader and the lady from the Wiltshire health watchdog is that all are victims of modern-day, Left-wing witch-hunts.

We live in an age when all language is monitored as closely as it was in Communist East Germany and careers are ruined at the drop of a so-called ‘offensive’ remark. Yet the self-appointed moral guardians of the Left believe they have a divine right to hurl whatever slanders they like provided they simultaneously proclaim their own goodness.

So it’s OK to monster ‘Tories’ and ‘Jews’ and make false, hurtful ­allegations of ‘racism’ against a thoroughly decent and selfless 70-year-old woman just as long as your heart is in the right place.

While the Prime Minister is big enough and ugly enough to handle the rough and tumble of political abuse, Mrs Farquhar has had her life turned upside down.

There will be no sanction against Sadiq Khan, or those Labour MPs who mocked Paul Maynard’s ­disability. The demonstrators who called the student leader ‘Tory Jew scum’ will not be prosecuted.

And the smearmonger from the Wiltshire Racial Equality Council will not be forced to apologise and will continue to seek out racism where none exists.

No doubt Sonia Carr considers Mrs Farquhar a symbol of ‘old’ Britain and therefore a perfectly legitimate target for vilification. She’s probably also suspected of voting Tory.


BBC bias still thriving

After failing to bounce the Lib Dems into a ‘progressive’ coalition with Labour, the BBC set itself up as the official opposition to the new Government.

Day after day, horror stories about the ‘cuts’ dominate the Corporation’s news bulletins.

The BBC could choose to report on the massive waste in local government and the 20 per cent pay rises enjoyed by council middle managers, whose ranks and remuneration have swollen under Labour and now cost us £2.8billion a year in wages alone.

It could draw attention to the vast sums of money frittered away on useless and time-­consuming bureaucracy in the police.

But instead it focuses on library closures and Labour’s ludicrous claims that thousands of police are to be sacked and we’re all going to be murdered in our beds because of the ‘cuts’.

All news organisations have an agenda tailored to their own audience. But the BBC isn’t a commercial operation. It is paid for by a poll tax, enforced by law. It has a duty to be ­impartial, yet pumps out a diet of Labour-friendly, political propaganda.

NPR is no better, being hopelessly skewed to the Democrats. But it’s financed by public subscription, not by a licence fee.

The BBC does many good things, but it takes its news agenda from the Guardian, one of Britain’s worst-selling, loss-making newspapers.

While the row over Rupert ­Murdoch buying out the whole of Sky rumbles on, two-thirds of people still get their news from the BBC.

Ten million homes voluntarily subscribe to Sky, so why not to the Beeb? Some people think subscription would spell the end of the BBC. No doubt the poor and minorities would be hardest hit.



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.

2 Responses to

  1. Ignatius Sancho says:

    I see, hiding behind the old white slavers excuse that as you do not find the term offensive ergo it cannot be offensive. I am sure your ancestors were likewise not offended by slavery and therefore my Negro ancestors should not have been either?

    Jungle drums is a despicable term harkening back to the days when whites thought Negroes were primitive savages. Clearly some still do.

  2. Ignatius Sancho says:

    I have a quite wicked sense of humour and I was of course joking in the above comment. I do get a perverse delight in poking white guilt to see what happens. Invariably it is the same reaction and it does indeed sadden me when white people just lay down whenever a person of colour decides to get frothy at the mouth and rant and rave. The woman in the article was wrong, and I was wrong in what I said above; you, or someone should have taken me to task for it. White people should stand up and be counted when they know something is wrong, regardless of the ‘injured party’s’ colour, they certainly would with a white racist. We campaigned for generations for equality, that means equal, not racial superiority. The idea was that we’d be treated the same, not that the white man would cow down at the black mans will. White people don’t get offended at every turn, why should we have that privilege?

    You were quite correct, ‘jungle drums’ is not offensive in any way shape or form, this Sonia Carr is the racist. I truly abhor people like her, who I find no better than the white racists, filled with hate and merely looking for an opportunity to hang blame around the necks of the people they hate.

    There are people like this of every colour, however the white ones are marginalised, ridiculed and outcasts, whereas those of colour end up on race relation councils!

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