Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Wow...


"Medical organisations want licensed premises to use tumblers made of a shatter-proof plastic called polycarbonate glassware. Trials in Hull and Lancashire have shown the switch reduces the number of serious facial and neck injuries, that can sometimes be fatal.


The A&E doctors, together with the Royal College of Surgeons of England and the British Medical Association, support the change. A glass is the most common weapon in fights in pubs and bars. Football grounds were banned from selling alcohol in glass containers some years ago.


Since the introduction of the trial in Hull in 2008, nobody has been injured because of "glassing" and the local NHS has saved ?7.2m in eye surgery costs."


Guardian 23rd Sept 2010


Hull is UKs 17th largest city with about 250,000 residents. There are 15m residents in cities of that size or larger in the UK.


If we assumed as a starter that the 'glassing' problem was limited to cities that big or larger, then at least ?450m could be saved out of the tax payers annual bill by changing from glass to pollys in big cities.


That's more than could be saved by firing NHS execs with big pay cheques.


I wonder if the British people would be willing to make that sacrifice in order to save so much of their own money?

Quite right HAL9000, but I think this is a study in Lancashire and Hull that demonstrates the benefits of the replacement on a wholesale level from which the results will be revealed tomorrow. Hence the article.


It's quite possible that plenty more people will also say 'yeah whatever', but it's always nice to see someone actually doing a bit of work and calculating a reasonable cost/benefit argument. :-)

I'm not saying 'yeah whatever' - on the contrary.


The arguments regarding the benefits of polly have been around for many years - anyone who has handled a polycarbonate drinking glass will have realised immediately that it has to be far safer than regular glassware anywhere where alcohol is served: the material is virtually indestructible.


There are many well-established polly drinking glass manufacturers targeting pubs and clubs online.


Personally, I?ve been avoiding clubs and pub discos where glass is still in use for many years.


The emergency services have been dealing with horrendous glassing injuries for decades now - I came across hundreds of inmates incarcerated for GBH through glassing during my work with prisoners. The authorities and breweries have known about the benefits of polly for years. The recent trials can add nothing new. In my opinion, the adoption of polly should have been a matter of legislation back in the 1990s.

Huguenot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I wonder if the British people would be willing to

> make that sacrifice in order to save so much of

> their own money?


Excuse me for being a bit dim here, but what sacrifice are you referring to? If you are simply talking about accepting the switch from glass to Polywotsit, I don't believe I would feel much deprivation given the potential benefits. At football matches we are issued with those horribly thin, flexible plastic cups which - when grasped remotely tightly - can result in some of your drink overflowing onto your lap. But one copes...it certainly doesn't put me off going to matches and ordering my favourite tipple. Oooooh no...

So basically for the X million of pint glasses used daily some Y (insert a small number as I've not a scooby) are used in violence...but hey lets all use plastic ones as result of a miniscule amount of bad use. Let's all wear nappys so the incontinent don't have to wet themselves in public too etc etc.


Next time it snows let's make everyone stay at home, indoors...save a fortune and no 'orrid accidents.


NANNY STATE CRAP

Perhaps we should all be banned from spending time in our homes, given that a huge proportion of A&E is (I believe - correct me if I'm wrong) treating people who've had accidents at home....


Isn't Hull a bit of a special case? Like, full of nutters?

  • 2 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I'm a bit worried by your sudden involvement on this Forum.  The former Prince Andrew is now Andrew Mountbatten Windsor Mountbatten in an anglicisation of Von Battenburg adopted by that branch of our Royal Family in 1917 due to anti-German sentiment. Another anglicisation could be simply Battenburg as in the checker board cake.  So I surmise that your are Andrew Battenburg, aka Andrew Mountbatten Windsor and that you have infiltrated social media so that the country can put the emphasis on Mandelson ather than yourself.  Bit of a failure. I don't expect an answer from police custody.  
    • We had John fit our PLYKEA kitchen (IKEA cabinets with custom doors) and would happily recommend him and Gabi to anyone. Gabi handled all communication and was brilliant throughout — responsive and happy to answer questions however detailed. John is meticulous, cares about the small details, and was a pleasure to have in the house. The carpentry required for the custom doors was done to a high standard, and he even refinished the plumbing under the sink to sit better with the new cabinets — a small touch that made a real difference. They were happy to return and tie up a few things that couldn't be finished in the time, which we appreciated. No hesitations recommending them.
    • Not sure about that. Rockets seems to have (rightly in my view) identified two key motivating elements in Mcash's defection: anger at his previous (arguably shabby) treatment and a (linked) desire to trash the Labour party, nationally and locally. The defection, timed for maximum damage, combined with the invective and moral exhibitionism of his statement counts as rather more than a "hissy fit".  I would add a third motivation of political ambition: it's not inconceivable that he has his eye on the Dulwich & West Norwood seat which is predicted to go Green.  James Barber was indulging in typical LibDem sleight of hand, claiming that Blair introduced austerity to *councils* before the coalition. This is a kind of sixth form debating point. From 1997-1999 Labour broadly stuck to Tory spending totals, meaning there was limited growth in departmental spending, including local govt grants. However local government funding rose substantially in the Noughties, especially in education and social care. It is a matter of record that real-terms local authority spending increased in the Blair / Brown years overall. So he's manifestly wrong (or only right if the focus is on 1997-1999, which would be a bizarre focus and one he didn't include in his claim) but he wasn't claiming Blair introduced austerity more widely. 
    • My view is that any party that welcomes a self-declared Marxist would merit a negative point. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...