The City Council also handed the dairy farmers another victory by voting 5 to 4 against an amendment that would have required them to post a placard informing consumers of the potential health risks linked to drinking raw milk.
Raw milk is milk that hasn't been pasteurized to kill potentially harmful bacteria such as E. coli, Salmonella and E. coli that can cause severe illness.
The proposed placard, as drawn up by the city's Department of Health and Human Services, warned that children, pregnant women, the elderly and those living with conditions that weaken the immune system are at the greatest risk of becoming ill from drinking raw milk. It also warned that raw milk outbreaks are responsible for nearly three times more hospitalizations than outbreaks involving any other food.
The issue came before the City Council after the city's newly hired food-service inspector visited the Portland farmers' markets last fall and told the raw-milk vendors that sales of unpasteurized milk were not allowed there. That came as a surprise to the vendors, because they had been selling raw milk at the markets for several years, with no previous indications from the city that they weren't supposed to.
It turned out that although state law permits raw milk from state-licensed dairies to be sold at retail stores throughout the state, and even though raw milk is sold at other farmers' markets in the state, the city of Portland had its own list of items that can't be sold at its farmers' markets. Raw milk was on that list, even though it can be sold in stores in the city.
During the City Council meeting, Mayor Michael Brennan, who cast one of the four votes in favor of requiring the placard, made no comments about why he had voted that way. But in an email to Food Safety News after the meeting, he said he voted in favor of the placard because he believes it's important to provide "the most information" possible to consumers about "any number of food products."
He also said his vote supported the recommendation of the council committee that had originally proposed the placard, as well as the recommendation of the city's Department of Health and Human Services, "because both had reviewed the issue more fully."
During the council meeting, Heather Donahue, co-owner of
Balfour Farm and a raw-milk vendor at the city's Wednesday farmers' market, told council members that raw-milk farmers are required to inform customers that the milk hasn't been pasteurized by putting the words "not pasteurized" on the containers' labels.
She also pointed out that while in the past raw milk was a "significant" carrier of diseases, many improvements have been made since then. She said that to be certified as a raw-milk dairy in Maine, the dairy herd has to be tested at regular intervals and strict sanitation practices must be followed.
In an interview after the meeting, she told Food Safety News that she was relieved that raw-milk dairies won't have to display the placard about the potential health risks of raw milk.
"In general, the people who shop at farmers' markets know about raw milk and seek it out," she said. "They can get more information from us than they can from a store clerk."
She described the proposal to require the placard as "a wrinkle that needed to be ironed out."
Lauren Pignatello, co-owner of
Swallowtail Farm and Creamery and also the manager of Portland's winter farmers' market, said that if consumers are being informed about the health risks of raw milk, they should also be informed about what he sees as the benefits of drinking raw milk.
The
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says there are no health benefits from drinking raw milk that cannot be obtained from drinking pasteurized milk that is free of disease-causing bacteria.
Raw-milk producer Lee Straw told council members that state-licensed raw-milk dairies are held to the same standards as conventional dairies.
"Even though the feds will say otherwise, by holding us to the same ordinances as pasteurized milk, the state seems to feel we can put out a safe product," he said.
But Portland resident Charles Bragdon took the opposite tack, telling the council members that raw milk is "very dangerous to some members of our population" and that providing people with information about the health risks is "important, if not critical."
Council member Cheryl Leeman, who voted in favor of requiring the placard, held up a newspaper featuring an article about a recent outbreak of food poisoning cases linked to a raw-milk dairy in Pennsylvania.
On Feb. 7, Pennsylvania health officials said there were 43 confirmed cases of
Campylobacter infections among people who drank raw milk sold by the Your Family Cow farm. Maryland public health officials confirmed that the outbreak strain of bacteria was detected in two unopened containers of unpasteurized milk from the Pennsylvania dairy.
"There is a health risk with raw milk," Leeman said, emphasizing the word "is."
At the same time, she acknowledged that there is "clearly a public demand for raw milk."
Looking at the issue from the perspective of a City Council member, Leeman said that because the issue is raw-milk sales on city property, the city should go along with its Health Department's recommendation requiring the placard.
"It's not an unreasonable request for those folks who want to sell raw milk on our property," she said, pointing out that with the placards, the city will have done its job of making sure the public is informed.
"Then, it will be up to the consumers to weigh the pros and cons," she said. "The final decision is really up to the consumers."
Council member Ed Suslovic had his own concerns, saying that if he were in a rush and grabbed a container of raw milk, it would be easy for him to miss the label saying that the milk hadn't been pasteurized.
"I'd like to see the placard," he said.
He even went so far as to say that he'd like to offer an amendment that would require informational placards at any point of sale for raw milk in the city, which would include retail stores as well as farmers' markets.
The amendment was not acted on.
When a council member asked why the the requirement for a placard was proposed in the first place, Douglas Gardner, director of the city's Health and Human Services Department, explained that it seemed appropriate to tie it in with the proposal that the city allow raw milk sales at its farmers' markets. That way consumers could have information about the basic risks associated with raw milk.
Through all of this, some council members struggled with the issue of fairness. If, for example, placards were to be required at the farmers markets but not at retail stores in the city, then the farmers' market vendors would be at a disadvantage.
Even council member John Anton, who made the motion to remove the requirement for a placard, said he wasn't basing his motion on public health arguments but rather concerns about how it would affect those who sell at farmers' markets, compared with those whose milk is sold in stores.
"It feels unfair and arbitrary," he said.
But he also said that if the city wanted a citywide requirement for an informational placard, he might support it.
In an interview after the meeting, Health Department director Gardner told Food Safety News that during the meeting, he heard several council members express an interest in looking at a citywide requirement for informational placards that would apply to all points of sale -- in stores as well as at farmers' markets.
"There was an interest at looking at a broader approach," he said.
Warnings or Not?
Food-safety attorney Bill Marler, publisher of Food Safety News, said that a warning sign, such as the one on the placard proposed by Portland, MEs health department, should be on a bottle of raw milk as well as at the place of sale of raw milk.
He provided this example of such a sign: "WARNING: This product has not been pasteurized and may contain harmful bacteria (not limited to E. coli O157:H7, Campylobacter, Listeria and Salmonella). Pregnant women, infants, children, the elderly and persons with lowered resistance to disease (immune compromised) have the highest risk of harm, which includes diarrhea, vomiting, fever, dehydration, Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome, Guillain-Barre Syndrome, reactive arthritis, irritable bowel syndrome, miscarriage, or death, from use of this product."
"Consumption of raw milk, especially for the young, the elderly and those with compromised immune systems, should be warned against," Marler said. "Just saying that the milk is not pasteurized is not enough."
Raw Milk in Maine
Amy Robbins, epidemiologist with Maine's Center for Disease Control of Prevention, said in an email to Food Safety News that in the past 5 years, no outbreaks related to raw (unpasteurized) milk products have been identified in Maine, although outbreaks related to raw (unpasteurized) milk products have occurred in other states. The state does not allow raw milk or raw milk products to be sold in restaurants, schools, hospitals or nursing homes. Maine, which has 32 dairy operations that are allowed to sell raw milk, and 65 licensed to sell cheese, is one of 11 states that allows the sale of raw milk at retail stores separate from the farm. Along with 7 other states, it has high standards for cleanliness of the milk, with a coliform standard of no more than 10 coliform bacteria per milliliter, which is equivalent to the national and some international standards for pasteurized milk.
This document describes NHS Berkshire West’s pharmaceutical needs assessment (PNA). This document has been prepared to meet the requirements of the National Health Service (Pharmaceutical Services and Local Pharmaceutical Services) (Amendments) Regulation 2010 These regulations require PCTs to prepare and publish a PNA by 1st February 2011.
You can
download the PNA here
The purpose of the PNA is:
- To inform and support the PCT’s commissioning plans for pharmaceutical services
- To inform and support the PCT’s decision making process in relation to market entry, this function requires further enabling regulation which is expected in the autumn of 2010.
We have developed this PNA through a process of engagement and collaboration with patients and the public, pharmacists and dispensing doctors and local stakeholders.
As a result of increasing concerns associated with the
use of Actos® medication, manufacturer Takeda Pharmaceuticals has been forced to cut its work force. The company announced on January 18, 2011 that 2,800 jobs within the United States and in Europe will be cut as the result of decreasing sales. The company has also purchased Swiss drug company, Nycomed.
The company expects that sales will continue to drop as concerns with Actos increase and the introduction of generic versions of Actos enter the market. They have made plans to cut jobs slowly over the course of four years.
This reduction in Takeda’s workforce will represent about 9% of the company but is expected to help the company save $1.7 billion by March of 2016.
The FDA approved Actos for the treatment of type II diabetes in July of 1999. This once a day pill was designed to aid the body’s sensitivity to insulin and accrued sales of $4.3 billion for Takeda Pharmaceuticals in 2010. However, these sales quickly dropped after concerns associated with Actos were actively reported to the FDA.
Generic versions of Actos medication are expected to be released by August of 2013, further reducing sales dollars for Takeda.
Victims who have taken Actos claim that Actos causes bladder cancer and allege that Takeda failed to properly issue sufficient warnings to patients and the medical community.
In September of 2010, the FDA began to review safety concerns of Actos due to interim data from an ongoing ten year study that revealed a link between
Actos and bladder cancer. The agency mandated updated warning labels for Actos in the U.S. and the health regulating agency in Europe also mandated new warning labels as well.
Actos lawyers continue to pursue compensation for individuals who have suffered bladder cancer injuries after taking Actos.
TRENTON - An experimental anti-clotting drug that Merck & Co. is developing was found to increase risk of dangerous internal bleeding in a second study, meaning it's unlikely to achieve the blockbuster status once expected, if it's even approved.
Vorapaxar is part of a new generation of anti-clotting drugs meant to prevent the death and disability strokes and heart attacks cause in the millions of people at risk for them. Drugmakers have generally touted their compounds as more effective and safer than Coumadin, known chemically as warfarin, the standard treatment for decades despite the need for frequent blood tests because getting the dosage right is so tricky.
On Tuesday, Merck said top-line results from a 26,000-patient study called TRA-2P show vorapaxar, when added to standard anti-clotting therapy, significantly reduced risk of heart attack, stroke, and death from heart disease or emergency heart surgery.
But the company said there was a significant increase in bleeding, including bleeding inside the skull. That can cause a stroke, brain damage or death. Such intracranial bleeding was less common in patients who had not previously had a stroke.
A year ago, the same bleeding problem led safety monitors to halt a late-stage study of vorapaxar called Tracer. That international study included nearly 13,000 patients who had had a heart attack or severe chest pain from clogged arteries.
At the time, Merck decided to continue the TRA-2P study but to no longer give vorapaxar to about 6,000 patients in that study who had a history of stroke.
"We believe commercialization is unlikely, given the potential safety profile of the drug and negative results from Tracer," Citi analyst John Boris wrote to investors. "If vorapaxar reaches the market, we see a limited commercial" opportunity.
He still has a "Hold" rating on Merck but wrote off any chance of vorapaxar sales in January 2011.
Merck basically conceded the drug's diminished prospects when it took a $1.7 billion charge a little over a year ago to write down the value assigned to vorapaxar when it acquired the compound through its November 2009 purchase of Schering-Plough Corp.
Merck, based in Whitehouse Station, N.J., and with operations in the Philadelphia region, said it will present detailed results from TRA-2P at the March 24-27 meeting of the American College of Cardiology.
"We are pleased that TRA-2P met its primary endpoint, and we look forward to discussing the results with the scientific community," Peter Kim, president of Merck Research Laboratories, said in a statement.
Merck has said it plans to apply for approval of five different drugs between this year and next. Vorapaxar is not on the list, although Merck originally had planned to apply for approval in 2011.
Meanwhile, rival drug companies have gotten new anti-clotting drugs approved recently or expect a ruling on their drug shortly. Those are: Boehringer Ingelheim of Germany, whose Pradaxa was approved in October 2010; partners Johnson & Johnson and Bayer Healthcare, whose Xarelto was approved last July, and partners Pfizer Inc. and Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. Their Eliquis is expected to get a ruling from the Food and Drug Administration by March 28.
None of those drugs has shown such serious bleeding risks, but they are far more expensive than warfarin.
In midday trading, Merck shares were up 28 cents at $38.68.
Summary:
STRIKE TWO: A second study shows Merck's experimental anti-clotting drug vorapaxar increased risk of dangerous internal bleeding, including inside the skull. The study, called TRA-2P, did show vorapaxar lowered risk of heart attack, stroke and death.
DIM FUTURE: Merck's already taken a $1.7 billion charge over vorapaxar after it flopped in the earlier study. It's to release full results of the latest study in late March.
ANALYST VIEW: Citi's John Boris thinks approval is unlikely. If it happens, he writes, vorapaxar has "limited commercial" opportunity.
,,,
Linda A. Johnson can be followed at
http://twitter.com/LindaJ,onPharma
This is not about the USAFTA or about any of the other Bilateral FTAs that Australia has signed in the past 10 years or is keen to sign as soon as possible.
The USAFTA is a symptom of a much larger penetration of American influence and ownership in our country. The trade and investment imbalance between Australia and America has grown and grown over the past 20 years. That relationship imbalance is a threat to the independence of our economy.
It is frightening to think just how much dominance of the Australian market and acquisition of Australian assets there has been in the past 20 years. My concern is that Australia will eventually be substantially owned and operated by the USA and China. We don't have a clue how many of our businesses and how much of our property they already own and operate.
The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) and the Foreign Investment Review Board (FIRB) have not released any substantial information regarding the extent of US/China investment in Australia. We have aggregate statistics for imports and exports from and to those countries, but we do not have relevant estimates of the size of the Australian markets and the individual product statistics.
The ABS provides product import statistics based on the statistical codes used in Customs entries. Those statistics are frequently wrong and are seldom, if ever, checked by the Australian Customs Service (ACS). Under the present arrangements, Customs entries are not manually checked for statistical errors. The ABS no longer receives import statistics quantities and values on a product group statistical code basis from the ACS.
American companies, politicians and lobbyists have cleverly networked Australian politicians, ex-politicians and senior company leaders for a long time. They have been aided and abetted by prime ministers, premiers and luminaries on both sides of Australian politics and business leaders. The trickle at the beginning of the American networking campaign occurred at the end of the influence of Britain. The latter joined the Common Market and we stopped giving customs duty preferences to Britain and most of the Commonwealth countries except Canada and New Zealand.
There have been two major remarkable successes for the USA in its agenda to substantially dominate the Australian economy. Both events occurred during the prime ministership of John Howard. His friendship with president George Bush was obviously the stimulus for a major shift in Australia's economic relationship with the Unites States. John Howard was the fulcrum for two major government inspired economic policy initiatives.
Firstly, the Howard government contributed a major amount of $25 million for the establishment of a US Study Centre at the University of Sydney. The NSW Labor government also contributed $2 million. On the other side of the Atlantic, Dow Chemicals contributed $2 million, Merck contributed $500,000, Alcoa $200,000 and Harvard $120,000. We certainly outdid the USA on the relative level of contributions. It is worth noting who is on the Board of Directors and who are advisers to the Centre.
The Board of Directors includes: David Anstice, an executive of Merck & Co; Bob Carr, former Premier of NSW; Loftus Harris, a former Director General of NSW Department of State and Regional Development; Kevin McCann, Chairman of Macquarie Group and Origin Energy; Dennis Richardson, Secretary of DFAT; Joseph Skrzynski who is the managing director of the biggest venture capital company in Australia; Ezekiel Solomon, senior partner at Allens, Arthur, Robinson; Michael Thawley, an Australian ambassador to the US; and Lucy Turnbull, previously Mayor of Sydney and wife of Malcolm Turnbull.
The advisors include: Mark Johnson, Chairman of Macquarie Infrastructure Group; Robert Joss, Dean of Grad School of Business at Stanford University; Kim Beazley; Bob Hawke; John Howard; Stephen Fitzgerald, Managing Director of Goldman Sachs; Anthony Pratt; Andrew Liveris, President and CEO and Chairman of Dow Chemicals; Roy Krzywosinski, Managing Director of Chevron Australia; Steven Roberts, CEO of Citigroup Australia; Michael Spence, Vice Chancellor of University of Sydney; and Thomas Schieffer who was the Ambassador to Australia and Japan.
Reading the Annual Reports of the Centre is also instructive.
For the record, Australian ambassadors to the USA since 1982 have been: Bob Cotton, Rawdon Dalrymple, Michael Cook, Donald Russell, Jon McCarthy, Andrew Peacock, Michael Thawley, Dennis Richardson and Kim Beazley.
The second major achievement by the USA was the USAFTA in 2004. This Agreement has been discussed by me and others numerous times in the seven years of the Agreement's operation. Some people may argue that Australia obtained some benefit from the Agreement and that is true. The benefits were consolation prizes compared to the major prizes won by US exporters of both elaborately transformed manufactures and intellectual property.
In the past few years, America has also achieved a very substantial, discriminatory dispensation in the threshold for US investment in Australian businesses, property and land holdings. No investigation by the FIRB is required if the value of the investment is less than $1 billion. For the rest of the world, the threshold is $200 million.
Once again, there are no ABS statistics identifying changes in US equity in what were majority owned Australian businesses or in sales of property and land to US investors. The last substantial foreign ownership review by the ABS was in 2002. Prime Minister Gillard has said that the Government has initiated some research into these topics.
Nearly 50 years ago, when I was 14 I went to see West Side Story. I loved the duet that started:
I like to be in America!
O.K. by me in America!
Ev'rything free in America
For a small fee in America!
It still sums up the friction between hype and reality that often typifies dealing with America. You have to count your fingers after the very exuberant and totally sincere handshake.
Negotiations for the Australia - China Free Trade Agreement also commenced during the Howard Government in 2003. The idea was that we would be equal trading partners and all sectors were negotiable. FTA talks began in earnest in April 2005. In April 2011, Prime Minister Gillard said:
Free Trade is good for Australia. Free Trade is good for Australia and China so we will keep working through it even if it is an agreement with some areas of sensitivity.
The
some areas
include differences in trade in goods. China's manufactures constitute about 40 per cent of its GDP and it exports the majority of its elaborately transformed manufactures. Australia's manufacturing sector now contributes about 9 per cent to GNP. Most of that is consumed domestically.
Other differences at issue include rules of origin, quarantine restrictions, Customs procedures, duty rates and intellectual property. Chinese companies have much more onerous rules for the purchase of residential and rural properties in Australia (there are about 170,000 Chinese students living here). They have to satisfy the FIRB that they are permanent residents or that they will sell the property when they leave Australia. These rules are not, of course, the same rules applying to the USA. The Bumiputra in Malaysia has the same rules for foreigners with assets in Malaysia.
One of the problems with China is that they lack the ingratiating networking skills of the Americans and they are not good networkers. They just buy $50 billion of our iron ore, coal, petroleum and wool. They have bailed out some of the mining companies, but are viewed with suspicion.
Wayne Swan has presided over a three stage FIRB approval process for the Chinese. The first step is to apply for approval for investment in exploration. The second step is to develop the resources discovered. The final step is to advise the FIRB if the investment includes finance obtained from a Chinese State owned bank.
One commentator said that "China's intention is clear - to invest heavily or take control of key Australian mining companies". The same person talked about their "nefarious non-commercial motives."
Excuse me, I think that is the intention of the USA, India, Korea, Europe, Japan, Singapore and any other country that makes things and doesn't have the domestic raw materials to meet both their domestic and export markets. They would all like to either control or have a big voice in the affairs of the source of supply.
Australia's exports to China consist of $45 billion of iron ore and coal, petroleum and wool and a few billion dollars worth of education services. We don't count the financial contribution to the domestic economy of the 170,000 students living in Australia or the level of Chinese investment in residential and rural property or businesses. We don't do that for the Americans either, or any of the other industrialised economies that have invested so heavily in our mining companies.
We don't count much at all in our economy. We stopped doing that about 10 years ago. The level of foreign investment in key industries got embarrassing. I don't know the antonym for "xenophobia" but it describes Australia. We welcome everyone so long as they buy stuff.
The problem with China is that they don't pretend to be our best friend or close relative. Business dinners in China are quick and the negotiations are hard. Their children study hard and their lives are focused on climbing out of a society that literally destroyed the old China without creating anything to take its place. In contrast, the Americans are charmers. The trouble is that the next time you go to America for discussions they have forgotten that you were there in the first place.
I remember going to lunch with Speaker of the House and present presidential aspirant Newt Gingrich's brother in the early '90s (a Washington lobbyist) when the USA was negotiating its sugar quotas. He told me that Americans thought we were just about the nicest people in the world and they cheered our commitment to free trade and an open economy. We were heroes. Of course we got nothing when they handed out the sugar quotas to close mates of the Washington lobbyists. They always look after their own first.
The second trouble with China is that they don't smoodge. A woman trade minister involved in our Free Trade negotiations once told some Australian envoys that the problem was that we had nothing to trade in a Free Trade Agreement. We had already given it all away to everybody. Unilateral trade liberalisation is almost a unique Australian philosophy (New Zealand thought it was a good idea too).
I wonder how much money has been spent by DFAT and our government in the past nine years of writing about the Australia - China Free Trade Agreement, and going to visit officials in China and getting the prime minister to parrot how Free Trade is good for China, good for Australia and good for the rest of the world. I know that it keeps some bureaucrats in DFAT employed.
I love the Prime Minister's comment about some areas of sensitivity and "making more meaningful progress". Almost everything in the agreement will be sensitive unless we make concessions that have virtually nothing to do with trade, and trade away our quarantine restrictions, our rules of origin, our intellectual property and our businesses and property in general. They can have duty free imports entry. It means nothing.
The conclusive trouble with China is that they are climbing out of an economic pit that existed for thousands of years and are trying to include a lot more of their population in a better life. Work and education are major imperatives. Making things is a major imperative. Exporting is a real strategy, not just a lot of talk about innovation and productivity.
We don't think or work that hard or that cleverly.
This article is the fourth in a six-part series. View all Martin Feil's previous articles
here
.
Martin Feil is an economist specialising in Customs, logistics, ACCC actions, industry policy and international trade related matters, including transfer pricing. View his full profile
here.
generic viagra procure an time to empathize with where is the esoteric to hide, and where is the take, and if he does in this situation. So, we all well-established painkiller Viagra was created multitudinous years ago before scientists in requirement to go into sex rite in men, to put it more precisely, this deaden has been created in buy to discuss erectile dysfunction in men, and, it should be famed that it turns out, and stillness particular successful. So, as presently as this goods was created, its chemical formula pronto patented, so that other pharmaceutical companies can not just misuse it to put together the unmodified downer, under a opposite clientele name. So the term of a unmistakeable for a chemical mo of the cure has expired, and pharmaceutical markets everywhere the unbelievable there was such a attitude as
buy tazalis, that is, a drug that has the unvarying structure as we all everyday drug, only be made beneath a various trade dignitary or other assembly , you, by the sense, there is a great chance to secure hindgra, without any interference.
Only here the viewpoint on the
buy filitra are divided into two sides, on the one to, people who suffer from disorders such as erectile dysfunction, there is no have occasion for to secure hindgra, because they force long been in use accustomed to at near others, we all known hallucinogenic which gives a profoundly sound occur, but on the other helping hand, it is absolutely advantageous offer for those people who are not nervous to struggle contemporary things, and, in the forefront you acquisition bargain hindgra, more precisely, steady to suggest, before the deaden reached the pharmaceutical retail , he passed all required tests and the worth is no another from other drugs of the word-for-word group. No more than there is single contradistinction is that when you buy hindgra you save your pelf that you can Shell out to something else.
UK environment secretary addresses businesses and charities at London's Guildhall
•
Set greener goals at Rio+20: Caroline Spelman
Ladies and Gentleman, thank you for joining us this morning.
In four months' time, the world will meet to plot the path to sustainable development and green economic growth at Rio +20.
What will govern it is the level of ambition.
Today I will set out the Government's priorities.
And let me tell you, ladies and gentleman, that I, for one, am ambitious.
Because, frankly, our economic, social and environmental security –our future well-being – relies on tangible outcomes from Rio+20.
Not just exhortations and aspirations.
It has to be a workshop, not a talking shop.
Let's just remind ourselves of what's at stake here:
Today, over a billion people still live in poverty;
Today, two thirds of the world's ecosystems are still in decline ;
And today we are facing economic challenges on a scale not seen for decades – challenges of delivering growth, prosperity; equality, employment and quality of life.
We've come a long way since the first Earth Summit 20 years ago - and it's important to acknowledge that.
Many of the organisations represented here today have been crucial to the shift we've seen.
Sustainable development is no longer a sideline or an afterthought.
There's real recognition that it matters, and our location here, in the City of London, is testament to that.
But – and it's a big but – some people still think that there's a tension between being green and delivering growth.
I disagree. Being green is integral to sustainable economic growth.
If we fail to protect our natural resources we'll make long term economic growth impossible.
We have the evidence:
We have Nicolas Stern's estimates that global GDP will fall by a quarter because of climate change;
We know that deforestation costs the global economy up to $4.5 trillion a year;
We know that 1.2 billion people rely on forests for their livelihoods;
And we know that the natural world underpins 40% on the global economy.
We have the evidence.
What we need is action.
This government is determined to see Rio +20 trigger that action.
To deliver outcomes that will make a real, lasting difference to the economy, to the environment, and to our well-being.
[the UK position]
So let's get specific.
The UN's negotiating text – the 'zero draft' – has been titled simply 'The Future We Want'.
It's a strong title, and a good start.
But the text lacks focus and ambition.
It needs to be a lot stronger if Rio+20 is to deliver the transformational change that we know it can.
And it's missing some important elements.
[1. Green growth]
It doesn't properly make the case for green growth.
It doesn't explicitly link natural resources, poverty, and the economy.
Rio has to recognise that interdependency.
So we will be pushing for a clear commitment to sustainable development and green growth from politicians around the world.
We need to make clear that long term, sustainable growth can only be achieved with efficient use of resources; the reduction of carbon emissions; and the eradication of poverty.
This is something we all here understand.
A growing number of companies, including those represented here today, recognise that their own success is directly linked to sustainability:
Companies like Aviva - calling for global leadership on sustainability reporting;
Companies like Unilever - committing to halve the environmental impact of their products by 2020;
And companies like Marks and Spencers - who saved over 70 million pounds last year, and 50 million pounds the year before, through resource efficiency.
The recognition is spreading. Over 90 percent of CEOs now think of sustainability as the most pressing issue facing their business.
In a world facing the challenge of resource security, sustainable business practices need to become commonplace – not just for the sake of corporate responsibility, but to protect the bottom line.
And there are also opportunities to be had. Resource efficiency offers UK companies ?23 billion of savings. It offers the global business sector savings of ?2.9 trillion.
We need the private sector across the world to be inspired – at and beyond Rio+20 – to seek out these kinds of new opportunities, new products and innovations, new investment and markets.
I have really been heartened by the efforts that UK businesses and NGOs are making to drive forward the green economy.
I'm working with UKTI to encourage the Brazilians to host a trade fair at Rio, and we are keen to work with businesses and civil society on plans for what the Brazilians are calling the 'middle bit'.
We need to work together – because there is much work still to do.
[2. Mainstreaming]
Ban Ki Moon's panel said last week that Sustainable Development is not yet mainstreamed into economic policy on an international scale. We still do not value our natural resources.
Rio has to put this right.
We want action to ensure that businesses and governments factor sustainability into every decision they make- and for this to be transparent.
So we will join the call for Rio to drive uptake of sustainable business practices – in particular transparent and coherent sustainability reporting.
Not as a burden on business, but as something they are asking for. We need companies to do this as a matter of course, and we need shareholders and investors to demand it.
[3. Natural capital/green accounting]
We will call for governments to take steps to measure and account for their natural and social capital, as well as their GDP.
It's becoming more and more apparent that GDP is not a perfect measure of progress, because it deals solely with economic output. It does not consider the other factors that contribute to sustainable growth such as natural resources, or social wellbeing.
Known as 'GDP+' it's an area where the UK is taking the lead.
Our Prime Minister is taking steps to measure the well being of society, recognising the need to reflect our quality of life.
We're establishing a Committee that reports to the Chancellor on the state of natural capital in England.
The Office of National Statistics is looking to embed natural capital in our environmental accounts by 2020.
We're working with the World Bank on their Wealth Accounting and Valuation of Ecosystem Services, which pilot new approaches to wealth accounting in a number of developing countries.
We're working to develop indicators which will allow us to measure and track progress towards a green economy.
We want to share these experiences in Rio.
Because it is essential we create the conditions for the value of nature to be reflected in everyday decisions.
We've made a start here in the UK – we've worked with business to establish an Ecosystem Market Task Force – chaired by Ian Cheshire - that looks at the opportunities for businesses to develop new green goods and services.
Rio provides an opportunity to showcase this kind of approach on a global scale.
[4. Sectors]
So we need that political commitment.
We need to drive green growth.
We need to mainstream sustainability into decision making of governments and businesses across the world.
In addition to all of this, I want to see a real focus on the specific global challenges we face.
Agriculture, water, and energy are fundamental to our economy and to the lives of many of the world's poorest people; and they are inseparable
Ban Ki Moon's excellent report notes that by 2030, the world will need at least 50% more food, 45% more energy, and 30% more water.
And we need to produce this without further damaging our environment.
So my ambition at Rio is to chart a clear course of action on food security and sustainable agriculture – one of the most pressing issues of our time. The UK Foresight project identified the scale of the challenges facing the global food system.
We need to produce more food, with less impact - particularly if we are to feed a billion extra mouths in 13 years time.
We need sustainable intensification that takes account of available water resources. We need to reduce waste, and we need to be climate smart.
I want to see water high up on the agenda.
In addition to its importance for food security and energy, access to safe and clean drinking water is one of the basic requirements for development – and a prerequisite for green growth.
And I want to see action on sustainable energy for all.
Sustainable energy is fundamental to growth and prosperity – and is currently a luxury that a quarter of the world's population cannot afford.
So I warmly support the UN Secretary General's Sustainable Energy for All by 2030 initiative, which will be launched this year at Rio+20.
This initiative has an important emphasis on raising private capital, and we shall co-ordinate this with the support we provide to sustainable energy from the International Climate Fund - to ensure that our public finances have maximum impact.
[5. SDGs]
The international community has not made sufficient progress on these issues. We need renewed focus to drive forward change.
Which is why the UK will call for Sustainable Development goals to drive international action on linked challenges such as food security, water security, and access to energy – as an absolute priority.
We have seen the role that global goals can play.
Just look at the impact of Millennium Development Goals – which over the last 12 years have helped get the world on track to reduce the levels of poverty and tackle development issues.
The international community now needs to step up to the mark and work towards goals that tackle the great sustainability challenges.
Sustainable Development Goals – proposed by the Colombian Government – would give us the makings of real progress.
Progress our generation has a moral obligation to deliver.
Let me be absolutely clear that SDGs cannot and should not attract attention away from achieving the Millennium Development Goals by 2015 – the UK is firmly committed to achieving this.
We must work towards a clear position beyond 2015 – one which builds on the existing MDGs, and one in which the Sustainable Development Goals could play an important part.
[conclusion]
So I think we have a strong message to take to Rio.
I will be working hard with my colleagues in the EU for a strong common position, and with colleagues internationally to make sure that we harness the political will from Durban.
Governments can and must provide the framework for green growth;
Through reducing or removing environmentally harmful subsidies;
Through getting price signals right;
Through standards and voluntary approaches;
And through valuing natural resources, developing indicators of green growth.
And I genuinely believe this Government is leading the way with that agenda.
In the UK, the Green Deal, the Green Investment Bank, our Climate Change Agreements, EU Emissions Trading Schemes, and the our Natural Environment and Water White Papers are all key examples of our efforts to provide this kind of framework
But the private sector and civil society have a major role to play in delivering the green economy:
through trade, innovation, and investment;
And through campaigning, evidence, and implementation.
I realise that we are in tough times, but I hope that many of you will be involved in the summit, and the preparations for it.
I want to hear you making the case for green growth – to embed sustainable development in the economy of tomorrow.
I want you to help us push the envelope on natural capital and green accounting.
And I want to see you striving for solutions to the challenges of energy, agriculture and water resources.
These are ambitions that will see us agree achievable and practical outcomes.
Generating the political will and a proper understanding of what we need to do.
An understanding that inspires real change in the world through sustainable development and green economic growth.
Representing the fusion of economic and environment recovery.
And above all demonstrate to the world that this country is an environmental leader pursuing goals that balance environmental responsibility and economic security for today and for tomorrow.
Thank you.
Terms & Conditions |
More Feeds
Slide01_v01
1.
lela rose for hsn dress, $99; 2.
hobnail tumbler, $10; 3.
asos floral studs, $9; 4.
le versha chair, turqoiuse, $248
Slide09_v01
1.
gato sunglasses, $40; 2.
l'autre chose coat, $520; 3.
suede bow heels, $130; 4.
kate spade dress, $495; 5.
bow headband, $24
Slide08_v01
1.
pearl necklace & earring set, $60; 2.
kathryn ireland quilt roses fabric in lavender, prices vary; 3.
remo living room chair in coral, $549; 4.
topshop floral dress, $100; 5.
magnussen ferndale pedestal accent table, $229
Slide07_v01
1.
antique brass 4 arm candleabra, $85 2.
floral wallpaper, $20 per rollon wonderwall:
talking to the cast of
the help
Slide06_v01
1.
white porcelain vase 24" high table lamp, $190; 2.
david & young fedora, $18; 3.
corona sofa in pear, $699; 4.
mallard art print, $18; 5.
caravelle watch, $100
Slide05_v01
1.
home style white buffet with hutch, $877; 2.
1951 chair in red, $315; 3.
bedhead pajamas, $70; 4.
fossil woven flats, $60
Slide04_v01
1.
peach j.crew dress, $250; 2.
bounkit topaz drop earrings, $375; 3.
cake stand, $16
Slide03_v01
1.
grape scallop boutis tablecloths, from $150; 2.
stouffer gold encrusted salt and pepper shakers from beaubow, $35; 3.
dolce & gabbana shift dress, $453; 4.
elizabeth cole crystal burst earrings, $70
Slide02_v01
1.
the help
book, $15; 2.
deena & ozzy oxford, $59; 3.
embellished cardigan, $98; 4.
bixby bag, $495
Black Magic is the negative use of energies and power by jealous and malicious human beings of Kalyuga, whose main objective is to harm or deprive others from something, or influence them to do something wrong or negative. Black magic is the evil side of the celestial cycle or negative energies. Black Magic can be used to harm or hurt another person by performing certain acts even at a far away place - the effect of this technique can be experienced thousands of miles away. With increase of jealousy, frustration, greed, selfishness, negativity and inability to accept other's happiness & growth, the use of Black magic has become the most common way to take out one's vindictiveness and get an evil kind of satisfaction from the turmoil of others. This problem has intensified a lot in the last few years, and many are suffering all over the world, totally unaware of the attacks made by no other than their closest friends, acquaintances and relatives. Many prosperous and happy families are ruined by Black magic.
Symptoms of Black Magic
Black magic puts a block on a person's wisdom and intelligence and all efforts to solve the problem go fruitless. One feels a mental block, gets disturbed sleep with bad dreams, and negative thoughts. There is heaviness and weight on the heart and constriction in the throat.
At times, there could suddenly be blue marks on thighs without getting hurt, or faster & erratic heartbeat and breathing without any physical exertion. There are quarrels in the family without any reason. One might feel the presence of somebody in the house.One feels one is not
getting one's due and can achieve much more. One feels suffocated & restless in all circumstances, and is never at peace. One remains depressed, with lack of enthusiasm or desire to live & rise in life.
Effects of Black Magic
Black Magic can really play havoc with the life of the target person by destroying any aspect of life may it be career/business or wealth/prosperity, creating family problems or unnecessary tensions/phobias, adversely affecting children & family, creating chronic health problems, destroying mental peace, intelligence & happiness, cause inner turmoil, unrest & uncharacteristic/abnormal behavior and even cause unnatural deaths in extreme circumstances.
Black Magic not only affects the circumstances and future prospects of a person, but also deprives him materially of everything he was destined for, but also affects the psyche of the victim in such a way that one looses the will-power & mental energy to get out of the sinister
situation one is in, and has no desire to live or rise in life.
The effects of Black Magic become more chronic, dangerous and fatal with time, if untreated, like a horrible disease. Black Magic starts spreading like a contagious disease, affecting the person's mind, brain, body, relationships, attitudes, work, money, marriage, career and everything in life.
Breaking or reversing Black Magic Spell
Putting a Black magic spell on someone is very easy for those knowing even a little bit of Tantrik siddhis/ voodoo. But to remove the spell and eliminate it's sinister effects needs lot of expertise,
continuous & rigorous puja/worship and a combination Siddhis & Sadhna. Gurude curses those doing Black Magic on innocent people and destroying their lives and happiness for years to come.
'Talisman Raksha Kavach Yantra ' for Protection & Cure of Black Magic
'Raksha' is 'Protection' and 'Kavach' is 'Shield'. 'Raksha Kavach' is the most powerful Talisman for protection and cure of Black magic. 'Raksha Kavach' eradicates all ill-effects of Black magic, Evil spells, Curses, Ghosts and Spirits. Raksha kavach cures one of evil effects of past attacks and protects one from all future attacks.
The effect of 'Talisman Raksha Kavach Yantra' never gets reduced. Raksha kavach yantra's
protection is life-long, and lasts for as long as it is worn. The moment it is worn, the negative effects start receding and it's protection starts, freeing the wearer from all evil influences which can ruin & destroy one's present and future life.'Raksha Kavach Yantra' is blessed with so much extraordinary energy and power that it can guard and protect an individual against the strongest super-natural forces, negative powers and reverse/break any kind of spell.The wearer of 'Raksha Kavach' always remains immune from all kind of Black magic (Voodoo, Evil Spells, Curses, Ghosts and Spirits) attacks.
Nizagara 100 is the most popular and an expensive remedy for the treatment of ED- which is a physical difficulty in getting a strong and a long lasting erection.
It expensive nature gave raise to its generic form known as “Nizagara”.
Nizagara bears the same quality and quantity of Sildenafil Citrate, as in Viagra. It is manufactured by different Pharmaceutical companies
Manufactures of Nizagara follow the same patent formulation, process of preparation, strength and dose that is as safe as Viagra. Nizagara can be purchased without prescription and comparatively at a very low cost then Viagra. It is made affordable because they do not spend much on marketing and promotion and due to lower labour cost.
suhagra in hyderbad
suhagra reviews
tablet for sexual time extend in pakistan available
tadacip vs tadalis
tadaga wiki
tadalista 20 review
tadalista wiki
uses of vigora 50
vidalista ct
vigora 100 red tablets reviews
vigora 100 review
vigora 100 side effects
8-Feb-2012
HYDERABAD : Hyderabad-based biopharmaceutical company Suven Life Sciences Limited (Suven) stated that it has secured three patents, two from the US and one from Mexico, for its new chemical entities (NCEs) for the treatment of disorders associated with neuro-degenerative diseases. These patents are valid through 2025 and 2028.
The granted claims of the patents include the class of selective 5-HT compounds discovered by Suven and are being developed as therapeutic agents that are useful in the treatment of cognitive impairment associated with disorders like Alzheimer’s disease, attention deficient hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), Huntington’s disease, Parkinson and Schizophrenia.
With the new patents, Suven has a total of 11 patents from the US and 12 patents from Mexico.
“We are very pleased by the grant of these patents to Suven for our pipeline of molecules in the central nervous system (CNS) arena that are being developed for cognitive disorders with high unmet medical need and an estimated $30 billion market potential globally,” chief executive officer of the company, Venkat Jasti, stated in a press release on Tuesday.
http://www.business-standard.com/india/printpage.php?autono=463976&tp=
No comments:
Post a Comment