It is inflammation. Can be minor(short term pain and gastric issue), But when acute can lead to death. Mainly as it seriously harm other organs and has a systemic effect on the body when the pancreas fails.
Pancreatitis ranges from minor to life threatening.
It can become systemic harming multiple organs.
So idepending on what this study shows when done. A high number of severe cases. Could def be worse for the NHS then obesity. Considering 1 in 4 adults meet the obesity Def now. And 1 in 5 cases of pancreatitis are classed as severe. Mass roll out could be a disaster if the study shows high numbers suffer this effect.
Both companies question if the 2002 law applies. Saying they think the gov is wrong.
Neither give a shit if they morally should be advertising a dangerous product. Let alone in front of children.
Ain't capitalism great.
I mean I grew up with tobacco advertising. And below 10 my father sending me to the shop to buy him fags. The 70s were a very different time.
But for all the evil tobacco companies did. They were trying to stay afloat. With a model that started before the health disadvantages were understood. Shitty greed was clearly a motive. But at least some element of survival instinct can be applied. To their desperation to fight the science.
Sainsbury's knew the harm from day one. Had no business to protect by trying to skirt the law. A law clearly intended to stop exactly what they planned to do. And openly supported by the waste majority of modern British citizens. Heck even my father's age group tends to agree with the law.
But openly decided to do harm purely to increase profits..
according to my neighbours, you can buy kittens, not do any of that and then just let them be feral around your neighbourhood
Ignoreing the not having to care for them. And legally cats must be chipped now. But that is a very very recent rule change.
This is very much a majority opinion in the UK that cats kept inside is cruelty to the cat. Your opinion that all cats are required to be inside creatures is the rare one. More common in the younger generation. But not one backed up by evidence.
Bird deaths are the most common sighted evidence. But cats are not proven to be the cause of a change in total population. Cats have been in the UK at least since the Romans first arrival. So 2000+ years. And have been used as pest control on farms extensively since at least that period. Most UK bird species have come here via Europe where cats were for much longer. Urbanisation may mean more cats. But the expansion of humanity and removal of habitate is the real issue.
Well it's sky so I'm not going to disagree with the intent.
But it's very open to interpretation. Many right wing readers may interpret it that way. But the tittle just questions the cost. Reading the article it seems more like a warning.
"For elderly females that dogs may be a bad pet for them and the NHS."
I worry more that it makes no effort to compare the huge cost saving regular walking of dogs has on elderly heart and muscle health. And companionship has on mental health.
But that's less click baity. And really clicks is all they care about.
Moving to a nation you are not a citizen off is not simple. More so when the nation you are a citizen of is consided an agressor to the one you want to visit.
But more to the point. No government can force you to. So even if he could. The UK is required to consider all asylum/refugee claims under his percieved risk at his home nation. It's part of the Geneva convention.
Or you know. More information shared with the public about the needs of certain pets.
Hamsters are the worst off. Most have no idea how big the cage needs to be for them to be unstressed. There already short lives are way shorter and stressed due to pet shops not advising the need a much much larger cage. RSPCA says 1mx50cm or larger. Also if you have a Syrian you likely need a larger wheel.
Yep, My prediction was more the idea of a first try. Cash and run is normally the type of criminal more willing to try with less planning, etc.
To work with machinery needs both the ability to move it in a way cops won't notice. So take minimal organisation. Cops confronted with an assumed ICE agent taking expensive machinery are much more likely to draw their own gun then accept it's a ICE agent.
Stuff small enough to fit in a white van like generators or tools, though. Yep, would just look like immigrants are being removed.
Heck, could even kidnap Musk that way and likely get away with it with a little thought.
I am in no way recommending anyone start kidnapping billionaires to help defund trump. (Nudge nudge).
Nope you should not do that (very obvious unsubtle wink) .
Before, some groups uses this to commit/escape from crime.
Likely to be small scale cash attack on some small cash only but very public business. Dressing like this and confusing local police into inaction. While they bully and cause fear. Someone empties the cash and runs.
He may know it. But it is pretty unlikely the gov has one given its trump uncertainty at play. Not to mention the news released on legal opinion.
But no cabinet member is authorised to declare war or not or future attacks on another nation. Without approval of the whole cabinet. So even if he knows it and one exists.
He is in no way authorised to declare it independent of official channels.
And absolutely any journalist in a position to ask that. Knows full well he cannot answer it.
It is absolutely not reasonable. Unless you are intentionally looking for refusal to answer. Because cabinet policy on attacking a 3rd nation is not and has never been released in such an interview. Such things would be officially announced to parliament first. And be an illegal act of treason for any minister to announce in such a way.
Except the law did not ban the treatment she needed.
Don't like her or the law.
But in her case. It was very much the fear of the laws rather then the actual law. That slowed her treatment.
Sorta exactly how what she calls fear mungering predicted it would.
But honestly. It's not exactly impossible that a % of the staff refused to treat due to who she is Vs the staff own political opinions. Good for them. But she dose have a point technically.
Pancreatitis not cancer.
It is inflammation. Can be minor(short term pain and gastric issue), But when acute can lead to death. Mainly as it seriously harm other organs and has a systemic effect on the body when the pancreas fails.