FSM

Like the ones in 1918 and 1957?

That’ll be the ones made by PPE medpro then…. 😀

The numbers on that aren’t even correct. Average doses for best quartile is 1.73 not 1.61. Someone divided total by 13 but there’s only 12 in that column. 🙂 more importantly : Correlation. Does. Not. Equal. Causation.

Clue is in the name…”Labour” party. A political party founded on the notion of supporting those who work for a living. same with the tory party… “As a political term, Tory was an insult (derived from the Middle Irish word tóraidhe, modern Irish tóraí, meaning "outlaw", "robber"”

Ah. Come on. I’m a 51 year old doctor. The only time in my living memory when the health service worked anything like it should is 1997 - 2010. It’s conservative ethos to dismantle the NHS. Always has been. Boils my piss that people keep voting for these jokers cos they think they’re middle class and the tories will look after them. Wake up.

https://www.gov.im/media/1373642/gp-2020-contract-blank.pdf

US fluid ounce is slightly bigger…By about 1ml.

1/5 gill = 1 fluid oz = 28.4ml

Yes I understand. But his admission was proven untrue by the prosecution’s own expert, so should be disbelieved anyway. To then use that admission as a basis for “proving” him guilty seems wrong to me, but I’m not a lawyer. Not clutching at straws but I’m with Mr Bumble on this one.

But if admissions clearly and provably untrue? He could have had ten pints the night before, or two ( or ten) just before driving) His “admission” was a lie. Prosecution chose to assume theformer scenario. If he had a lot just before driving levels would be increasing for up to 2 hours(UK official guidance) back calculation shouldn’t be used if levels may still be on increase. If prosecution are using his account as gospel, 2 pints night before would be undetectable so clearly not a safe basis to make a calculation?

Don’t agree, and neither does official UK guidance https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/915637/220_Alcohol_Back_Calculation_v2.0.pdf back calculations absolutely do depend on what and when he claims to have imbibed.(which he obviously lied about) alcohol level may continue to increase for between 30 minutes and 2 hours after consumption. Chap stopped by police, scared , just had 2 pints, says he had a drink the night before. Clearly lied. Prosecution assumes he drank a lot more than he admits to the night before. Assumption, unproven. Not denying it’s likely the prosecution is right but standard of proof is beyond reasonable doubt isn’t it?

I know. But back calculations only usually used in the UK in cases of death or serious injury or if defence of post incident consumption invoked. Assumptions are just that. Defendant clearly lied about his consumption so all assumptions and consequent calculations should be invalid. If he had 2 pints just before driving and lied about it, his levels would be on the way up and might never have reached the limit. He obviously lied about how much and when he drank so to base a calculation on clearly incorrect information seems suspect at best. Not defending him but to convicions based on unproven suppositions shouldn’t happen.

There is a limit, or there isn’t. Bullshit science. Only proven is the level when the test is done. If he was under he should walk. Agree he’s lied about his consumption. 2 pints the night before would be undetectable. But if he drank 2 pints just before driving levels could be on the way up, not down.

Our resident trauma surgeon might want to answer this.. Currently, I imagine a UK trauma centre would provide more exposure to managing these types of injuries. Otherwise, junior doctors are a heterogenous group. Some want to work in tertiary centres managing the rare and unusual, others relish being a part of the life of a small community. There are a thousand places in the UK which provide the latter, without the inconveniences of the IOM

Definitely. We all learn something new almost every day. My patients are my greatest teachers. This week I have seen 3 patients with a condition which had me reaching for the textbooks and making notes for future reference. That’s a fairly average week.If the CPD requirement suddenly changed to 200 hours I don’t think I’d have a problem meeting it. We also train medical students and junior doctors, teaching someone else always teaches you about yourself.