Naked Science Forum
Life Sciences => Physiology & Medicine => Topic started by: acsinuk on 24/06/2016 10:37:59
-
I trust that medical staff,engineers and NHS workers realise that this referendum was not anti European but rather a protest vote about over regulation and lack of jobs both of which affect our economy adversely.
To overcome the first we need to simplify to one page maximum all regulations/directives and add government or EU recommendation on how the regulation could be achieved but these are not mandatory. The office of deputy prime minister did an excellent job in starting this off.
To provide more jobs now that we are so computer efficient means that we need to reduce the working week to just three and a half days per week and encourage a shift work system as NHS, supermarkets, large stores, service industries and spares already do. 6 to 2, and 2 till 10.
-
Voting "out" was a great personal sacrifice. Currently, I can hire top Rumanian consultants for less than the starting salary of a UK junior doctor, and Hungarian nurses (with real practical nursing skills!) are happy to undercut their UK graduate equivalents. But longterm, we need to find work for UK citizens or face a very unstable future.
-
Thanks Alan. But if we reduce the working week that will create fuller employment. I believe we all have the right to work and achieve dignity. There is nothing more depressing than filling in countless CVs whilst wasting time on the dole.
We are Europeans and we should lead Europe into shorter working hours unless we can float our island away somehow?
-
Shorter working hours? And earn how much exactly?
-
if we reduce the working week that will create fuller employment
So if someone outside the UK had a choice of a top Rumanian consultant working 50 hours per week, and a British consultant who was only prepared to work 30 hours a week (and charge more), which one is going to be unemployed?
A lot of work these days can be done remotely, on contract. For jobs like this, which person will a UK employer choose?
-
"We" (I presume you mean the British) are definitely not Europeans. These islands have been at war with various bits of mainland Europe for about 4000 years and "native" Brits are of Celtic, Norse, and latterly of African and Asian descent, along with bits of Saxon and Norman invaders, plus the descendants of Czech and Polish warriors and Italian prisoners of WWII, and waves of Jewish refugees. The current UK population is a slowly-homogenising mixture of pretty much everything except white Europeans.
Implementing a points-based immigration policy, with an inbuilt Commonwealth preference, will fill gaps without creating unemployment or depressing wages to East European levels.
Once we have control of our borders, we can consider how to limit the population, for the greater good of our descendants. Within 100 years these islands can be entirely selfsufficient with full and interesting employment for anyone who wants it.
We have always traded at a loss with mainland Europe, so doing less trade will simply mean less loss. Our net trade with the rest of the world has always been positive. And if you have goods to sell to EU countries you don't need to negotiate separate agreements: it being a single market, if your goods meet the CE specification, they can be sold anywhere within the EU at the same rate of duty - by law! That's how China, Japan, India and the USA have destroyed most European manufacturing industry, not by manufacturing in the EU, but by making and selling to a single specification.
Some very good x-ray equipment is manufactured in Spain, but I've never bought it from the factory. I can buy the same machines for about half the price from an American agent, because as the EU is a protected market, the European price is maintained by the corrupt Union, but in North America you have to compete, and the sales volume is greater, so the wholesale price is lower.
A consistent misinterpretation of EU law has prevented my clients from selling safe medical equipment to the NHS. Hopefully we can save a few lives in future by restoring the UK standard of electrical safety.
I've just been prevented from fitting an American compass to my American-designed aeroplane because, although approved for the last 20 years by the manufacturers and the FAA, it hasn't been approved by the European Aviation "Safety" Agency for fitting to a British-registered plane. Why did I want to do it? Because when the chips are down and everything else has stopped working in thick fog, the American ("vertical card") compass will tell you where you are heading whilst the EASA-approved heap of junk is spinning uselessly backwards.
My safety is a minor matter compared with other stupidities: (1) EASA decreed that we need new radios and navaids in the rental fleet, and offered a cash grant to get them fitted, if we submitted 4 years' audited accounts. The application was turned down because the accounts were in Sterling, not Euros. You can't audit a UK limited company in anything but Sterling. (2) EASA decreed that a flying school must have at least two designated classrooms, so we had to buy a new hut to stay in business - but we only have one instructor, so the second classroom is unused (EASA won't let us use it for an office, which we actually need).
And finally (for the time being), where on earth did the Labour Party get the idea that workers' rights are a gift from the EU? When I was a lad, it was the job of the Labour Party to promote and defend those rights, hence the Factories Acts, the Health & Safety at Work Acts, the National Health Service, employment tribunals, state pensions....all of which predated the EU by at least 40 years.
-
Apropos the original question, "very few".
If you want to make a product to sell in the USA, it must conform to US standards, but then you can sell it in any state. In most cases the same standard applies to Canada and Mexico, and even Japan. The EU is exactly the same: goods that meet EU standards can be traded anywhere in the Union, and for convenience most non-EU countries in Europe adopt the same standard. So no change there, except that you will now be able to sell non-EU-standard goods in the UK. This may allow more rapid development of new products for the home market and encourage the development of products to North American standards. Interestingly, in the case of medical devices, the EU requirement is for manufacturing consistency and design traceability, whereas the FDA requirement is that the damn thing actually works.
Collaborative research in industry happens anyway. I've been working with a Russian company assembling American-designed-Chinese-manufactured subsytems into a Russian rig with British and German components. We sell the kit worldwide but the only applicable published standard is American. I'm also evaluating and developing American medical products for worldwide sale: the science happens wherever we can find suitable talent, and the EU certification is just an expensive paper exercise once we have met the FDA proof of effectiveness.
Good collaborative academic research tends to be pan-European, not EU-based. The EU has very prescriptive rules about funding, and politically-motivated targets, so although I've supported a few applications for such funding it's usually quicker and better to go directly to charities, private philanthropic funds, national or local government schemes, or the potential beneficiaries, for small grants.
Personal mobility has never been a signifcant problem. If you need a good bloke for a specific project, you can get a temporary visa, or shuffle through the pack of intellectual refugees who are the first to seek asylum whenever trouble brews in benighted countries. At the top level, most consultants capable of earning a living from their talent can get a self-employed business visa to travel anywhere, but nowdays most consultancy is by email anyway!
-
About BREXIT, the exit of a founding member, even if this is not a direct answer to the question placed here, I'd like to say this:
1. That's not the end of the UK or the EU. It's perhaps the beginning of the end, as Churchill would say.
2. Scotland in the short term and perhaps Northern Ireland later will follow next.
3. More referenda will take place in the EU, maybe France and the Netherlands next.
4. The EU, however imperfect it is, was the greatest tool ever constructed in the sake of peace in Europe, the most belligerent continent of all times.
5. The future divisions of the UK and the EU will kill that tool that guaranteed a period of peace lasting more than 70 years, never seen before in History.
-
If France and the Netherlands see how expensive it is, they might decide not to bother.
-
If France and the Netherlands see how expensive it is, they might decide not to bother.
It was expensive in the UK too and was expensive before when France made a referendum that killed the future constitution of the EU.
-
4. The EU, however imperfect it is, was the greatest tool ever constructed in the sake of peace in Europe, the most belligerent continent of all times.
5. The future divisions of the UK and the EU will kill that tool that guaranteed a period of peace lasting more than 70 years, never seen before in History.
The facts speak otherwise.
For the greater part of that period, Germany was divided under military occupation, having been bankrupted by one war and thoroughly demolished by a second. Nothing to do with EU diktats on the shape of bananas, but quite a lot to do with NATO and the Red Army, and it kept the peace rather well. Except of course in the Balkans (1991 - 2001). Spain remained free of civil war from 1936 under a fascist dictatorship until 1975 and did not join the EU until 1986.
Iceland effectively defended its fishing grounds (a small war, but a violent one) and continues to have a viable primary industry. The UK joined the EU and lost everything.
And don't forget that the UK was not a "founding member". We stupidly joined the EEC several years after having been refused entry, then the EEC reinvented itself as the EU and Her Majesty' Electorate was persuaded to pay for an even more pointless and corrupt layer of bureaucracy, and then the EU expanded without consulting the British public.
When smaller countries were given referenda on EU matteers, they were instructed to vote again until they came up with the right answer. At last, a major economic power (or so we like to kid ourselves) has chosen to hold two fingers up to sleaze, incompetence, and the hegemony of Big Business.
Ut sequiuntur alies
-
A Petition demanding a second referendum on the grounds of too little a margin is running now and collected 1.440.614 signatures in a single day.
Maybe this is just the first referendum in a row, until there are no grounds for a massive petition any more.
I think the UK is playing bungee jumping.
-
I understand little of the situation, to be honest I didn't even vote. But are we not up for 2 years of trade re-negotiation during which the business implications following the BREXIT vote are to be decided, and therefore now that it is essentially an independantly functioning democracy is it not within the persuasive power of the individuals concerned to have an impact on deciding and developing said implications.
Also are there not strong possibilities of improved connections with other countries outside the EU now that could function to the position that the soon to be replaced EU measures filled.
But like I said, I understand little of the situation.A Petition demanding a second referendum on the grounds of too little a margin is running now and collected 1.440.614 signatures in a single day
This only means that it will be debated by the parliament, which now lacks some influential members of the remain campaign I believe.
-
I do not want the unelected in Brussels telling everyone what they must do. They are shocked not because we left but because our fees will dry up. All the panic is among the controlling interests in Europe who can't fathom the audacity of the peasants to defy them. Nothing at all has changed for Joe Public except the increased level of scaremongering that will now be aimed at him.
-
A Petition demanding a second referendum on the grounds of too little a margin is running now and collected 1.440.614 signatures in a single day.
To be followed by another petition demanding that referenda be held until we come up with the right answer, a sufficient majority, and a minimum turnout.
What these morons don't understand is that the "out" vote is solid, based on fact, and enthusiastic. Why else did Dodgy Dave insist on extending the registration period for 48 hours after his TV performance, in the hope of scaring the ignorant young into supporting him? 75% turnout is unheard of in UK politics, and the lower it gets, the bigger the "out" majority is likely to be.
-
But are we not up for 2 years of trade re-negotiation during which the business implications following the BREXIT vote are to be decided
Renault, BMW and VW will not wait for 2 years before lowering the UK price of their vehicles to meet the challenge of Ford and GM. The EU can decide tomorrow what import tax to apply to British goods, but as we don't supply much to the EU, HM Government can simply reflect that tax on goods imported from the EU and thereby inflict grievous harm on German manufacturing and French farming.
The alternative to negotiation is to do nothing and leave all the duties as they are. That's best for Big Business and therefore what will happen (who do you think runs the EU?)
What really matters is whether the UK reasserts its territorial waters and determines its own farming subsidies.
The next French revolution will occur when the EU privatises their health service. Riots? You ain't seen nuthin' yet. Tumbrils and guillotines....
-
Has anyone watched "Brexit The Movie" - https://www.brexitthemovie.com/
I'd be interested in hearing your reactions.
-
Nothing hurts quite as much as the truth!
-
A Petition demanding a second referendum on the grounds of too little a margin is running now and collected 1.440.614 signatures in a single day.
Maybe this is just the first referendum in a row, until there are no grounds for a massive petition any more.
I think the UK is playing bungee jumping.
This would only be implemented if a minimum turnout or minimum majority had been a precondition of the referendum. It is not possible to change the rules retrospectively so I can't see there being another referendum.
-
Late night, and a moment to reflect on the EU's supposed protection of the safety of its citizens.
For the last hour I've been reviewing a research ethics application to test a new medical device for "CE certification", i.e. to allow it to be placed on the market in the EU. The device is an alternative to the present standard technique for treating a particular pathology.
Why is the US manufacturer seeking CE approval for a device that does not yet have FDA approval? Well, as I mentioned before, the FDA requires evidence of efficacy, but a bit more besides. You can market a copy device or a minor improvement that solves a known problem on an existing device, without too much formality, but in the case of an alternative, you have to prove it works better (at least in particular cases) than the current standard, before you can get an FDA licence.
Not so in the EU. You need to prove that the new widget works (not an EU innovation, by the way - the UK Sale of Goods Act predated the Medical Devices Directive by several decades and requires "fitness for purpose") but even if it is only half as effective as the old one, you can put it on the market. And if it is half the price of the standard device (usually the deciding factor in a cash-strapped NHS), who cares? Only the patient's grieving relatives.
So if you have a half-baked idea for a lifecritical gadget, sell it in the EU first, make a small fortune, and see if it cures more than it kills. If it doesn't, well at least you have made a profit, and if it does, you now have the evidence to present to the FDA, without putting any American citizens at risk.
-
Voting "out" was a great personal sacrifice. Currently, I can hire top Rumanian consultants for less than the starting salary of a UK junior doctor, and Hungarian nurses (with real practical nursing skills!) are happy to undercut their UK graduate equivalents. But longterm, we need to find work for UK citizens or face a very unstable future.
I concur with your view alan, and we here in America are facing similar difficulties. While we are not part of the EU, God forbid, we also face the social trend toward Globalism. If the Globalists get their way, all national sovereignty will evaporate in wake of their greed for power and control. Along with our national sovereignty, individual rights along with the free press and many other liberties we hold dear will vanish. Long live Britain and I wish the same for the USA.
-
Renault, BMW and VW will not wait for 2 years before lowering the UK price of their vehicles to meet the challenge of Ford and GM. The EU can decide tomorrow what import tax to apply to British goods, but as we don't supply much to the EU, HM Government can simply reflect that tax on goods imported from the EU and thereby inflict grievous harm on German manufacturing and French farming.
I thought they were unable to change any status of the EU membership until after the 2 year period?
Does anyone know how will brexit affect the tier system of regulatiing exhaust gas emission for motors? As well as the other environmental laws, eg. is it now more or less likely that there will be fracking, or are these not affected?
-
The present arrangements will remain in effect for at least a further two and a quarters years. This is because David Cameron has indicated that he'll leave office in 3 months' time and it will be the NEXT leader who will initiate the exit process (Article 50); once in train, this takes 2 years to complete, so it seems reasonable to suggest that we'll be going business as usual for the next 2 years. One concern is that this will trigger a further immigration rush (including by ISIS operatives who exploited the Syrian crisis to infiltrate mainland Europe and are currently waiting in Germany for their papers to be prepared so that as "EU Citizens" they may legitimately travel all over Europe - with the UK as a major target - to facilitate their hate mission). Anticipating this, I wonder if some sort of legislation will be forthcoming...
-
You are probably right, so change "can" to a hypothetical "could" - the result is the same, with a 2-year delay.
EU Directives have to be implemented in national law, and enforced nationally in the first instance, so any piece of EU regulation that we want to keep, can stay on the statute books. However when we leave the EU we could instead impose Californian regulations and local testing to Cal standards instead of having to accept (by law!) any crap that the lying Germans foist upon us.
Fracking is inevitable, in or out, like it or not, because the Thatcher government rendered 200-years-worth of British coal completely unrecoverable and sold North Sea licenses to foreigners. I've just returned from Norway where the state owns about 40% of the oil business: Statoil pump prices are a bit lower than UK prices, and the profit is invested in public services rather than being exported to tax havens. Such a level of state ownership would not be permitted under EU regulations.
The first Clean Air Act in Europe was enacted in the UK in 1956, long before the EU was born.
-
One concern is that this will trigger a further immigration rush (including by ISIS operatives who exploited the Syrian crisis to infiltrate mainland Europe
The French have a way of dealing with this. Try selling a competitive product in France." Oui, certainement, vous avez le droit but our national implementation of the Directives require that the product be "homologue" (that's an e-acute) by scrutiny of an official translation of the paperwork and repeat testing of any parts that our national laboratory considers critique." Usually takes 1 to 3 years.
So we don't close the border (at least we still have one) but just take a very long look at any recently-issued EU passports. "Polish carpenter, eh? Please speak to my Polish colleague - he is an expert on regional accents and if you are under 70 years old he should be able to trace your birth certificate within 5 days. Meanwhile please return to Frankfurt."
-
So we don't close the border (at least we still have one) but just take a very long look at any recently-issued EU passports. "Polish carpenter, eh? Please speak to my Polish colleague - he is an expert on regional accents and if you are under 70 years old he should be able to trace your birth certificate within 5 days. Meanwhile please return to Frankfurt."
They'll all say "EU citizen, registered in Germany". We cannot tell the difference between legit refugees and ISIS scumbags masquerading as legitimate refugees. I suspect that the reason Merkel welcomed a million of them to Germany was because she knew full well that many (ISIS or otherwise) would be "just passing through" en-route to Britain or some other soft-touch (as soon as their papers are signed and sealed). Because, in news interviews I've seen and heard with these people, here (UK) is where a high fraction of them all say they are headed, because the view held is that the deal they get here is far more generous than anywhere else in Europe. Immigration might be good for a country, but mass migration and deprivation of services for existing consumers is not, and nor is wholesale import of terrorists and misogynists - see http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/cologne-attacks-what-happened-after-1000-women-were-sexually-assaulted-a6867071.html
-
A Petition demanding a second referendum on the grounds of too little a margin is running now and collected 1.440.614 signatures in a single day.
Maybe this is just the first referendum in a row, until there are no grounds for a massive petition any more.
I think the UK is playing bungee jumping.
3.061.793 signatures as I write.
-
"EU citizen, registered in Germany"
"Sorry, chum, not good enough. This is not a Schengen country and if your passport was issued after 23 June 2016 you need a visa to enter the UK, just like the USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Russia....in fact the entire civilised world. But as every EU passport has a date and place of birth, we can check your records and issue a visa within 5 working days. Please return to your port of departure. Next, please...."
It is the duty of any carrier (airline, ferry operator, ship's master, private pilot) to ensure that all passengers have the right to disembark, or to return them to the port of embarkation. Nothing new here - it's international law.
-
3.061.793 signatures as I write.
That's a lot of bad losers. If you don't like democracy, please leave the country.
-
To ALANCALVERD:
Perhaps Hitler was right.
-
To ALANCALVERD:
Perhaps Hitler was right.
In what respect? Killing Jews, invading Russia, bringing Germany from prosperity to the point of destruction, or what?
He certainly wasn't the first vegetarian, even if he remains the most famous.
-
The main problem the EU has is, there is not a common culture in Europe, other than what is artificially being defined by law. It is not like the US, where a common culture formed, organically, side-by-side with state autonomy. The EU is trying to do this backwards beginning with state autonomy with long histories, and then having an elite group, defining the common culture with laws, that benefits this same group of elite. It is not designed to optimize the middle class, who represents the largest majority of self determined people. If this was the goal, it would approach it differently.
The US is being steered in the direction of looking more like the current EU, defined by law and ruling class, and not the traditions of freedom and self reliance from which its common culture, appeared. It is more becoming composed of semi-attached pockets of imported cultures, which the liberals call diversity for perpetuation. Instead of striving to copy the best; melting pot, it maintains pockets which averages out to a second world US, for the middle class. The first world US is increasingly becoming restricted to an elite class, which are the same people who are the biggest winners in the Obama economy; power and money.
The shrinking middle class and the increase in welfare; lower class, is averaging the majority of the US down to a peasant class, closer to the illegal immigrants, who help the elite by depressing wages. The result will be the need of a royal ruling class of money and power. The EU is doing this with its own approach.
What the British should investigate is who is making out the best, in terms of money and power via the current rules and structure of the EU? These winners, are the same ones making the rules. Maybe the middle-peasant class citizens, while they still can, need to vote a higher tax and more regulation, on these elite, and give themselves a tax refund and more freedom. They are not looking out for you, so you are need not worry for them.
In the US, Trump could have gone along and become part of the ruling class, in the new world order. But he was able to reach that same level of money and influence in a free and open society. He did not have to rig the system, like the current ruling class is attempting. He has a soft spot for the working class; middle class, due to being in the construction business, and is standing up against the rigged system. Those who are not afraid to cheat, are afraid of the consequences if Trump is elected. He will not allow a rigged system. The peasants will be made aware, they will revolve, with the pseudo-royalty deposed; lose elections, while their zombie army; liberals, will awaken from their dream and stop feeding on the living. England has begin the Revolution.
There can still be a future EU, but not one with a ruling class, who needs a peasant class. A better EU would need to be designed to optimize the middle class; create jobs, with the level of the rich and the size of government define by this core growing. If the core declines, money and power will need to decline. The current EU is set up for money and power to increase with middle class decline. The Brits have sounded the alarm so the discussion can begin.
One of the magic tricks used by the EU and US led scams, is manmade global warming. If this was true, what it means is you cant grow the middle class, and expand the middle class to poor countries, so people stay home, because that will need more energy, with alternate energy not sufficient, and global warming meaning the energy you have is off limits.
That means there is a fixed sized pie of energy, that more people, world wide, will be need to eat from. That means the majority of humans will need to average as peasants, instead of the world wide middle class expanding. The elite don't have to worry about energy ib the new world order, since they are so important. Maybe laws can be made that restricts the energy use of the elite to the same levels if the peasants, with mandatory jail, if there is a violation. This way they will find the energy needed for the middle class. All of a sudden they will define new energy. If you wait too long, the peasants will not have the power to vote, fairness.
-
What are your reactions to this:
-
In Polish?
-
As I said earlier, nothing hurts as much as the truth.
Several vox pop interviews have revealed that Farage's appeal derives from a very simple tactic: "he looks you in the eye and answers the question" - two qualities that distinguish a professional from a parasite. Added to which, his program is not directed towards his own career - indeed he will lose his MEP status, salary, expenses, pension and promotion prospects as a direct result of his policy, and he has said that he has no ambition beyond becoming a UK backbencher (which may happen if the police investigation of the Tory Thanet election campaign shows it was corrupt). A rare bird indeed.
-
I am amazed at the people claiming that the referendum result should be annulled because it didn't return the result they - in the minority - wanted. There are reports about Cameron's departure being used as an instrument to annul the result. This is ridiculous. We allegedly live in a democracy where the majority verdict goes. But then again, perhaps that's why the referendum minority want to change the result. Because they subscribe fully to the mindset of the EU - dictate and we will all capitulate.
I was speaking with a banker from London yesterday. He works for a German organisation. His feeling is that owing to EU rules it costs so much to lay off staff in Europe that the UK is a far more attractive option, particularly since, unshackled from the EU, the UK can theoretically make these organisations very attractive offers to be based here... Businesses relocating to Frankfurt are potentially employment turkeys voting for Christmas.
-
A friend of mine worked for Deutsche Bank in London a few years ago. Company rules allowed just one A5 family photograph on the desk, so he had one of his dad painting a little swastika on his Hurricane. Plus ca change....
-
When organised people have the power to overthrow any government or controlling organisation. The phantom austerity that has been adopted by many nations is a useful tool to produce a compliant and inexpensive workforce. Fear has been the tool of politicians since 2007 when they realised it worked so well. Unfortunately for them they have now fallen for their own mythology so deeply that they fail to understand why the so called project fear has failed. Mr Johnson himself is said to be shocked by the brexit result as he himself didn't believe it would happen. Since they have deluded themselves so much politicians now have no plan B. Since they were arrogant enough to believe they had a win in the bag.
-
This only means that it [the petition] will be debated by the parliament, which now lacks some influential members of the remain campaign I believe.
From next week's Hansard:
Rt Hon David Cameron (Con, Artist) "Mr Speaker, we have received a petition demanding a replay of the shambles I initiated a few months ago and swore to abide by. As I didn't get the result that would have guaranteed me a seat on the EU gravy train, I ask the House to approve another referendum."
Dennis Skinner (Lab, Bolsover) "Bollocks".
The Speaker "Agreed. Next business."
-
3.061.793 signatures as I write.
Whoops: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3662545/How-hackers-hijacked-petition-demanding-second-EU-referendum-mocked-British-democracy-signing-42-000-signatories-Vatican-City-population-840.html
-
3.061.793 signatures as I write.
Whoops: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3662545/How-hackers-hijacked-petition-demanding-second-EU-referendum-mocked-British-democracy-signing-42-000-signatories-Vatican-City-population-840.html
I'm not sure about the weight of those signatures.
Further, the government has means to certify signatures.
By the way, it's 3.879.368 signatures as I write.
-
A small newspaper interviewed more than 200 people who signed the petition and disclosed that 34% had voted for BREXIT.
Most of these are signing the petition (not from Vatican City) because they don't accept such a tiny margin for winning and want a better marginal victory in a second referendum.
Merkel said that if the UK approves a second, they're playing bungee jumping.
What's most sordid is that the second referendum will take place with the UK outside the EU...
Perhaps this will reverse results.
-
Not quite. The turnout was 70%+ which is unprecedented against UK election norms. The margin was about 4%, or close to 10%; with the numbers voting (33 million plus) and a 4-5% margin, that's statistically sound and it's called democracy.