Nanny loves to ban things, and will often cite "scientific evidence" to back up her claims.Rather reminiscent of the witch trials of the 16th century, Nanny's "evidence" often amounts to little more than heresay and lax research rather than detailed statistics that can withstand rigorous intellectual scrutiny.
Indeed, it is ironic that we have progressed very little from the days of hysterically burning people based on no evidence whatsoever to the modern day equivalent of fat haters, smoker haters and "all adults are paedophiles" etc.
Anyhoo, according to Nanny's Health and Safety Executive (HSE) sun beds pose a risk to under 18's, as such they may be banned from using them.
The Sunbed Association (TSA) notes that there is no scientific evidence for a ban on young people aged 17 or 18.
Over 100 deaths from skin cancer every year in the UK are thought to be linked to the use of sunbeds. That's hardly an epidemic is it?
In the 1920's and 30's Nanny would force children to sit in front of UV lamps, as she then thought that this was healthy.
Why should we now believe her, when she says that it is so dangerous?
Cry wolf too many times Nanny, and no one will believe you!
Visit The Joy of Lard and indulge your lard fantasies.
Show your contempt for Nanny by buying a T shirt or thong from Nanny's Store.
www.nannyknowsbest.com is brought to you by www.kenfrost.com "The Living Brand"
Celebrate the joy of living with champagne. Click and drink!
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Toys, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
Good morning Ken, on the day Nanny's councillors are reminded that they work for us.
ReplyDeleteAs well as citing dodgy science, I have recently noticed that Nanny has started to cite dodgy surveys too - along the lines of "93 percent of people would like to see an increase in the TV licence fee." and "98 percent of drivers think more speed cameras are needed."
I have stopped believing that shite already.
Nanny really does believe that we are all truly daft.... and that is one of the most annoying things about her.
Coming soon from Nanny:
ReplyDeleteAll children under the age of 18 must NOT be exposed to daylight.
Smithy:
ReplyDeleteGood Afternoon to you sir, yes Nanny has been slapped good and hard today!
With regards to these surveys that don't seem to reflect reality....It is all in the way the question is asked, for example:
Proposition A
Would you like to see more speed cameras installed to slow down trafic to stop kids being killed?
or
Proposition B
Would you like to see more kids killed by speeding drivers
Obviously, put in that way, most people would say propostion A, the choices given assume that more kids are being killed when they aren't actually. No choice allowed as to whether one wants more cameras or not.
They adopt similar tactics when asking local people where they want new homes built;_
Site A or Site B? The choice that is not given is, "no new homes thanks." So local Nanny can rightly say, local people support development at site A or B.
Clever and manipulating is Nanny.
Nanny wants to get her facts right before spouting off shite like the sun bed rule. As a psoriasis suffer for more than 25 years, one of the first therapies that is offered is pUVA treatment. This involves taking a drug (psoralen) which heightens the skins sensitivity to UVA radiation ten-fold, then entering a 'stand up sun bed' which is a hell of a lot more powerful than the ones you find in your average 'bronze me up' (real name of a local tanning salon), although clinically monitored. I do agree that excessive exposure to UVA/B radiation may have a derogatory effect on the appearance of the skin but isn't better that little Chardonnay feels it is better to spend her pocket money on 3 minutes on a sun bed, than spend it on 5 bottles of Diamond White cider, get ‘knocked up’ and spend the rest of her life sponging off the state with several kids to several different fathers and ending up in hospital at 30 with chronic alcohol liver failure, than presenting to Dermatology with a ‘funny lookin’ mole that’s itchin’ a bit’. I’ll leave the good readers to work out the difference in treatment of the two scenarios.
ReplyDeleteanon 7:42,
ReplyDeleteLiver failure or cancer? Either way it doesn't matter, a day or so after admission to an NHS hospital you'd be dying of MRSA.
Way back children were deliberately exposed to UV as it was found to help in rickets - prevalent then.
ReplyDeleteStill nowadays if you live in sunny Australia it is odds on you will have basal cell carcinomas dug out from face & scalp. Sooner or later. As well as getting the wrinkles of chronic sun damage.