Priests for Life, maybe, but certainly not Priests for Truth

Should Baby Joseph have been given a tracheotomy by the London Ontario hospital and returned to the care of his parents? Or would another medical approach all together have offered the infant life instead of the almost certain death of simply being taken off the ventilator?

These are not questions that I can easily answer. But now that the baby has been airlifted from London to St. Louis Missouri where he will receive alternative care, these questions will have an answer. Maybe.

But what was clear if you followed the Twitter tweets and Facebook posts was that many people distrusted the doctors at the London Health Sciences Centre (LHSC). But if the reportedly terminally ill child has left London, the cloud of mistrust and controversy remains.

Priests for Life, based in Staten Island NY, posted a statement boasting "Father Frank Pavone of Priests for Life Leads Covert Mission to Rescue Baby Joseph." The story says the mission was accomplished "under cover of darkness."

Covert? So how did the fathers disguise their operation so as to not alert hospital security and  under the cover of darkness secretly spirit Baby Joseph away?

The short answer: They didn't.

The London hospital cared for Baby Joseph right up until the American medical team in an air ambulance took over. There was no covert operation. And it certainly was not conducted under the cover of darkness. The transfer may have been done at night but those Canadians are quite advanced; they have lights!

End-of-life decisions are difficult, especially ones involving infants. Such decisions are hard on everyone involved: mothers, fathers, other family members and on the doctors, nurses and other hospital staff providing medical treatment to the failing child.

When I read the claim by Father Pavone that Baby Joseph needed "a hospital that cherishes life over the bottom line," I shook my head. That is just what the dying child had in the LHCS. I know this for a fact from my own personal experience.

Also, as a former newspaper photographer I've spent a lot of time over the years taking pictures of children receiving treatment at the Children's Hospital at London Health Sciences Centre. The hospital, its doctors, nurses and staff do not deserve the nasty, uninformed attacks they have taken since this matter went viral on the Internet and in the American media. They certainly should not be subjected to phone and e-mail threats as has been happening.

Ian Gillespie, a columnist with The London Free Press, addressed this very issue in a recent column. He spoke with Lisa Cann, a mother with a 14-year-old son who must struggle to live. Her boy has help with his health struggles - the LHSC.

Cann told Gillespie:

During the past nine years she and her son have made 25 visits to the emergency room, more than 100 pediatric medical day unit visits, 55 radiology visits, more than 50 visits to a gastro-intestinal clinic, more than 450 weekly pediatric appointments, at least seven calls to 911 and close to 20 extended hospital stays. This week, they went back for yet another surgical procedure.

And through it all, Cann says she’s seen nothing but top-notch care and compassion.

LHSC kept Baby Joseph alive for months. He was under their care from October on and it was months before they recommended removing the boy's breathing tube. They ran every test and explored every option. This is not the conduct of a hospital more interested in saving money than saving lives.

Whether you agree with the Canadian hospital's decision or not, there is widespread support for their position in the medical community throughout the world. This is not just according to the hospital but according to the father of Baby Joseph. Moe Maraachli spoke to me of the frustration of trying to find a hospital to take his son. "I've talked to doctors throughout Canada, the United States and Europe . . . ," he said, then stopped and shook his head. He was unable to finish.

The parents of Baby Joseph sought the medical opinion of physicians at the Children’s Hospital of Michigan in Detroit. Physician experts at the hospital wrote the LHSC:

"We do not feel that we have anything to offer Joseph that has not already been given to him under your care” and "there is nothing that the Children's Hospital of Michigan has to offer Joseph that has not already been done for him in Ontario".

When Priests for Life present themselves as major players in the success of finding a suitable hospital prepared to accept little Joseph, they are not lying. It is clear that they work with a rather unique hospital in SSM Cardinal Glennon Children's Medical Center of St. Louis.

What I find so disturbing is the angry and very nasty tone of much of the discourse, especially that coming from the Priests for Life. Many distrusted the Canadian hospital; I distrust the highly charged statements released by this religious group. I find their statements self serving and worse I find them dishonest.

It is time for the priests to stop the posturing. It is time for the Fathers to work at getting out the truth. Stoking fiery emotions of hate, anger and misunderstanding, emotions already glowing red hot when it come to this issue, is not the right response; It may not even be Christian.
______________________________________________________________________

Baby Joseph myths

Fox News in the States has done a good job of politicizing this story with fabricated facts. They put enough spin on the story to make any viewer dizzy. LHSC put together a page dispelling some of the false and misleading information being spread by groups such as the Priests for Life and Fox News.

Read Just the Facts on the LHSC website.

When I watch a video featuring the Fox News Medical A team I can't help but think of George Owell's Ministry of Truth in his novel 1984.

An open Letter to the Editor of The London Free Press, a Sun Media newspaper

This is an open Letter to the Editor of The London Free Press.

Click on image to enlarge.

According to Canoe health expert and Sun Media columnist Dr. Gifford-Jones, the fluoridation of water is useless and fluoride toothpaste is a dangerous biological poison. This newspaper columnist went on to say in a Quebecor Media story that several studies involving as many as 480,000 children found fluoride provided no protection against tooth decay.

The QMI "expert" even raised the spectre of childhood death in his attack on fluoridation. I wrote expert in quotation marks to indicate my disdain just as Ian Gillespie did to indicate his disdain for some supposed "experts" in his recent column.

It is time for Gillespie to take his own advice and give his head a shake. The Free Press columnist need not look to the Internet for "ignorant fear-mongering at its worst." I think it is clear from the above that he can find it in the pages of his own news operation — Quebecor Media Inc.
_______________________________________________________

The beauty of the Internet is the free flow of ideas and information. If you can't get a letter to the editor published, post it.

Use enough hooks and someone using Google, or another search engine, will stumble upon your letter. Also put links to your Facebook page and Twitter account in your post. If you get enough hits your blog post will gain importance and may appear near the top of the list returned by a search engine query.

Ian Gillespie asks, "What next? Fluoride killing polar bears?" According to The Free Press, the answer may be young children.

Aiming his well-known wit at the anti-fluoridation folk, Gillespie misses mark.

A recent opinion piece by The London Free Press journalist  Ian Gillespie has further muddied the already murky fluoridated waters.

I was very disappointed by his ad hominem attacks on those with whom he disagrees. Instead of using facts to disprove the anti-fluoride position, Gillespie attacked those holding those beliefs. He painted them as crazy conspiracy believers. And in cases where his opponents based their arguments on expert opinions, Gillespie ridicules those experts as well.

Ian mocks London city councillor Denise Brown for suggesting to The Free Press, "If you do any research on the Internet, you’ll find scientists believe there are health risks.”

Click to enlarge.

Ian's witty retort: "And if you do more Internet 'research,' you’ll also discover 'experts' who argue that aliens hijacked the Voyager 2 spacecraft, Paul McCartney died in a 1966 car crash, Elvis Presley is alive and the Apollo moon landing was a hoax."

And if you, Ian Gillespie, do more research you will find the following published by Sun Media, written by Canoe health expert and columnist Dr. Gifford-Jones, and found on The London Free Press Internet site:

"It's shocking that 25% of North Americans over age 43, and 42% of those over 65 years of age, have no teeth!

"(The doctor featured in the article carried by The Free Press) Dr. Judd also believes that the fluoridation of water and the use of fluoride toothpaste is a useless, dangerous biological poison. He says calcium fluoride seeps into enamel, making it weak and brittle, destroying 83 enzymes along with adenosine diphosphatase.

"I couldn't agree more. (Dr. Gifford-Jones writes.) Look at the warning on fluoride toothpaste. Parents are told to watch children under six years of age while they brush their teeth. To be safe, only a tiny amount of toothpaste is used, and none should be swallowed. That should tell you something! In 1974, a three-year old child had fluoride gel placed on his teeth. The hygienist handed him a glass of water but rather than rising out his mouth, he drank it. A few hours later, he was dead.

"If fluoride toothpaste is the answer to dental decay, why is it that 98% of Europe is fluoride-free? Sweden, Germany, Norway, Holland, Denmark and France stopped using fluoridation 29 years ago. These are not backward, depressed nations.

"The sole argument for fluoridation is that it reduces tooth decay. But several studies involving as many as 480,000 children found no beneficial evidence between fluoridated and non-fluoridated communities.

"Dr. Hardy Limeback, Professor of Dentistry at the University of Toronto, says children under three should never use fluoridated toothpaste or drink fluoridated water, and mothers should never use Toronto tap water to prepare baby formula."

I want to go on record as saying I am not frightened by the amount of fluoride being put into London's water. I believe dangerous concentrations of fluoride are only found in drinking waters contaminated with unregulated, naturally occurring fluorides. London is very conservative when it comes to the amount of fluoride added to our drinking water.

But many people are concerned. As long as papers, such as The London Free Press, are telling them a young child died from a fluoride treatment, some folk will use bottled water rather than tap and try their best to stay clear of all fluoride -- even that found in toothpaste and mouthwash.

At one time, it was believed that fluoride only worked topically. It was said that once ingested, as in drinking water, its ability to fight dental caries was curtailed. That belief is now in question.  But,when I worked at The Free Press the only-works-topically mantra was still being repeated. I chatted with a professor at the Schulich School of Medicine & Dentistry at Western University who confided that putting fluoride in water was inefficient as it only works topically. But he would not go on record with such a view. The whole issue was simply too emotionally charged.

My point? The anger, distrust, public ridicule surrounding this issue all work to prevent discussion. Journalists are a big part of this problem. And that is sad. Journalists should be advocates of reason and independent thinking. Instead, all too often journalists are herd animals.

I expect more from my daily paper and I certainly expected more from Ian Gillespie. The Free Press is a paper sadly in need of some thoughtful writing and solid editing. This column of Gillespie's should have been spiked. Wait. The spikes left with the editors.
_______________________________________________________________

As I said, I am not concerned about the amount of fluoride found in London Ontario tap water. Just last month the EPA in the United States lowered the maximum recommended concentration of fluoride for drinking water. London was ahead of the EPA. Our fluoride level is inline with the new proposed U.S. guidelines.

But, and it is a big but, if you are already frightened by fluoride in your water, the recent move by the EPA does nothing to allay your fears. Learning that after decades of use the correct amount of fluoride to be added to drinking water without causing any health problems is still being adjusted is downright worrisome. These people need their fears addressed in an adult manner. Condescension is not called for nor is it productive.

Gillespie quotes UWO professor Tim Blackmore, who teaches media and information studies:

“Ignorance is a lot easier and a lot more convincing than knowledge. Knowledge takes time, it takes thinking and it takes figuring. Ignorance doesn’t take any of those things. It just takes belief.”

Ian, I think the professor may have been talking about you.

Don't bag fall leaves!

How to Green Your Falling Leaves on Howcast

"Just pick up the damn bags!"

It was a quick, flippant answer that struck a responsive chord with many London folk — especially those with clear plastic bags, filled with fallen autumn leaves and sitting forgotten at the curb, passed over by city crews doing the fall leaves pick-up. It seems those leaves were ignored because they were in the wrong bags.

Plastic leaf bags are so passé; Paper bags are in. But not just any paper bag. No, the paper bags you fill with leaves, and place at the curb, must be certified compostable and bear the appropriate logo from either the Biodegradable Products Institute (BPI) or the Bureau de Normalisation du Quebec (BNQ). No label, no pick-up.

How much does it cost London to pick-up leaves?

The problem had grown into quite the local dust-up when London mayor-elect Joe Fontana stepped boldly into the fray. Fontana called News Talk 1290 Today with Andy Oudman and sliced through the Gordian knot of confusing green rhetoric. Fontana, shooting from the hip — some might argue lip — said, "Just pick up the damn bags!"

Free Press columnist Ian Gillespie found the “just get ‘er done” response refreshing. I wasn't immediately enamored with Fontana's response but I have slowly climbed on-board. Gillespie was right. And so was Fontana.

With the problem at hand "solved" by our mayor-elect, I say, "Let's clear up the whole messy, costly, leaf pick-up program and kill it for 2011. The Free Press reports that the city enjoys an annual savings of about $200,000 simply by banning plastic bags for leaf pick-up. This makes me wonder how much the city could save by scrapping the needless pick-up altogether.

Fontana promises to be a "Get Tough" mayor. He ran for office vowing to freeze property taxes over four years — a financial get tough platform. Maybe one place to apply his new, bold approach might be here, and tackle the whole leaf pick-up problem head-on.

The truly get tough answer might be, "They're leaves. Run your lawn mower over 'em and get on with life. The city is out of the leaf pick-up business. We can't afford the luxury anymore."

I can hear the outcry now. "The leaves will kill my lawn." "Leaves harbour mould and plant diseases." "Rotting, wet leaves offer sanctuary to breeding mosquitoes."

Relax. It doesn't have to be that way according to many researchers who have studied fall leaves. Steve Bender, the Grumpy Gardener, says:

"Stop Being So %^&*@#+ Stupid! Do you bag your leaves? . . . Are you, in other words, a certified cretin?

Leaves are a great source of organic matter. And they're free! Why throw away good, free stuff in favor of peat moss, composted cow manure, and shredded bark from the garden center that costs money? Hello? Is there anybody home?"

He see fall leaves as free organic matter! Did you hear that? Free! Grumpy writes:

"Hydroponics aside, you can't grow good plants without good soil. And no matter if your soil is mucky clay or worthless sand, the best way to improve is to add lots and lots of organic matter. Organic matter improves soil drainage and aeration, increases storage of moisture and nutrients, and makes things cozy and comfy for earthworms and microbes that stir and digest the soil and make its nutrients available to plants. Organic matter is brown gold."

Grumpy is not alone. The Website of The City of Guelph calls leaves Mother Nature's gold. The tell homeowners:

 "Keep your leaves on your lawn. . . . Research has proven that mowing leaves into your lawn can improve its vigor, and help to slow down weed germination in the spring. Organic matter and nutrients from leaves mown into lawn areas has been proven to improve turf quality."

The City of Guelph calls leaves Mother Nature's gold.

Personally, I've never understood the whole autumn leaves problem. My dad was a farmer born more than a hundred years ago in the early years of the twentieth century. He always saw fallen leaves as a valuable commodity. Something to be composed, or used to insulate plants from the harshest cold and fiercest wind of winter. Leaves represented the goodness of the soil; He recycled them back into the earth.

My grandparents on my mother's side were both born in the 1870s in small farming communities. They agreed with my dad. Despite living for most of their lives off the farm and in the city they never showed any sign of being caught up in the off-the-land fear of leaves that seemed to grip the city slickers.

A The Free Press photographer, now retired, had a farm west of the London. He told me that he wished there were a way to convince the city to dump the leaves collected from city homes at his farm. He saw them as a fine addition to the soil and he'd just plow them into the earth. Unfortunately, his farm was too far out of town for the city to have any interest in his idea.

A few years ago The Free Press ran a Business Monday feature on a company selling and installing special replacement blades for electric and gas rotary mowers. They installed two special blades with a total of six sharp cutting edges which made quick work of mulching lawn clippings, including leaves.

The company's product was obviously accepted by Londoners as the shop in North London was backed up with hundreds of lawn mowers waiting to be upgraded.

Sadly, it seems that the multi-blade, mulching invention, as good as it was, was better than the inventor's business acumen; The business folded and the mulching blade invention disappeared with last year's leaves.
 ______________________________________________________________

And Joe, if you should happen by, do a quick google about the Net and check out all the cities that are getting on the mulch 'em bandwagon.

e.g. Seattle Public Utilities: Mulching lawn mower guide

. . . and they are even into mulching in Merry Old England.

e.g. Warwickshire County Council: Mulch Mowing

e.g. . . . and a sister paper of The London Free Press,
The Chatham Daily News, says:

"Use a mulching mower and feed your lawn and keep shredded grass and leaves out of the landfill."

So go get 'em Joe. Tell those damn voters,

 "Just leave the damn leaves!"