Monday 10th October 2016

Post by **refitman** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 7:09 am

Morning all.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 7:48 am

Good morfternoon.

Record low number of UK butterflies a 'shock and a mystery'

Annual Big Butterfly Count records lowest ever number of usually prolific species despite the relatively warm, dry summer (Guardian)

https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... -shock-and

JonnyT1234 · Post by **JonnyT1234** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 8:17 am

After May's Brexit pledge, Europeans close ranks - Reuters
https://apple.news/AN5fz7LbUQjCpsv5bBw7AaQ" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The EU mantra is "no negotiation before notification". On Friday, Commission President Juncker said: "We won't negotiate before we've had the British government's farewell letter." (The French term he used also means "suicide note".)

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 8:27 am

Farage's crush on Trump continues. Calls him an alpha male again, as if it's a good thing.
Gorilla's everywhere are offended at the comparison.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... -spin-room" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 8:34 am

Despite the obvious negative issues around Clinton, you have to admire her ability to stand up against Trump and his attempt to play the 'alpha male'* his pal Nige drools about.

* translation: crude bullying idiotic perv

ScarletGas · Post by **ScarletGas** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 9:09 am

Good (I think) tweet from someone called Tom Rosenthal (some sort of TV person I am told)

"With Trump grabbing vaginas and Clinton shaming rape victims cant help but think we were a bit harsh on Miliband about that bacon sandwich"

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 9:28 am

Quite clearly has no idea what alpha male means,even less about gorillas.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 9:35 am

8m ago 09:24
David Davis to make Commons statement on Brexit

There will be a statement in the Commons today on Brexit, the Labour Whips Twitter feed has announced. David Davis, the Brexit secretary, will deliver it, and his new Labour shadow, Sir Keir Starmer, will respond. (Politics Live, Guardian)

Might be illuminating (Keir Starmer-wise).

Edited to add -

Although if the statement is the usual load of nothing, then why should it be?

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 10:00 am

EdM on Victoria Derbyshire just after 10.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 10:05 am

PorFavor wrote:
8m ago 09:24
David Davis to make Commons statement on Brexit

There will be a statement in the Commons today on Brexit, the Labour Whips Twitter feed has announced. David Davis, the Brexit secretary, will deliver it, and his new Labour shadow, Sir Keir Starmer, will respond. (Politics Live, Guardian)
Might be illuminating (Keir Starmer-wise).

Edited to add -

Although if the statement is the usual load of nothing, then why should it be?

What would be nice is if Starmer set out a positive case for staying in the single market or at least the customs union. That would place him in conflict with Corbyn/McDonnell, so he cannot.

What we'll get is what we have had before "the Commons must have a vote". But how, and on what, is really hard to see. On invoking art 50? On what the UK's negotiating position is? What?

But, sticking to procedures enables Starmer not to say anything about what Labour's position actually is. I don't blame Starmer for that, he has an impossible task as Labour has no positive position to offer.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 10:23 am

gilsey wrote:EdM on Victoria Derbyshire just after 10.

I've just watched it thanks to your alert.

What a missed opportunity for the country.

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 10:29 am

PorFavor wrote:
gilsey wrote:EdM on Victoria Derbyshire just after 10.
I've just watched it thanks to your alert.

What a missed opportunity for the country.

Yes. Never mind re-running the EUref, if only we could re-run the 2015 GE.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 10:53 am

gilsey wrote:
PorFavor wrote:
gilsey wrote:EdM on Victoria Derbyshire just after 10.
I've just watched it thanks to your alert.

What a missed opportunity for the country.
Yes. Never mind re-running the EUref, if only we could re-run the 2015 GE.

Don't even go there.....

JonnyT1234 · Post by **JonnyT1234** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 11:02 am

: IMG_5122.JPG (64.09 KiB) Viewed 9610 times

Babe
I got you babe
I got you babe

I got flowers in the spring
I got you to wear my ring
And when I'm sad, you're a clown
And if I get scared, you're always around

Babe
I got you babe
I got you babe

JonnyT1234 · Post by **JonnyT1234** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 11:08 am

Creepiest performance during a 'debate', ever. Farage has tutored his padawan well.

JonnyT1234 · Post by **JonnyT1234** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 11:11 am

HindleA wrote:Quite clearly has no idea what alpha male means,even less about gorillas.

Big sigh of relief. Let him near no gorillas. Particularly mine. I'll forewarn him, I'm armed with the caged gorilla's weapon of choice and I will not hesitate to fling it.

[youtube]x5HaLo95ufw[/youtube]

JonnyT1234 · Post by **JonnyT1234** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 11:30 am

Record low number of British butterflies a 'shock and a mystery' - the guardian
https://apple.news/Aw2wsDYMnSE6LFLVxVihfzw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Just pasting again because PorFavor's link is giving me a 404, but also to include an article about a study that's a couple of years old now:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 090145.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Phenology -- the study of the timing of recurring natural phenomena -- tells us a great deal about changing climate and its effect on wildlife. Although phenology provides some of the oldest written biological records in Britain, the date when butterflies emerge each spring has only been recorded systematically for the past 30-40 years.

Records from the UK Butterfly Monitoring Scheme show that since 1976, spring has arrived 6-11 days earlier each decade due to rising temperatures. Now, ecologists from the Natural History Museum (NHM) and the University of Coventry have used some of the museum's 130,000 butterfly specimens collected over the past 200 years to look back at earlier springs.

They examined 2,600 specimens of four British butterfly species -- the Grizzled Skipper, the Duke of Burgundy, the Orange Tip and the Blue Adonis -- all held in the Museum's research collections. Collected between 1876 and 1999, each butterfly is mounted on a pin and labelled with when and where it was caught.

When they compared collection dates with temperature records, they found that in years with warm springs, collection dates were earlier than collection dates in cold, wet springs. The results also show March temperatures and rainfall were most critical in influencing how early these butterflies emerged.

According to Dr Steve Brooks, researcher at the Natural History Museum "Because they agree with observations over the last 30-40 years, our results show that natural history museum collections can provide vital historical information about how butterflies and other organisms respond to climate change."

Understanding the impact of these changes is important because different species depend on each other for food. "Long-term shifts in when British butterflies first emerge due to changing climate may mean the butterflies are no longer synchronised with the food plants on which their caterpillars depend. Many birds depend on caterpillars to feed their chicks but changes in the timing of butterfly life cycles may lead to insufficient caterpillars being present when they are needed by the young birds. By providing long term data from museum collections we can get a more accurate idea of the rates of these shifts in timing," he explains.

Possibly what's happened this year for some species - the milder winters we've been having are causing caterpillars to emerge too early leading to lack of food sources or premature death due to a snap return to normal, colder weather conditions.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 11:56 am

Ed was good, didn't rule out returning to the front bench in future either.

JonnyT1234 · Post by **JonnyT1234** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 12:01 pm

But clearly ruled out returning now ('no formal talks' = informal talks)

Tory MP accuses government of 'tyranny' over Brexit strategy - the guardian
https://apple.news/AopH4Hq67TnyT2FvQpZ3WLw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Not Anna Soubry or Ken Clarke but an MP who voted leave.

Phillips said: “I and many others did not exercise our vote in the referendum so as to restore the sovereignty of this parliament only to see what we regarded as the tyranny of the European Union replaced by that of a government that apparently wishes to ignore the views of the house on the most important issue facing the nation.”

JonnyT1234 · Post by **JonnyT1234** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 12:03 pm

Prices will shoot up if UK fails to get EU single market access, retailers warn - the guardian
https://apple.news/APtyPePplTFGG6zXsT-bbfA" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Well, duh.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 12:21 pm

Luckily, all polls are inaccurate, as the 2015 GE showed.

JonnyT1234 · Post by **JonnyT1234** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 12:47 pm

Type 2 diabetes: Data reveals hotspots for cases - BBC News
https://apple.news/A9jwhF_6nTQGlOZRq3Xw7XA" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Another wholly avoidable issue that New Labour did bugger all to prevent, that will cost the NHS an arm and a leg to manage, and that the Tories are doing even less to stop than did New Labour.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 12:49 pm

Good-afternoon, everyone.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 12:50 pm

Quite.

And lest we forget the Tory manifesto which is the mandate this government has and nothing else said:

Cropped properly this time!

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 1:12 pm

Labour's policy on the UK's membership of the single market also seems to have altered, rather unfortunately.

An interesting defence of the reshuffle.

http://averypublicsociologist.blogspot. ... uffle.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

what did they expect? indeed so.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 1:13 pm

Starmer yesterday seemed to be emphasising the dangers of a "hard" Brexit - the correct line to take right now IMO.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 1:38 pm

From DAG in the FT

Parliament should be central to Brexit, not marginal

https://www.ft.com/content/1b1aabc8-f4d ... 00df9a74a6

The most curious thing about the government’s attempt to sideline parliament is that it appears to contradict what many would see as the central purpose of Brexit: returning sovereignty back to Westminster from Brussels. The government is misguided in this, for the best way to make a success of Brexit is to make parliament central to the process and not marginal.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 1:41 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Starmer yesterday seemed to be emphasising the dangers of a "hard" Brexit - the correct line to take right now IMO.

Seemed to be?

Labour isn't going to reach anyone with nuance. Polls show that remaining in the single market has majority support. With the Tories leaning to hard Brexit it seems a no brainer for Labour to sweep up that majority support for what is, after all, the only plan which offers some kind of economic stability. Poor people always lose out most from market volatility and change. Anyone who wants to protect the most vulnerable should be supporting the least disruptive option, yet so far Corbyn has had little positive to say about single market membership. He needs to get a move on.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 1:44 pm

The UK leaving the EU means what? A phenomenal crisis in this country's history is unfolding. The UK referendum and it's outcome will directly affect the lives of millions of people all over the world. The same worthless Tory government we woke to find still in leadership May 2015 continues. Whatever it is Tory government are doing, it's not straight up. It's untrustworthy. That May states she knows 'the will of the people' is terrifying. Should the UK remain in the EU, yes or no? How come we don't and didn't know the answer to that prior the vote? Or now? Who's allowed this to happen? How did anyone allow this to happen? I shouldn't be so incredulous. Completely avoidable terrible things happen throughout human history.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 1:46 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:From DAG in the FT
Parliament should be central to Brexit, not marginal

https://www.ft.com/content/1b1aabc8-f4d ... 00df9a74a6
The most curious thing about the government’s attempt to sideline parliament is that it appears to contradict what many would see as the central purpose of Brexit: returning sovereignty back to Westminster from Brussels. The government is misguided in this, for the best way to make a success of Brexit is to make parliament central to the process and not marginal.

Yes, this.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 1:48 pm

JonnyT1234 wrote:Type 2 diabetes: Data reveals hotspots for cases - BBC News
https://apple.news/A9jwhF_6nTQGlOZRq3Xw7XA" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Another wholly avoidable issue that New Labour did bugger all to prevent, that will cost the NHS an arm and a leg to manage, and that the Tories are doing even less to stop than did New Labour.

Beg to differ there Jonny, as I was working in admin in primary care and part time for a Primary Care Trust back then.

There were National Service Frameworks set up under Blair, for major health conditions including diabetes.
Some doctors moaned about the extra workload, but more time was spent looking at preventative health. One of the projects I worked on was about identifying, monitoring, recalling patients.

Unfortunately a lot of patients didn't/don't like the 'you're at risk of ....[insert health condition] you need to lose weight, exercise, cut the junk food' advice.

Blair gets it in the neck about a lot of things but there was much in the small print that his government
achieved. Of course, a lot of it got derided by the usual suspects as being about targets, or complaining that patients were being asked to take responsibility for aspects of their own health.
Or that there were too many admin people like me, as if highly qualified nurse and doctors should have been attending to all the admin needed in a late 20th/ early 21st century NHS.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 1:49 pm

Guardian headlines, Tories have a 17-point lead post-conference and Donald Trump says he's a gentleman.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 1:50 pm

Lunacy

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 1:50 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Starmer yesterday seemed to be emphasising the dangers of a "hard" Brexit - the correct line to take right now IMO.

No he wasn't. I watched it carefully.

I was all procedural and "questions the government has to answer".

I don't blame him, he is constrained.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 1:53 pm

Willow904 wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:Starmer yesterday seemed to be emphasising the dangers of a "hard" Brexit - the correct line to take right now IMO.
Seemed to be?

Labour isn't going to reach anyone with nuance. Polls show that remaining in the single market has majority support. With the Tories leaning to hard Brexit it seems a no brainer for Labour to sweep up that majority support for what is, after all, the only plan which offers some kind of economic stability. Poor people always lose out most from market volatility and change. Anyone who wants to protect the most vulnerable should be supporting the least disruptive option, yet so far Corbyn has had little positive to say about single market membership. He needs to get a move on.

I wonder what could be the block on Labour adopting this no-brainer position?

Are there any prominent Labour members who have adopted a lifelong hostility to markets in general, and the EU in particular, I wonder?

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 1:58 pm

The latest ICM poll holds no comfort.

Tories 43%
Labour 26%

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 2:21 pm

Starmer is on from 34min

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0 ... w-09102016" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Notice in particular the tell-tale calls for "access" to the single market (at 37min)

coupled with the calls to end freedom of movement, which will inevitably means we leave the single market, depressing, But I don't blame him I suppose, nothing he alone can do.

(The stuff about skills is largely nonsense unfortunately. )

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 2:22 pm

Reality starts to bite
David Beeson ‏@DavidBeeson2 2h2 hours ago
UK fuel retailers have announced a likely increase in fuel prices of 45p a litre by the end of the month. The falling pound isn't cost-free.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 2:32 pm

AngryAsWell wrote:Reality starts to bite
David Beeson ‏@DavidBeeson2 2h2 hours ago
UK fuel retailers have announced a likely increase in fuel prices of 45p a litre by the end of the month. The falling pound isn't cost-free.

This seems to be the right figure. I heard 45p; I think the BBC said 4-5p; I apologise for my error (memo to self: check before you tweet)

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 2:37 pm

https://dwp.bravosolution.co.uk/esop/to ... st=CURRENT" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

- Umbrella Agreement for the provision of Employment and Health Related Services

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 2:40 pm

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/ ... -holmstrom" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Nobel economics prize won by Oliver Hart and Bengt Holmström

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 2:41 pm

AngryAsWell wrote:Reality starts to bite
David Beeson ‏@DavidBeeson2 2h2 hours ago
UK fuel retailers have announced a likely increase in fuel prices of 45p a litre by the end of the month. The falling pound isn't cost-free.

I need to order my central heating oil quickly. There'll be big hike in that too.

Have just checked on of the main heating oil suppliers - it was as low 25p a litre on average in January - now 37.65p and will be heading up even more with the pound so low.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 2:44 pm

norman smith ‏@BBCNormanS 58m58 minutes ago

Govt will fall if it tries to impose Brexit deal without backing of Commons warns Dominic Grieve #wato

There was another Tory MP kicking back against the government simply doing what it wants without parliamentary approval too.

JonnyT1234 · Post by **JonnyT1234** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 3:02 pm

yahyah wrote:
JonnyT1234 wrote:Type 2 diabetes: Data reveals hotspots for cases - BBC News
https://apple.news/A9jwhF_6nTQGlOZRq3Xw7XA" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Another wholly avoidable issue that New Labour did bugger all to prevent, that will cost the NHS an arm and a leg to manage, and that the Tories are doing even less to stop than did New Labour.
Beg to differ there Jonny, as I was working in admin in primary care and part time for a Primary Care Trust back then.

There were National Service Frameworks set up under Blair, for major health conditions including diabetes.
Some doctors moaned about the extra workload, but more time was spent looking at preventative health. One of the projects I worked on was about identifying, monitoring, recalling patients.

Unfortunately a lot of patients didn't/don't like the 'you're at risk of ....[insert health condition] you need to lose weight, exercise, cut the junk food' advice.

Blair gets it in the neck about a lot of things but there was much in the small print that his government
achieved. Of course, a lot of it got derided by the usual suspects as being about targets, or complaining that patients were being asked to take responsibility for aspects of their own health.
Or that there were too many admin people like me, as if highly qualified nurse and doctors should have been attending to all the admin needed in a late 20th/ early 21st century NHS.

Preventative medicine in this instance would have been reigning in junk food, sugary drinks and fast food culture. It would have been standardised food labels. It would have been proper regulation of the food industry. It would have been bans on advertising shit foods to children. It would have been encouraging people to adopt a healthy lifestyle. It would have been reversing the sell off of school playing fields. It would have been looking across the ocean at the epidemic of obesity occurring in the USA and stopping it from happening here. So, no, New Labour didn't do anything. They stood by and let it all happen. They let a wholly preventable disease take hold, one that is going to cost the NHS a fucking fortune to deal with, meaning that a significant chunk of that extra funding they put into the NHS was a big, fat waste of time.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 3:34 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:
norman smith ‏@BBCNormanS 58m58 minutes ago

Govt will fall if it tries to impose Brexit deal without backing of Commons warns Dominic Grieve #wato
There was another Tory MP kicking back against the government simply doing what it wants without parliamentary approval too.

Tyrie maybe?

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 3:48 pm

StephenDolan wrote:
RogerOThornhill wrote:
norman smith ‏@BBCNormanS 58m58 minutes ago

Govt will fall if it tries to impose Brexit deal without backing of Commons warns Dominic Grieve #wato
There was another Tory MP kicking back against the government simply doing what it wants without parliamentary approval too.
Tyrie maybe?

Ah yes, Tyrie. Ta.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 3:53 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:
StephenDolan wrote:
RogerOThornhill wrote: There was another Tory MP kicking back against the government simply doing what it wants without parliamentary approval too.
Tyrie maybe?
Ah yes, Tyrie. Ta.

The man I always feel guilty for quite liking.

Time to confess that I quite like Jacob Rees Mogg (for reasons of pure whimsy).

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 4:20 pm

We need a proper structure for these negotiations. We want absolutely clarity on the issues that will be negotiated and then we want some say over the details of that package.

We need to know what the objectives are at least. I understand that you don’t show your cards initially but you need to say what the objectives are ...

We need certainty. People who want to invest in this country want some certainty. People whose livelihoods depend, for example, on the finance sector need some certainty so we’re saying to the government ‘get your act together’.

Strong statement from McDonnell. I'd call that opposing.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 4:33 pm

JonnyT1234 wrote:
yahyah wrote:
JonnyT1234 wrote:Type 2 diabetes: Data reveals hotspots for cases - BBC News
https://apple.news/A9jwhF_6nTQGlOZRq3Xw7XA" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Another wholly avoidable issue that New Labour did bugger all to prevent, that will cost the NHS an arm and a leg to manage, and that the Tories are doing even less to stop than did New Labour.
Beg to differ there Jonny, as I was working in admin in primary care and part time for a Primary Care Trust back then.

There were National Service Frameworks set up under Blair, for major health conditions including diabetes.
Some doctors moaned about the extra workload, but more time was spent looking at preventative health. One of the projects I worked on was about identifying, monitoring, recalling patients.

Unfortunately a lot of patients didn't/don't like the 'you're at risk of ....[insert health condition] you need to lose weight, exercise, cut the junk food' advice.

Blair gets it in the neck about a lot of things but there was much in the small print that his government
achieved. Of course, a lot of it got derided by the usual suspects as being about targets, or complaining that patients were being asked to take responsibility for aspects of their own health.
Or that there were too many admin people like me, as if highly qualified nurse and doctors should have been attending to all the admin needed in a late 20th/ early 21st century NHS.
Preventative medicine in this instance would have been reigning in junk food, sugary drinks and fast food culture. It would have been standardised food labels. It would have been proper regulation of the food industry. It would have been bans on advertising shit foods to children. It would have been encouraging people to adopt a healthy lifestyle. It would have been reversing the sell off of school playing fields. It would have been looking across the ocean at the epidemic of obesity occurring in the USA and stopping it from happening here. So, no, New Labour didn't do anything. They stood by and let it all happen. They let a wholly preventable disease take hold, one that is going to cost the NHS a fucking fortune to deal with, meaning that a significant chunk of that extra funding they put into the NHS was a big, fat waste of time.

That just isn't true.

During those years 'Well person' clinics started in my area, help to stop smoking, public health campaigns about healthy lifestyles. Diabetes awareness was a big part of that. I know because I was working with a pharmacist, lead GP and health visitor on organising stuff, and the surgery where I was a patient did a lot of work around it too as did other practices in the area.

I agree about bans on certain foods, but New Labour didn't just stand by. That's just emotion speaking. Either that or I must have imagined it all and didn't actually do the work.
We were regularly having meetings and training sessions about it too. Much more money was available for training, both clinical and staff, during those years. I worked before the 1997 government during the awful Tory fundholding mess so saw the difference.

And if New Labour had banned things it would've be marked up as another 'authoritarian' Blairite policy. Those governments were damned whatever they did.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 4:52 pm

Sorry that wasn't supposed to sound grumpy. It's just that those were good years to be working in my job, much more investment, more focus on patients and [awful word] 'empowering' them to make the right decisions about their health.