fortune gems 3
Getting smart about car insurance can provide cost savings and peace of mindConcerns raised over hospitality staff after smoking curbs ditched"The Council of Autism Service Providers" And "ABA Centers" Partner to Ring Closing Bell at the New York Stock Exchange
Ravens’ Derrick Henry responds to Chargers LB Khalil Mack’s comments
There must be uniform criteria for eligibility to apply for and obtain financial assistance from the President’s Fund, followed by monitoring and evaluation assessment Minister Nalinda Jayatissa This article highlights some crucial aspects of Minister Nalinda Jayatissa’s recent disclosure in Parliament about the facts and figures of misuse of the President’s Fund by politicians. As mentioned above, the disclosure is related to the President’s Fund Act, No. 07 of 1978. Under section 6 of the Act, the purposes for which the amounts of money of the Fund may be applied are (i) Relief of poverty (ii) Promotion of education or knowledge (iii) Promotion of religious or maintenance of religious practices, (iv) Donations to those who have rendered a national service (v) Any other welfare related matter decided by the President or Board of Governors. The board of governors of the Fund is comprised of (i) the president, (i) the prime minister, (iii) the speaker, (iv) the opposition leader, (v) the secretary to the president, and (vi) two other members appointed by the president by the subsections of the statute. Given the above, the purposes of the Act are crystal clear, while the President’s Fund received its capital from individuals as donations and institutions like the Development Lotteries Board (DLB). Irrespective of the sources of funds, the President’s Fund is part and parcel of the nation’s assets, and people individually or collectively earn and contribute to the Fund. Now, it is up to the President and Board of Governors to decide and ensure the proper use of funds to serve the purposes of the President’s Fund. According to the composition of the board of members of the Fund, they are well-recognised and knowledgeable individuals. Hence, people and the country expect to consider every application seriously and responsibly so that funds are allocated for the correct/right purpose and the right applicants. Minister Nalinda Jayatissa disclosed that 36 former Ministers and Members of Parliament (MPs) received Rs. 112.5 million from the President’s Fund from 2005 to 2024. According to Minister Nalinda Jayatissa, among many, former Minister Keheliya Rambukwella received Rs. 11 million, former Minister Dr. Rajitha Senaratne received Rs. 10 million, late Prime Minister D.M. Jayaratne received Rs. 30 million, and former MP Ranjith De Zoysa received Rs. 18 million. Apart from the above, Wasudewa Nanayakkara, Widura Wickremanayake, Wimala Dissanayake, Sumeda Jayasena, S.B. Nawinna, John Amaratunga, Sarath Amungama, P. Harrison, Piyasena Gamage, Manoj Sirisena, P. Dayaratane and S.C. Muthukumarana received financial assistance from the President’s Fund. Another important disclosure is some individuals have hid or concealed their well-known names to the public. Examples, J.P.D.P.K. Jayasekara from Kurunegala, Dayasiri Jayasekara, H.M.P.N. De Silva from Kalutara, Piyalal Nishantha De Silva, S.A.D.S. Premajayantha from Nugegoda, Sunil Premajayngha and EAIDP Perera, Isuru Devepriya Perera. Furthermore, it should be noted that from 2005 to 2024, the Fund was headed by Mahinda Rajapaksa (Jayantha Weerasinghe, the legal advisor to Mahinda Rajapaksa, received Rs. 9 million), Gotabaya Rajapaksa, Maithripala Sirisena and Ranil Wickremesinghe. As indicated above, along with five purposes, mainly based on the relief of poverty, the fund could help and assist the poor because more than one-third of the population in Sri Lanka is poor. I will not explain the nature and extent of poorness as I have explained the same in my 38 articles published in the Colombo Telegraph and Daily FT. However, as per the website of the President’s Fund, the funds are allocated for activities such as medical assistance for various diseases, poverty relief programs, the Mahapola Scholarship Programme, scholarships for children who have passed the General Certificate of Education (Advanced Level), and Ordinary Level Examinations, may be related to poverty one way or another. Among the objectives of the Fund and if we focus on medical assistance for various diseases, I am sure the current public concern is the most significant issue. In short, everyone, including the king, queen, and beggars, falls sick, so all need due care and treatment. It is well-known that public notices in print media and other sources request assistance such as Rs. 1-2 million for heart surgery and kidney implants because the cost cannot be afforded even if they sell all properties or assets, which is true. None of the former Ministers and MPs, as revealed by Minister Nalinda Jayatissa, who obtained funds from the President’s Fund, requested public assistance via print media and other sources because their political affiliations helped them to get the required financial assistance from the President’s Fund, or it was a captive financial source for politicians. Given the above, there is significant discrimination between those individuals who had political affiliation and support and those who did not have such political affiliation and support; it is a tragedy indeed. Some ordinary people received instalment assistance even though they requested small amounts, while politicians obtained millions in one go. Furthermore, compared to the people who made public appeals for assistance were not rich at all. However, as revealed by Minister Nalinda Jayatissa, the list of politicians was not poor; they could afford money. Good examples are Keheliya Rambukwella (KR) and D.M. Dayatratne, both are well-known political thieves in Sri Lanka. As it is all known to the public about KR, about Rs. billions of his assets, I am not going to write about him. Currently, he is resting before going behind bars in the future. However, in 2014, there was an issue related to D.M. Jayaratne (then Prime Minister in Sri Lanka) regarding drugs. It was revealed in the media that the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) also has called for the Prime Minister’s resignation. Its parliamentarian Anura Kumara Dissanayake said, “The Government should hold a full inquiry into allegations that the Prime Minister’s coordinating secretary issued a letter to clear a consignment which was later found to be carrying drugs. We see that his remaining in office hinders an impartial and proper inquiry. He should temporarily resign until the inquiries are over.” According to a recent communique from Ranil Wickremesinghe (RW) about the disclosure by Minister Nalinda Jayatissa, he indicated that he did not approve anyone more than Rs. 1 million. However, Dr. Rajitha Senaratne states that he received Rs. 10 million from RW without application, utter favouritism because RW did not have the concern for ordinary people who made public appeals for funds such as Rs. 1-2 million for heart surgery and kidney implant, the issue. After Minister Nalinda Jayatissa’s revelation, some cries came from former Ministers and MPs who obtained funds. MP Manoj Sirisena said, “I did not do any wrongdoing,” but his eligibility is the concern. Ranjith Aluvihare said, “I obtained funds based on medical reports.” Yes, it is common for all, but whether he is eligible to apply is the concern. S.C. Muthukuamarana said, “Yes, I also got money but it was not that much.” The issue is that he obtained a substantially higher amount compared with the ordinary applicants due to political influence. Given the above, all wrongdoers come with explanations and excuses. But their “conscience” is a matter of public concern. Another concern is the transparency and credibility of the Fund’s operation. Amounts such as Rs. 30 have been granted but are unknown to the Parliament and the public. Indeed, the total sum is Rs. 112.5 million. It is a well-known fact that MPs went to Parliament as representatives of the people, enjoyed all the privileges that ordinary people do not have, and finally received the world’s best treatment and care via the President’s Fund so that the whole lives of those politicians were looked after by ordinary people—a critical aspect of the use of the President’s Fund. There must be uniform criteria for eligibility to apply for and obtain financial assistance from the President’s Fund, followed by monitoring and evaluation assessment of whether funds have been used for the intended purpose, and so on. Currently, the above is not in place is a tragedy, so that the accountability and credibility of the board of governors of the Fund is in question. We must appreciate the fact that the establishment of the President’s Fund in 1978 was a great move. However, as revealed by Minister Nalinda Jayatissa, from President to Ministers and MPs, it had been utterly misused and mismanaged because of political influence and involvement, where ordinary people or voters who elected their representatives to the Parliament had been neglected along with disproportionate or unequal allocation of funds, the naked truth. When someone falls sick, it is political influence or involvement that discriminates between the ordinary people and those politically affiliated; it is totally against democracy and human rights, too. In short, political favouritism had been part and parcel of the 76 years of political history people rejected during presidential and parliamentary elections. Now it is up to the AKD/NPP headed Government to revisit the President’s Fund to ensure that revelation by Minister Nalinda Jayatissa has been taken seriously on board and serves the stated objectives of the President’s Fund; the following will be useful and relevant to be considered in due course: (i)Having clearly defined eligibility criteria for application for financial assistance from the Fund; (ii) Strictly adhere to the eligibility criteria and ascertain that funds have been used only for the intended purpose or no misuse of funds; (iii) Complete avoidance of any political involvement or influence or any form of mismanagement of the Fund; (iv) Maintain and ensure a high degree of responsibility, accountability, and credibility in all aspects of the operation of the Fund; (v) The Presidential Secretariat must prepare and publish an annual report about all aspects of the operation, including details of donors, letters of appreciation from the fund recipients and government auditor general’s reports; and all known to the parliament and public; (vi) Public awareness for requesting financial assistance/donation to the Fund, while noticing the availability of financial assistance from the Fund to needy people; (vii) Only the President is responsible and accountable for all aspects of the operation of the Fund; (viii) Finally, proper investigations into all aspects of the Fund’s past operation must be conducted and completed within a given time period. Accordingly, wrongdoers must be punished to ensure that the AKD-headed Government does not tolerate misuse and mismanagement of public funds and that the law applies equally and fairly to all in the country, “The Meaning of Rata Anurata”. If the above is followed systematically and strategically, the President’s Fund will not be a tragedy for the nation in the future.Aaron Rodgers Reveals the Issue He Has With His FamilyChennai: BJP state president K Annamalai on Tuesday said electricity minister Senthil Balaji was his ‘pangali' (relative). Addressing reporters here, he said, "Senthilbalaji is my pangali. We both worship the same god. He has come to my house and eaten food, but that was before my entry into politics. Even Congress MP S Jothimani akka (elder sister) is my kin, and we both worship the same god. Despite that, we have differences politically and level charges against each other." To a question about an I-T search at the house of one of his relatives, he said the person was a distant relative and the incident had nothing to do with him. Stay updated with the latest news on Times of India . Don't miss daily games like Crossword , Sudoku , Location Guesser and Mini Crossword . Spread love this holiday season with these Christmas wishes , messages , and quotes .
For travelers, Puerto Rico is a floating island of desirabilityT'Vondre Sweat's rookie season has already proven the Titans 100% right and the rest of the league wrong
Scientists have raised concerns about hospitality staff coming into contact with second-hand smoke at work after the Government rowed back on plans to make it illegal to smoke in pub beer gardens. Concerns have also been raised about the “renormalisation” of smoking. Dr Rachel O’Donnell, senior research fellow at the University of Stirling’s Institute for Social Marketing and Health, said restrictions on smoking in outdoor places can “reinforce” a message that smoking “isn’t a socially acceptable thing to do” and could also help smokers to kick the habit. In November, it emerged that the UK Government is to scrap plans to ban smoking in the gardens of pubs and restaurants in England. Health Secretary Wes Streeting said the hospitality industry has “taken a real battering in recent years” and it is not “the right time” to ban smoking outside pubs. But smoking and vaping could be banned in other public places in England – such as in playgrounds or outside of schools – under the Tobacco and Vapes Bill. According to the World Health Organisation, there is no safe level of second-hand smoke exposure. In a briefing for journalists, Dr O’Donnell said decision-making “should be on the basis of all the evidence that’s available”. She added: “Any debate about legislation on smoking in outdoor settings shouldn’t only focus on air quality and second-hand smoke exposure levels, because the impacts of restrictions in outdoor settings are also evident on our social norms.” Smoke-free outdoor environments “reinforce smoke-free as the acceptable norm”, she said. “This, I think, is a critically important point at a time where in the media, over the last year, we’ve seen various reports and questions as to whether we might be on the cusp of renormalisation of smoking for various reasons, and so smoke-free public environments still have a critically important role to play. “If you reduce opportunities to smoke, it can also help individuals who smoke themselves to reduce the amount they smoke or to make a quit attempt.” Dr O’Donnell said visibility of tobacco products and smoking is a “form of marketing for tobacco companies” as she pointed to studies highlighting the increasing number of tobacco depictions on screen. She went on: “The more often young adults observe smoking around them, the more likely they are to believe that smoking is socially acceptable, which feeds back into this idea of renormalisation of smoking. “So, restrictions on smoking in outdoor public places have other positive knock-on effects, potentially for young people as well, just sending out that clear message that this isn’t a socially acceptable thing to do and see, and this could help to discourage smoking initiation among young people at quite a critical time.” On being exposed to second-hand smoke at work, she added: “I think sometimes when we think about exposure to second-hand smoke in outdoor settings, in pubs, in restaurants, we think about that sort of occasional customer exposure, the nuisance element of it when people are out enjoying a meal with friends, but we also need to be reminded that this is a repeated occupational exposure for those who are working in hospitality and serving drinks and food. “Now, as we’ve already seen, concentrations of second-hand smoke in these settings are generally low, and they’re likely to present a low risk to health for most healthy people. “But ... there’s no safe level of exposure to second-hand smoke, and so any individual with pre-existing heart, lung or respiratory conditions may be particularly vulnerable even to low levels of exposure. “We know that second-hand smoke is its known carcinogen, and on that basis those exposed in the hospitality sector have a right to be protected. “On that basis, there’s a need to protect them, as there is anybody in any workplace setting from second-hand smoke exposure in all areas of workplaces and spaces.” Sean Semple, professor of exposure science at the University of Stirling’s Institute for Social Marketing and Health, said: “I think that if I were a policy-maker, which I am not, then I would be looking at those occupational exposures as well. “I have asthma, if I was being occupationally exposed to SHS (second-hand smoke), and knowing that I was one of a very small number of workers now being legally exposed to SHS in the workplace, then I might not be very happy about that.” A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson said: “As part of our 10 Year Health Plan we are shifting focus from sickness to prevention, including tackling the harms of smoking and passive smoking. “The landmark Tobacco and Vapes Bill is the biggest public health intervention in a generation and will put us on track towards a smoke-free UK.”Chicago election officials want more voting sites, council members float agency consolidation
Trump team signs agreement to allow Justice to conduct background checks on nominees, staffSINGAPORE: Throw out old stereotypes of a game only for nerds or retirees, chess is now firmly mainstream . The 2024 World Chess Championship in Singapore, still ongoing at the time of writing, is livestreamed to millions. The showdown between world champion Ding Liren and 18-year-old challenger Gukesh Dommaraju receives global media coverage. Recent Nobel Laureate Demis Hassabis – a former child chess prodigy himself – was in town to open their first game. Charismatic top players such as Magnus Carlsen and Hikaru Nakamura – the current World Number 1 and 3 – do not fit the conventional image of chess grandmasters. Chess influencers stream games and analyses, making chess dynamic and entertaining even for casual viewers. Technology – from internet chess platforms to social media – has made it easy for people to learn, play and connect online. The surge of popularity can also be attributed to the chance convergence of factors, like the COVID-19 pandemic – during which lockdowns and movement restrictions drove more people to play chess – and the 2020 Netflix series The Queen’s Gambit. The rising global tide has not left Singapore behind. Grassroots chess events have proliferated, with initiatives such as the Aliwal Chess Club gaining attention even on mainstream media. Participation among young children and youth has similarly surged, with year-on-year increments in enrolment for chess courses and tournaments organised by the Singapore Chess Federation and private operators. PARENTS MAY HOPE FOR COGNITIVE BENEFITS Some parents may be wondering if this might be a good time to sign their children up to learn chess . Many who do believe that it can shape young minds in profound and positive ways, or hope it can enhance academic performance. It is easy to understand why. After all, a game of chess is fundamentally about strategic thinking and problem-solving. Players plan multiple moves ahead and anticipate consequences. A typical three- to four-hour game requires concentration and patience, increasingly rare qualities in our digital world of instant gratification and short attention spans. At higher levels of competition, preparation involves knowing and adapting to one’s opponents, taking into account their style of play, strengths and weaknesses, and their possible preparation against oneself. These skills should transcend the chessboard. RESEARCH DOESN’T BACK UP OUR BELIEFS However, a sense of healthy scepticism with regards to these seemingly logical beliefs is important. Just as in chess, one should assess positions objectively and analyse even “obvious” moves and captures. Surprisingly, there are only a handful of rigorous and well-designed research studies on the effects of chess on children. And they suggest no effect when it came to attention, focus or creativity. The most important study was on primary school children in Bangladesh in 2016, conducted by Monash University researchers, led by Associate Professor Lee Wang Sheng, my former Raffles Institution chess teammate and one of the top players of Asia in his youth. The primary positive effect was that the children who learned assessed risks better and were less risk-averse than those who did not. The Monash University study and another large-scale trial conducted on over 4,000 children in England also found no significant evidence that learning chess enhances mathematical abilities, reading nor science. In adults, playing chess (and other games such as mahjong and weiqi) is associated with better cognitive health, reducing the risk of dementia as well as slowing cognitive decline. However, most of the published research studies are small and not designed to demonstrate a causal relationship. CONSIDER THE EMOTIONAL AND SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT Where chess can benefit players is in the social platform it provides for children and adults from diverse backgrounds to connect. The sport transcends age, ethnicity, language and cultural barriers, creating a meritocratic and inclusive environment. I remember going to chess clubs as a teenager – then mainly in community centres – after school and over the weekends, playing games for fun or participating in local tournaments. Social status did not matter – one was respected for one’s skills and sportsmanship. I made many acquaintances and friends over chess, many of whom I remain in touch with or work closely with today. Maintaining one’s composure under pressure, and coping with loss and failure – often repeatedly at a young age – are invaluable experiences for building resilience. Such losses are “safe failures” and can teach children to view setbacks as stepping stones for growth rather than reasons to give up. Moreover, being able to objectively track one’s improvement with effort – by achieving better results in tournaments or defeating formerly formidable opponents – boosts self-confidence and a sense of accomplishment that extends beyond the game. These emotional and social development benefits are not unique to chess, of course, but present in many other sports and interactive games. ALL SPORTS AND GAMES HAVE POTENTIAL DRAWBACKS But just like these other sports and games, chess is not without potential drawbacks. The risk of children and youth becoming overly competitive or experiencing undue pressure is always present, especially if parents or coaches emphasise winning too strongly. Excessive focus and time spent on chess can also lead to reduced physical activity, a narrower range of interests, and in some cases, poorer academic performance. I found Basic Military Training during National Service gruelling because of the lack of physical fitness. At various points in junior college and university, my results were subpar, usually after taking time off for overseas chess tournaments. My parents and some of my teachers expressed concern about my academic progress, but (perhaps) wisely chose to support and respect my passion for the sport. It is important to ensure that chess supplements, rather than replaces, a well-rounded lifestyle that includes physical exercise, diverse social interactions and other recreational activities. SO, SHOULD I SIGN MY CHILD UP FOR CHESS? From my admittedly biased perspective, there is little harm and much potential benefit in introducing children to chess. However, it is essential not to have unreasonable expectations about the cognitive or academic benefits of the game, and children should never be pressured to continue if interest wanes. If they develop a passion for the game, providing a supportive environment and offering opportunities – be it enrolling in school chess clubs or participating in local age-group events – can at the minimum enhance their skills and broaden their interests. For some – which include my fellow chess enthusiasts and myself – it can be a transformative experience that positively shapes lives. Professor Hsu Li Yang is the President of the Singapore Chess Federation and Vice Dean of Global Health at the Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore.
Singh won't support Conservative non-confidence motion that uses his own wordsJustin Baldoni’s ex-publicist sues him, his crisis PR team over alleged Blake Lively smear campaignFor travelers, Puerto Rico is a floating island of desirability
WinGD wins late engine orders for eight newbuild LNG carriersMLB insider explains why Red Sox will need to ‘pay extra’ for free agents
Concerns have also been raised about the “renormalisation” of smoking. Dr Rachel O’Donnell, senior research fellow at the University of Stirling’s Institute for Social Marketing and Health, said restrictions on smoking in outdoor places can “reinforce” a message that smoking “isn’t a socially acceptable thing to do” and could also help smokers to kick the habit. In November, it emerged that the UK Government is to scrap plans to ban smoking in the gardens of pubs and restaurants in England. Health Secretary Wes Streeting said the hospitality industry has “taken a real battering in recent years” and it is not “the right time” to ban smoking outside pubs. But smoking and vaping could be banned in other public places in England – such as in playgrounds or outside of schools – under the Tobacco and Vapes Bill. According to the World Health Organisation, there is no safe level of second-hand smoke exposure. In a briefing for journalists, Dr O’Donnell said decision-making “should be on the basis of all the evidence that’s available”. She added: “Any debate about legislation on smoking in outdoor settings shouldn’t only focus on air quality and second-hand smoke exposure levels, because the impacts of restrictions in outdoor settings are also evident on our social norms.” Smoke-free outdoor environments “reinforce smoke-free as the acceptable norm”, she said. “This, I think, is a critically important point at a time where in the media, over the last year, we’ve seen various reports and questions as to whether we might be on the cusp of renormalisation of smoking for various reasons, and so smoke-free public environments still have a critically important role to play. “If you reduce opportunities to smoke, it can also help individuals who smoke themselves to reduce the amount they smoke or to make a quit attempt.” Dr O’Donnell said visibility of tobacco products and smoking is a “form of marketing for tobacco companies” as she pointed to studies highlighting the increasing number of tobacco depictions on screen. She went on: “The more often young adults observe smoking around them, the more likely they are to believe that smoking is socially acceptable, which feeds back into this idea of renormalisation of smoking. “So, restrictions on smoking in outdoor public places have other positive knock-on effects, potentially for young people as well, just sending out that clear message that this isn’t a socially acceptable thing to do and see, and this could help to discourage smoking initiation among young people at quite a critical time.” On being exposed to second-hand smoke at work, she added: “I think sometimes when we think about exposure to second-hand smoke in outdoor settings, in pubs, in restaurants, we think about that sort of occasional customer exposure, the nuisance element of it when people are out enjoying a meal with friends, but we also need to be reminded that this is a repeated occupational exposure for those who are working in hospitality and serving drinks and food. “Now, as we’ve already seen, concentrations of second-hand smoke in these settings are generally low, and they’re likely to present a low risk to health for most healthy people. “But ... there’s no safe level of exposure to second-hand smoke, and so any individual with pre-existing heart, lung or respiratory conditions may be particularly vulnerable even to low levels of exposure. “We know that second-hand smoke is its known carcinogen, and on that basis those exposed in the hospitality sector have a right to be protected. “On that basis, there’s a need to protect them, as there is anybody in any workplace setting from second-hand smoke exposure in all areas of workplaces and spaces.” Sean Semple, professor of exposure science at the University of Stirling’s Institute for Social Marketing and Health, said: “I think that if I were a policy-maker, which I am not, then I would be looking at those occupational exposures as well. “I have asthma, if I was being occupationally exposed to SHS (second-hand smoke), and knowing that I was one of a very small number of workers now being legally exposed to SHS in the workplace, then I might not be very happy about that.” A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson said: “As part of our 10 Year Health Plan we are shifting focus from sickness to prevention, including tackling the harms of smoking and passive smoking. “The landmark Tobacco and Vapes Bill is the biggest public health intervention in a generation and will put us on track towards a smoke-free UK.”Russia shares higher at close of trade; MOEX Russia Index up 0.47%
SLUG: DELAYED DUE TO DIFFERENCES Vadodara: The Sama flyover project , which was delayed due to differences of opinion among elected representatives of the Vadodara Municipal Corporation (VMC), will now be taken up for discussion by the coordination committee of the BJP. VMC's political wing functionaries earlier passed the responsibility to the party as the deadlock continued. The flyover at Sama Crossroads, also called the Abacus Crossroads, was embroiled in controversy after it was suggested that the flyover should be linked to the Urmi bridge on the Vishwamitri river. This suggestion was taken up by VMC officials, and a design that aligned the existing Urmi bridge with the flyover was created. A fresh proposal regarding the unified bridge was also made by officials and presented before the standing committee of the civic body. However, before the proposal could be discussed, another group of corporators visited the site and stated that the idea of joining the bridge was only for the benefit of a few individuals and should be abandoned. They also raised concerns over the cost escalation. Instead of a small flyover costing Rs 56.56 crore, the project cost escalated to Rs 120.71 crore. In light of the deadlock, the ruling BJP decided that the top brass of the city unit should make a decision on the project. Sources said that the coordination committee of the BJP, which includes MLAs from the city, MP, VMC functionaries, and senior BJP city unit members, will now discuss the project. With so many top functionaries involved, there is no certainty regarding the possible outcome. Sources added that there was no word yet on the meeting of the coordination committee of the party. The ongoing process of appointing party functionaries at the ward level and then the city and state level functionaries may even delay the meeting. Project Deadlock Details Abacus Circle Flyover Abacus Circle to Urmi Bridge Length 560m 1,525m Cost Rs 56.56 crore Rs 120.71 crore Design Double pier Single pier Stay updated with the latest news on Times of India . Don't miss daily games like Crossword , Sudoku , Location Guesser and Mini Crossword . Spread love this holiday season with these Christmas wishes , messages , and quotes .
Getting smart about car insurance can provide cost savings and peace of mindRenters and homebuyers in Jamaica targeted in rising real estate scams
Concerns have also been raised about the “renormalisation” of smoking. Dr Rachel O’Donnell, senior research fellow at the University of Stirling’s Institute for Social Marketing and Health, said restrictions on smoking in outdoor places can “reinforce” a message that smoking “isn’t a socially acceptable thing to do” and could also help smokers to kick the habit. In November, it emerged that the UK Government is to scrap plans to ban smoking in the gardens of pubs and restaurants in England. Health Secretary Wes Streeting said the hospitality industry has “taken a real battering in recent years” and it is not “the right time” to ban smoking outside pubs. But smoking and vaping could be banned in other public places in England – such as in playgrounds or outside of schools – under the Tobacco and Vapes Bill. According to the World Health Organisation, there is no safe level of second-hand smoke exposure. In a briefing for journalists, Dr O’Donnell said decision-making “should be on the basis of all the evidence that’s available”. She added: “Any debate about legislation on smoking in outdoor settings shouldn’t only focus on air quality and second-hand smoke exposure levels, because the impacts of restrictions in outdoor settings are also evident on our social norms.” Smoke-free outdoor environments “reinforce smoke-free as the acceptable norm”, she said. “This, I think, is a critically important point at a time where in the media, over the last year, we’ve seen various reports and questions as to whether we might be on the cusp of renormalisation of smoking for various reasons, and so smoke-free public environments still have a critically important role to play. “If you reduce opportunities to smoke, it can also help individuals who smoke themselves to reduce the amount they smoke or to make a quit attempt.” Dr O’Donnell said visibility of tobacco products and smoking is a “form of marketing for tobacco companies” as she pointed to studies highlighting the increasing number of tobacco depictions on screen. She went on: “The more often young adults observe smoking around them, the more likely they are to believe that smoking is socially acceptable, which feeds back into this idea of renormalisation of smoking. “So, restrictions on smoking in outdoor public places have other positive knock-on effects, potentially for young people as well, just sending out that clear message that this isn’t a socially acceptable thing to do and see, and this could help to discourage smoking initiation among young people at quite a critical time.” On being exposed to second-hand smoke at work, she added: “I think sometimes when we think about exposure to second-hand smoke in outdoor settings, in pubs, in restaurants, we think about that sort of occasional customer exposure, the nuisance element of it when people are out enjoying a meal with friends, but we also need to be reminded that this is a repeated occupational exposure for those who are working in hospitality and serving drinks and food. “Now, as we’ve already seen, concentrations of second-hand smoke in these settings are generally low, and they’re likely to present a low risk to health for most healthy people. “But ... there’s no safe level of exposure to second-hand smoke, and so any individual with pre-existing heart, lung or respiratory conditions may be particularly vulnerable even to low levels of exposure. “We know that second-hand smoke is its known carcinogen, and on that basis those exposed in the hospitality sector have a right to be protected. “On that basis, there’s a need to protect them, as there is anybody in any workplace setting from second-hand smoke exposure in all areas of workplaces and spaces.” Sean Semple, professor of exposure science at the University of Stirling’s Institute for Social Marketing and Health, said: “I think that if I were a policy-maker, which I am not, then I would be looking at those occupational exposures as well. “I have asthma, if I was being occupationally exposed to SHS (second-hand smoke), and knowing that I was one of a very small number of workers now being legally exposed to SHS in the workplace, then I might not be very happy about that.” A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson said: “As part of our 10 Year Health Plan we are shifting focus from sickness to prevention, including tackling the harms of smoking and passive smoking. “The landmark Tobacco and Vapes Bill is the biggest public health intervention in a generation and will put us on track towards a smoke-free UK.”Trump team signs agreement to allow Justice to conduct background checks on nominees, staffGetting smart about car insurance can provide cost savings and peace of mind