General News Thread

[Samilktray]

Be nice if we could keep childish name calling out of this thread. I personally enjoy some of the contributions in here and as a very valuable part of the forum just don’t think calling politicians names is the way to go about it. Just my opinion and sorry if that offends anyone 

[leicsmac]

1 minute ago, Samilktray said:

Be nice if we could keep childish name calling out of this thread. I personally enjoy some of the contributions in here and as a very valuable part of the forum just don’t think calling politicians names is the way to go about it. Just my opinion and sorry if that offends anyone 

Or at least qualify such insults.

[JonnyBoy]

33 minutes ago, Samilktray said:

Be nice if we could keep childish name calling out of this thread. I personally enjoy some of the contributions in here and as a very valuable part of the forum just don’t think calling politicians names is the way to go about it. Just my opinion and sorry if that offends anyone 

Didn’t you get that @Raj banned or demanded his picture to be changed and starting calling him names.. “numpty” if I remember rightly 

 

kin’ell mate you’ve had a mare here 

[Unabomber]

5 minutes ago, JonnyBoy said:

Didn’t you get that @Raj banned or demanded his picture to be changed and starting calling him names.. “numpty” if I remember rightly 

 

kin’ell mate you’ve had a mare here 

He said calling politicians names not Raj tbf 

[Samilktray]

8 minutes ago, JonnyBoy said:

Didn’t you get that @Raj banned or demanded his picture to be changed and starting calling him names.. “numpty” if I remember rightly 

 

kin’ell mate you’ve had a mare here 

This is a very strange post 

[Miquel The Work Geordie]

10 minutes ago, JonnyBoy said:

Didn’t you get that @Raj banned or demanded his picture to be changed and starting calling him names.. “numpty” if I remember rightly 

 

kin’ell mate you’ve had a mare here 

 

He's having you on

[Tommy G]

1 hour ago, st albans fox said:

Is there anyone competent who could be brought into the role?  

I guess Angela rayner is looking to get back into cabinet  😂

The same person who hasn’t paid that tax or penalties back yet… 

 

 

[Claudio Fannieri]

Cannot believe what I am hearing, the reasons and justifications for not implementing a national screening programme for #prostatecancer is absolutely scandalous, yet again men’s health & well being is secondary. 

 

1,300 lives are saved every year as a result of the national breast screening programme surely this evidences the benefits of such screening programmes. 

Gutted for everybody involved at @ProstateUK and @prostateunited who work tirelessly to try and support men and find funding for research, testing and treatment.

[foxes1988]

BBC News - Wallasea Island sees 39,000 birds ten years post Crossrail work - BBC News

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cgex91yyg1qo?app-referrer=deep-link

 

Really excellent rewilding project. Using the earthworks from the Elizabeth line construction is the kind of joined up thinking that we need more of in this country not just in terms of rewilding but in general.

[foxes1988]

1 hour ago, Tommy G said:

Interesting what the OBR have published - makes RR position even more bleak. What an absolute cretin. 

She has literally ran the Tory play book from start to finish 

[leicsmac]

9 minutes ago, Claudio Fannieri said:

Cannot believe what I am hearing, the reasons and justifications for not implementing a national screening programme for #prostatecancer is absolutely scandalous, yet again men’s health & well being is secondary. 

 

1,300 lives are saved every year as a result of the national breast screening programme surely this evidences the benefits of such screening programmes. 

Gutted for everybody involved at @ProstateUK and @prostateunited who work tirelessly to try and support men and find funding for research, testing and treatment.

Quite apart from the inference of gender preference here, having such a screening programme makes sense from a practical perspective, regardless of the demographic of the recipients. 

 

1 minute ago, foxes1988 said:

BBC News - Wallasea Island sees 39,000 birds ten years post Crossrail work - BBC News

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cgex91yyg1qo?app-referrer=deep-link

 

Really excellent rewilding project. Using the earthworks from the Elizabeth line construction is the kind of joined up thinking that we need more of in this country not just in terms of rewilding but in general.

Yes, excellent news. Declining biodiversity is an issue that too few people appear to truly care about but which affects everyone. 

[Foxdiamond]

23 minutes ago, Claudio Fannieri said:

Cannot believe what I am hearing, the reasons and justifications for not implementing a national screening programme for #prostatecancer is absolutely scandalous, yet again men’s health & well being is secondary. 

 

1,300 lives are saved every year as a result of the national breast screening programme surely this evidences the benefits of such screening programmes. 

Gutted for everybody involved at @ProstateUK and @prostateunited who work tirelessly to try and support men and find funding for research, testing and treatment.

The counter argument and this has also be applied to breast screening is that some patients may undergo invasive treatment for a cancer that was never going to harm them during their life.

[Parafox]

24 minutes ago, Claudio Fannieri said:

Cannot believe what I am hearing, the reasons and justifications for not implementing a national screening programme for #prostatecancer is absolutely scandalous, yet again men’s health & well being is secondary. 

 

1,300 lives are saved every year as a result of the national breast screening programme surely this evidences the benefits of such screening programmes. 

Gutted for everybody involved at @ProstateUK and @prostateunited who work tirelessly to try and support men and find funding for research, testing and treatment.

 

If you read the article, there are genuine and balanced reasons for not mass testing men.

 

The intention is to test those most in the highest risk groups thereby avoiding over diagnosing:

 

"The UK National Screening Committee (UKNSC) has instead recommended that there should be a targeted screening programme for men with a confirmed BRCA1 or BRCA2 faulty gene variant, which means they are more at risk of faster growing and aggressive cancers at an earlier age. Men in that category could be screened every two years between the ages of 45 and 61, they said.

The committee found that the “harms would outweigh the benefits” if it were to recommend prostate cancer screening for all men or for men with a relevant family history of cancer, as it could lead to a small reduction in the number of prostate cancer deaths but “very high levels of over-diagnosis”

 

I think this is what over diagnosis means:

 

The committee estimated that about 40-50% of prostate cancer cases detected by PSA screening would be slow-growing, and that further treatment and testing for these slow-growing cancers would lead to high levels of overdiagnosis and overtreatment, “causing unnecessary anxiety and lifelong side-effects such as incontinence, erectile dysfunction and bladder problems for a cancer that would never have caused harm”.

[leicsmac]

5 minutes ago, Foxdiamond said:

The counter argument and this has also be applied to breast screening is that some patients may undergo invasive treatment for a cancer that was never going to harm them during their life.

 

3 minutes ago, Parafox said:

 

If you read the article, there are genuine and balanced reasons for not mass testing men.

 

The intention is to test those most in the highest risk groups thereby avoiding over diagnosing:

 

"The UK National Screening Committee (UKNSC) has instead recommended that there should be a targeted screening programme for men with a confirmed BRCA1 or BRCA2 faulty gene variant, which means they are more at risk of faster growing and aggressive cancers at an earlier age. Men in that category could be screened every two years between the ages of 45 and 61, they said.

The committee found that the “harms would outweigh the benefits” if it were to recommend prostate cancer screening for all men or for men with a relevant family history of cancer, as it could lead to a small reduction in the number of prostate cancer deaths but “very high levels of over-diagnosis”

 

I think this is what over diagnosis means:

 

The committee estimated that about 40-50% of prostate cancer cases detected by PSA screening would be slow-growing, and that further treatment and testing for these slow-growing cancers would lead to high levels of overdiagnosis and overtreatment, “causing unnecessary anxiety and lifelong side-effects such as incontinence, erectile dysfunction and bladder problems for a cancer that would never have caused harm”.

Interesting counterpoints.

[Foxdiamond]

26 minutes ago, foxes1988 said:

BBC News - Wallasea Island sees 39,000 birds ten years post Crossrail work - BBC News

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cgex91yyg1qo?app-referrer=deep-link

 

Really excellent rewilding project. Using the earthworks from the Elizabeth line construction is the kind of joined up thinking that we need more of in this country not just in terms of rewilding but in general.

This report has cheered me up

[kenny]

57 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Quite apart from the inference of gender preference here, having such a screening programme makes sense from a practical perspective, regardless of the demographic of the recipients. 

 

Yes, excellent news. Declining biodiversity is an issue that too few people appear to truly care about but which affects everyone. 

The current government for one. It's the biodiversity legislation that is in the firing line under the planning reforms.

[leicsmac]

3 minutes ago, kenny said:

The current government for one. It's the biodiversity legislation that is in the firing line under the planning reforms.

Then I would suggest that is no worse than what the other leading parties have in their locker on the matter policy wise at the present time. 

 

But I guess that's a consequence of a single or few issues viewed as "more important" taking the all the oxygen out of the room in terms of policy decisions and public consciousness. 

[kenny]

21 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Then I would suggest that is no worse than what the other leading parties have in their locker on the matter policy wise at the present time. 

 

But I guess that's a consequence of a single or few issues viewed as "more important" taking the all the oxygen out of the room in terms of policy decisions and public consciousness. 

It's a Tory policy they want rid of. As far as I'm aware the Tories aren't proposing to change it, though it probably does need some reform as it stifles smaller developments.

 

Lib dems support the current bng policies and want to make them more onerous.

 

Whoever is in charge, we should be building in our cities not the countryside.

Edited 28 November 2025 by kenny
Lib dem note added.

[UniFox21]

55 minutes ago, Parafox said:

 

If you read the article, there are genuine and balanced reasons for not mass testing men.

 

The intention is to test those most in the highest risk groups thereby avoiding over diagnosing:

 

"The UK National Screening Committee (UKNSC) has instead recommended that there should be a targeted screening programme for men with a confirmed BRCA1 or BRCA2 faulty gene variant, which means they are more at risk of faster growing and aggressive cancers at an earlier age. Men in that category could be screened every two years between the ages of 45 and 61, they said.

The committee found that the “harms would outweigh the benefits” if it were to recommend prostate cancer screening for all men or for men with a relevant family history of cancer, as it could lead to a small reduction in the number of prostate cancer deaths but “very high levels of over-diagnosis”

 

I think this is what over diagnosis means:

 

The committee estimated that about 40-50% of prostate cancer cases detected by PSA screening would be slow-growing, and that further treatment and testing for these slow-growing cancers would lead to high levels of overdiagnosis and overtreatment, “causing unnecessary anxiety and lifelong side-effects such as incontinence, erectile dysfunction and bladder problems for a cancer that would never have caused harm”.

Posted around this in the health thread not realising it had been discussed here. 

 

I agree that over diagnosis is a risk, and incorrect treatment can cause huge issues for men. Annoys me the suggestion is you should only get mass screening should you have a few specific BRCA variants. 

 

Unless you have family who know they have the variant, you're only finding out by testing. Testing that the majority of men won't know about. Variant testing isn't something you're told about regularly, or even offered much. 

 

So it's all well and good wanting this testing to be only those most at risk, but when those most at risk don't know it's them, the idea falls apart.

 

We should be encouraging conversations like this, encouraging and making it easy for men to get a quick blood test to check everything is fine.

[leicsmac]

14 minutes ago, kenny said:

It's a Tory policy they want rid of. As far as I'm aware the Tories aren't proposing to change it, though it probably does need some reform as it stifles smaller developments.

 

Whoever is in charge, we should be building in our cities not the countryside.

No disagreement regarding the second paragraph, but that's just a small piece of this particular puzzle.

[Parafox]

1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

 

Interesting counterpoints.

 

Quite. But women won't suffer from incontinence or erectile dysfunction which, in the latter is a often a major issue for men who would otherwise still be sexually active.

 

That's not to dismiss the psychological and emotional trauma breast removal has on women.

39 minutes ago, UniFox21 said:

Posted around this in the health thread not realising it had been discussed here. 

 

I agree that over diagnosis is a risk, and incorrect treatment can cause huge issues for men. Annoys me the suggestion is you should only get mass screening should you have a few specific BRCA variants. 

 

Unless you have family who know they have the variant, you're only finding out by testing. Testing that the majority of men won't know about. Variant testing isn't something you're told about regularly, or even offered much. 

 

So it's all well and good wanting this testing to be only those most at risk, but when those most at risk don't know it's them, the idea falls apart.

 

We should be encouraging conversations like this, encouraging and making it easy for men to get a quick blood test to check everything is fine.

 

I don't disagree but the current tests don't discriminate between the relatively benign and the more aggressive. So you have a screening done and it comes back as positive for cancer. It doesn't define which type, and how high risk it is for you as an individual.

It's only when the individual has already been identified as being in a high risk group that the test can be life saving. That's why routine screening for all men isn't the correct way forward and it should be targeted at the high risk groups as they're (potentially) already known to their doctors.

[ftfagos]

2 hours ago, Claudio Fannieri said:

Cannot believe what I am hearing, the reasons and justifications for not implementing a national screening programme for #prostatecancer is absolutely scandalous, yet again men’s health & well being is secondary. 

 

1,300 lives are saved every year as a result of the national breast screening programme surely this evidences the benefits of such screening programmes. 

Gutted for everybody involved at @ProstateUK and @prostateunited who work tirelessly to try and support men and find funding for research, testing and treatment.

Note the bottom line.

[Claudio Fannieri]

22 minutes ago, ftfagos said:

Note the bottom line.

Interesting because if 1.75m of men over 50 got screened it would save 3,500 lives …..  that is only 16.67% of the men who would eligible by the way. 

[ftfagos]

This is point 13 from the UK National Screening Committee (UK NSC) criteria for appraising the viability, effectiveness and appropriateness of a population screening programme:

 

 

13. The benefit gained by individuals from the screening programme should outweigh any harms, for example from overdiagnosis, overtreatment, false positives, false reassurance, uncertain findings and complications.

 

Harms of treatment can include impotence, incontinence etc

 

Prostate biopsy also comes with it’s own hazards.

 

Then there’s the not inconsiderable anxiety of false positives.

 

 

[Md9]

Trump blowing up boats claiming he is stopping drug cartels getting into the country then saying he will  pardon former Honduras president after being jailed for drug trafficking feels like another normal day in America.