At a WHO media briefing today, Keiji Fukuda, MD, the WHO’s assistant director-general for health security, emphasized that the rationale for any future move to pandemic alert phase 6 wouldn’t be based on disease severity, but rather on sustained outbreaks in more than one WHO region. On Apr 29 the WHO raised the pandemic alert to its current level, phase 5, which signifies sustained community outbreaks in two or more countries within one WHO region. May 4, 2009 The CDC will work with international health authorities to monitor the southern hemisphere’s flu season, beginning shortly, to see how the novel H1N1 strain behaves in competition with other flu viruses. “That will tell us a lot about whether the virus is changing and what measures we might want to take in the fall,” Besser said. The CDC will begin reporting “probable” cases of flu in addition to confirmed cases to give a better sense of the size of the US epidemic, acting director Dr. Richard Besser said Monday. In addition to the 286 confirmed cases, there are more than 700 probable cases in the United States. The World Health Organization (WHO) reported 1,085 confirmed cases of influenza A/H1N1 (swine flu) and 26 deaths in 21 countries as of 18:00 GMT (noon US EST) today, up from 985 cases in 20 countries reported earlier in the day. Mexico has reported 590 confirmed cases and 25 deaths. The WHO’s latest total reflects today’s updated US numbers from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which stand at 286 cases and 1 death. [WHO update 14] Tomorrow the WHO will host its second scientific teleconference to address clinical issues surrounding patients who have influenza A/H1N1 (swine flu) infections, the WHO’s Fukuda said today at a media briefing. The conference will allow scientists to share information on crucial topics such as disease severity. The topic of the first teleconference, held on Apr 29, was the influenza situation in Mexico.
Ben Ittensohn in high demand Paddington which was the only Brisbane suburb realestate.com.au expected to go back into the million-dollar median list by January.THESE three Queensland suburbs are housing the state’s next property millionaires, according to data crunched by realestate.com.au.According to realestate.com.au analysis of CoreLogic trends over the last three years, the next suburbs to cross the million-dollar median line mark a large triangle stretching from Central Queensland through to the New South Wales border and the capital city.For its sure bets to hit $1m median house prices in the next six months, REA backed Paddington in inner Brisbane, Castle Hill in Townsville and Tallebudgera in the southmost part of the Gold Coast.The first to cross the line to $1m was Townsville’s premier suburb, Castle Hill, which was expected to hit a seven digit median within the next two or so weeks.Its current median price was $950,000 with the forecast that it would be $1,040,105 in November.WEEKEND: Queenslanders galore on auction listBORROWING: Bank tightens loans on 91 suburbsTAX: Developers will be made to pay moreREA chief economist Nerida Conisbee said Townsville was starting to see a recovery from the mining downturn, which was “hitting premium suburbs first”.“This will likely extend to other suburbs over the next few years,” she said.Paddington in inner Brisbane, which was currently sitting on a median price just 2,000 below $1m, was expected to hit $1m in the new year. REA’s forecast was that Paddington would go to $1,000,452 in January.“In Brisbane, a million dollars still means something and you can still buy premium property in inner areas like Paddington,” Ms Conisbee said.More from newsParks and wildlife the new lust-haves post coronavirus1 day agoNoosa’s best beachfront penthouse is about to hit the market1 day agoThe third area expected to go off – Tallebudgera on the NSW-Queensland border – was currently sitting on $917,750, with a million-dollar date set for January too. REA expected it to go to a median of $1,015,569 in about 10 weeks.“We’re constantly seeing high levels of demand for Gold Coast – more people from Sydney are turning to Gold Coast for affordable lifestyle options.”That’s all good news for Ben Ittensohn, 38, who has lived in Paddington since he was 21 and was now bringing up his children there.“I think it will always be on a trajectory for growth because of its proximity to city,” he said. “Relative to other cities like Melbourne and Sydney, it’s amazing we’re still talking about the million dollar mark.”Mr Ittensohn has two properties in the suburb, both of which he planned to hold on to long term.“The investment property is a unit and units are not doing too well right now but we are looking long term. In the short term though it always rents really easy,” he said.“We’d love to upgrade our house next year or in years to come. Does that mean we can stay in Paddington? I really hope so. Maybe we might have to push out to Bardon and other suburbs. We wouldn’t be able to afford to have three properties in Paddington.”The best thing about the suburb, he said, was the stroll to Suncorp stadium. “I’m a big Broncos fan and being close to Suncorp is great. It’s very handy walking distance to the stadium.”undefined
In its opinion (judgment) on Wednesday, August 13, the Supreme Court took several drastic measures against senior lawyers and their clients, as part of effort to restore the credibility of the Judiciary.Some of those affected by Wednesday’s decision were Cllr. Musa Dean, Cllr. Nicholas Edward and their client, one Allen E. Brown.Dean and Edward are both senior counselors of the Supreme Bar and members of the Dean and Dean Law Firm.Cllrs Dean and Edward had filed a “Bill of Information” against the late Cllr. Emmanuel Kollie, the Judge, who heard the case between their client, Allen Brown and his wife Meata Huge Brown.A Bill of Information is a formal written accusation made by a prosecutor attorney charging a named person with a specific crime.Delivering the High Court’s opinion on the matter, Wednesday, Associate Justice Jamesetta H. Wolokolie publicly ordered that “Counselors Musa Dean and Nicholas Edward both of the Dean and Dean Law Firm are hereby fined US$500 each, which is to be paid within 72 hours. This is an abuse of the legal process.”She further stated that their punishment ranges from suspension, expulsion, fine and detention.“Because of the outbreak of the Ebola virus and our decision to decongest the prison center, we will not send them to jail,” Associate Justice Wolokolie stated.“They misinterpreted the domestic relationship law, in their Bill of Information filed before the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, on behalf of Allen Brown. Though, similar request was denied by then Justice in Chamber,” she disclosed. “But, they chose to disrespect the Chamber Justice and filed the bill directly to the Office of the Chief Justice,” she maintained.In furtherance of the High Court’s opinion, Justice Wolokolie ordered that “The request for the Bill of Information is hereby denied and the ruling of the Civil Law Court is confirmed.”She continued, “Mr. Brown is hereby ordered to pay US$30,000 to his wife, Mrs. Meata Huge Brown for failure to support her over the years, and also ordered to give her US$1,500 monthly.”In addition, the Associate Justice said, “There is no divorce proceeding between them, neither are they on separation.”In the bill, they were seeking the High Court’s approval to overturn a ruling of the Civil Law Court against their client, Brown.They alleged that the late Cllr. Emmanuel Kollie, then judge of the Civil Law Court, ruling against their client was in error.Their client Allen Brown was sued by his wife, Mrs. Meata Huge Brown, claiming non-persistence support.In her lawsuit, Mrs. Brown further alleged that she and her husband were still married, but he chose to deny her access to their properties.It was based on that, she complained to the court to compel her husband to give her little over US$22,000 for her monthly upkeep.However, after carefully listening to the case, Judge Kollie ruled in her favor and ordered Mr. Brown’s lawyers to negotiate with her for a better settlement.Instead, of negotiating with Mrs. Brown as was advised by Judge Kollie, both Dean and Edward advised their client not to do so and filed the bill.Share this:Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
A new report by safefood into Energy Drinks in Ireland has found a massive increase in the number of products on sale compared with 2002 and urges a ban on their sale to children under 16.The survey found Mountain Dew contained 16-and-a-half teaspoons of sugar and Monster Energy’s 500ml can had 14 teaspoons of sugar and the same amount of caffeine as a cup of espresso.The report also found that some brands cost less than €0.50 cent a can. Males aged 15-24 were the highest consumers of energy drinks (64%) and over half of those who consumed energy drinks (54%) consumed them at least once a week or more frequently.Introducing the research, Dr Cliodhna Foley-Nolan, Director, Human Health & Nutrition,safefood commented: “It’s really remarkable that these products are so prevalent and together, energy drinks and sports drinks now comprise more than 20% of the soft drinks market in Ireland.“Consumption can have health consequences because of their sugar and caffeine content.“A typical small 250ml can has sugar levels of 6 teaspoons per can which is equivalent to a full chocolate bar. The caffeine content is high and drinking two small cans and one small espresso of coffee drives an adult’s daily caffeine intake above recommended levels. “In addition, the use of energy drinks as a mixer with alcohol among young adults also has consequences in the context of Ireland’s current binge–drinking culture. safefood’s position continues to be that these drinks are not recommended as a mixer for alcoholic beverages but this is now common and part of the binge drinking culture prevalent particularly amongst our 15-24 year olds.”Operation Transformation’s GP Dr Ciara Kelly continued: “Mixing an energy drink which is a stimulant, with alcohol which is a depressant, is like driving a car with your feet on the accelerator and brake pedals at the same time; it stimulates a person so they actually end up drinking for longer as they may not be aware how drunk they really are.“GP surgeries and our A&E Departments have to deal with the effects of mixing energy drinks with alcohol. The cheap price, easy availability, aggressive marketing and consumption of these products bluntly show how far from responsible the industry truly is and why we need to ask ourselves some hard questions when it comes to their use.”While the majority of energy drink brands surveyed in the report comply with current labelling legislation, specific health claims are still made such as “contribute to the reduction of tiredness and fatigue”.Brands also make references to their appeal among “top athletes, students” and “in highly demanding professions” The safefood report found that the average price of an energy drink in Ireland was €1.09 however this cost ranged as low as €0.49 cent with supermarket own-brands being cheaper than branded products. The leading brands are also supported by extensive promotional campaigns particularly on digital and social media, with many brands hosting dozens of dedicated Twitter and Facebook accounts and marketing campaigns aimed specifically at active young people with a focus on high adrenalin activities and music.Media commentator and author Sheena Horgan said: “The increase in the number of energy and sports drink now available shows a marked trend in this category that accounted for almost €2 million in advertising spend last year – encompassing live events, sponsorships, promotion and digital and social activity.“My concern with such growth is twofold: firstly, regarding the implicit claims of some of the brands’ marketing around health and/or performance, either through words or image associations; and secondly, regarding the depth of the marketing carried out by some energy drink brands, which targets a young, and therefore impressionable audience.“In reality, in such a consumerist society as ours curtailing exposure to marketing is virtually impossible, however equipping young consumers with media literacy skills will empower them to balance their judgement against the ubiquity of marketing, and help them make informed and positive consumption decisions.” Dr Foley-Nolan added: “Safefood reiterate that energy drinks are also not suitable for children under 16 or for re-hydration purposes following sport.“Furthermore, the marketing of these products should be undertaken without any ambiguity or association with sport or alcohol. An awareness campaign of the potential health issues, targeted specifically at young people, is something that needs to happen.”DD HEALTH WATCH: SPORTS DRINKS ‘NOT SUITABLE’ FOR U16s was last modified: March 14th, 2016 by John2Share this:Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)Click to share on Skype (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window)Tags:dangersports drinksWarning