"Look from your side to this side, see these white cliffs and we're looking across at you feeling we want to be together and we will be together before long I'm sure."
Nuclear apocalypse is coming; the job market is destroyed; the genocide is ongoing; food prices continue to rise; gas and energy are unaffordable.
Some Labour MP: Oi, you, you better not be having oral sex.
Quite revealing that Labour will work happily with the Tories or even Reform but are determined to turn Green Party opposition to a genocide into a local political football.
Andy Burnham. Keir Starmer. The Labour Party still feels very Peter Mandleson.
https://t.co/i9idDx4vyY
"As a rule, GPs like to be helpful and are trained to be patient centred, so it’s difficult to say no, but this is often what we need to do."
Helen Salisbury writes on learning to say no to patient requests
https://t.co/nDbZ8nDp5q
We’re on the verge of a nuclear war, AI-hacking of critical national infrastructure and planetary environmental collapse; but Andy Burnham’s priority is forcing local councillors to pledge their loyalty towards the racist ideology of a genocidal settler-colony in the Middle East.
I have a small request to make from the whole world, regarding language:
Let's stop using the term 'South Lebanon' or 'Southern Lebanon' when talking about Israel's actions and demands. There is no such thing. There is only Lebanon.
Talking about South Lebanon is a huge Zionist win in political language: it creates the notion Israel is not attacking and occupying Lebanon, only 'South Lebanon', a cute little place that is not even a real part of actual Lebanon. Just a cute little bite.
They are now doing 'Southern Syria' instead of Syria, for precisely the same purpose: to make it sound like this is not invasion and occupation, only a minor bureaucratic move.
There is no south Lebanon and there is no West Bank or Gaza either. There is Palestine, which Israel is occupying in full.
We need to de-Zionize language. Let's start with Lebanon. All of it deserves to be free, and none of it is free till all of it is free. Same as Palestine, and Syria.
This one means a lot to me as an advocate for men's health in general.
Episode 2 of "And...Tell Me More About That" is out today across all podcast platforms.
If you can, like, share and follow to increase our reach as we get going 😁
@Parody_RCGP@A_MacLullich Whilst "ideal world" research is useful ("blue sky thinking but see where you fall" etc) in the healthcare realm it needs practical considerations like overall resource allocation to be able to transition into practice.
@Parody_RCGP@A_MacLullich Much harm has come from single issue guidelines that do not consider the impact of one intervention across a real world systemof competing interests.
If this work is so important then it needs its own funding stream.
"GP to do" in the UK NHS is meaningless as a research outcome
Non-engagement is often a symptom, not a choice.
Over 15 years in the NHS, I saw a clear shift in how we respond to people who don't attend.
When someone at risk missed appointments or didn't answer calls, we used to go to them. A home treatment or CMHT nurse would visit, check they were safe and try to bring them into treatment.
As an on-call registrar, I assessed many people who had said they were suicidal but couldn't come to clinic or had missed appointments. The team was worried, so we made the effort to reach them many times during the night or at weekends.
In recent years, I have seen people discharged despite high risk, simply because they don't engage. This is often based on an assumption that they have capacity, without a proper capacity assessment.
The same happens to people with severe anxiety or agoraphobia. Some cannot leave home, yet they receive a letter, miss the appointment and are discharged without ever being seen.
I have seen people deteriorate after this, in the NHS, in A&E and in private practice.
We have moved from trying to engage people who are unwell to discharging them for not engaging, even when that is part of their illness.
If someone can't come to us because of their illness, the answer shouldn't be a discharge letter.
Under pressure from Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the Trump administration may be within days of launching a nuclear strike on Iran. The target would be Pickax Mountain in central Iran, where Israeli intelligence claims the Iranian government has restarted its nuclear enrichment program. No conventional weapon in the American arsenal can penetrate 300 feet of solid granite to destroy the tunnels where enrichment is supposedly taking place. The only military option is a nuclear strike. Netanyahu has been pushing hard for one. “Bibi calls Trump about it every day,” says an informed observer.
Netanyahu is cornered and desperate. After last week’s election results, he can’t form a government unless Trump intervenes directly in Israeli politics and brokers a deal with other parties that gives Netanyahu 61 seats in the Knesset. Otherwise, he is out as prime minister and on his way to ignominy, investigations and possibly jail. Netanyahu must stay close to Trump. He needs this war.
To that end, he’s applied maximum pressure to his closest allies in the administration, including Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and CENTCOM commander Brad Cooper. Both oppose a negotiated settlement to the war they’ve so grievously mismanaged; both are pushing to restart major combat operations. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and CIA director John Ratcliffe are also following Netanyahu’s lead, as are leaders of the Democratic Party. In a recent meeting on the subject, former president Barack Obama said he opposes the current Iran peace deal being drafted in Doha.
The rest of America’s longtime allies in the Middle East are terrified by the prospect of more war. On September 27th, Netanyahu flew secretly to Abu Dhabi to enlist the UAE in his lobbying effort for a final attack on Iran. The Emiratis refused. After eight months of conflict, Gulf economies are teetering. So are global energy and fertilizer markets. They won’t recover soon. Globally, there are a total of about 850 supertankers used to transport oil from producers to the rest of the world. In October alone, 11 of them were badly damaged in Hormuz. At this pace, a global depression is imminent. A nuclear strike would radically accelerate the destruction. Fallout from a ground explosion at Pickax Mountain would contaminate the Persian Gulf, poisoning the water supply for 100 million people.
And those are just some of the immediate consequences for the region. The rest of the world is every bit as exposed. No country other than the United States has ever used a nuclear weapon in war. Some would like to. An American nuclear attack on Iran would set a new precedent. The Russians have already told at least two other governments that an American nuclear strike on Iran would free them to use nuclear weapons against Ukraine. Pakistan and India would be tempted to do the same against each other, as would North Korea against Seoul. After the first nuclear strike, World War Three is inevitable. That war would be short and final.
We’ve been sleepwalking toward this moment for months. Since February, the administration has quietly rewritten America’s nuclear doctrine to make first use of so-called “battlefield nukes” easier and therefore more likely. No one in Washington in either party seems bothered by this. Now we’re on the brink of it.
Close observers say Trump is likely to decide by next weekend whether or not to use nuclear weapons. That would be November 7, six days from now. To his credit, he’s hesitating. At the moment, Trump is listening to his vice president, JD Vance, and to his envoy and friend Steve Witkoff, both of whom argue a deal with Iran can be made.
They’re right, though it won’t be simple. The Iranians are famously frustrating to negotiate with under any circumstances, and elements of that government have become more radical since Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and his family were killed in February. After decades of isolation, even relatively moderate Iranian leaders seem confused by how decisions are made in the West. (There is a widespread belief in Tehran, for example, that the United States government controls Israel.) But overall, people who have spoken to decision-makers in Iran say there is consensus there that more war is bad for everyone and a deal is worth making.
One group that hasn’t been consulted so far is the global population — the hundreds of millions of people who will be killed along with their children if Trump is pushed by Netanyahu into launching a nuclear strike next week. Now would be the time for them to speak up.
Debunking medical myths, explaining UK General Practice and talking about primary care issues.
Let us join you on your commute as we explore topical issues.
Available on all regular podcast providers
#andtellmemoreaboutthat
https://t.co/hCfOq9pNlz
https://t.co/NFAxy5tprT
🧵1/2: Labour is playing politics with peoples lives.
Greens have always gritted our teeth and worked across party lines to protect local services. When Labour armed Israel, when they backed warmongers in Riyadh, we put aside national politics and worked for local people.
Indeed this
Every TARGET these days is about “teaching GPs” to diagnose and manage something what used to be remit of specialist services. Rheumatology, Immunology, Endocrines, Neurology etc keep rejecting referrals with A&Gs. Patients are going private to see these specialists
Green Peer Natalie Bennett: " It think its quite astonishing that climate was missing from this budget after the summer that we've all experienced.. the climate emergency is here & now & the govt is not reacting"