text:
World Flying Disc Federation

The World Flying Disc Federation (WFDF) is the international governing body for flying disc (Frisbee) sports, with responsibility for sanctioning world championship events, establishing uniform rules, setting of standards for and recording of world records. WFDF is a federation of member associations which represent flying disc sports and their athletes in 100 countries. WFDF is an international federation recognized by the International Olympic Committee (IOC), a member of the Association of IOC Recognised International Sports Federations (ARISF), GAISF, and the International World Games Association (IWGA), and it is a registered not-for-profit 501(c)(3) corporation in the state of Colorado, U.S.

Membership
WFDF has member associations in 118 countries (90+28) (in March 2022), from Africa, Asia, Australia, Europe, North America, The Caribbean and South America (regular members and provisional members).

WFDF is a not-for-profit corporation, incorporated in Colorado, US, and it was formed in 1985.

WFDF is a member of Global Association of International Sports Federations (formerly known as SportAccord), The International World Games Association (IWGA), and the International Council of Sport Science and Physical Education (ICSSPE). In May 2013, under the leadership of WFDF President Robert L. "Nob" Rauch, WFDF was granted provisional recognition by the International Olympic Committee and gained full IOC recognition on 2 August 2015.

It is now one of 42 sports that are members of the Association of IOC Recognised International Sports Federations.

Members by regions
118 members (90 regular members and 28 provisional members):

Asia Oceania Flying Disc Federation (AOFDF)
Asia Oceania Flying Disc Federation (AOFDF) - (governing body of Asian and Oceanic Flying Disc) (one of the continental association of the World Flying Disc Federation).

 * AFDF: 2011-2019 - Asian Flying Disc Federation
 * AOFDF: 2019-now - Asia Oceania Flying Disc Federation

On 3 December 2011, was founded in Kaohsiung, Chinese Taipei (2011 WFDF Asia Oceanic Ultimate Championship (AOUC)).

Foundation meeting: Chinese Taipei, Hong Kong, India, Japan, and Singapore.

Events:
 * 2011: Asia Oceanic Ultimate Championships, Kaohsiung, Chinese Taipei
 * 2013: Asia Oceanic Ultimate Club Championships, Singapore
 * 2015: Asia Oceanic Ultimate Championships, Hong Kong, China
 * 2017: Asia Oceanic Ultimate and Guts Club Championships, Manila, Philippines
 * 2019: Asia Oceanic Beach Ultimate Championships, Shirahama, Japan
 * 2019: Asia Oceanic Ultimate and Guts Championships, Shanghai, China
 * 2019: AOFDF Juniors and Masters Ultimate Championships, Manila, Philippines

Members (25+3):

Asia:
 * 1) $\phi$
 * 1) $\phi$
 * 1) $\phi$
 * 1) $\phi$
 * 1) $\phi$
 * 1) $\phi$
 * 1) $\phi$
 * 1) $\phi$
 * 1) $\phi$
 * 1) $\phi$
 * 1) $\phi$
 * 1) $\phi$
 * 1) $\phi$
 * 1) $\phi$
 * 1) $\phi$
 * 1) $\phi$
 * 1) $\phi$
 * 1) $\phi$

Oceania:

Other:

European Flying Disc Federation (EFDF)/European Ultimate Federation (EUF)

 * 1) European Flying Disc Federation (EFDF)
 * 2) European Ultimate Federation (EUF)

Federations

 * 1)    Int. | Freestyle Players Association (FPA)
 * 2)    Int. | Guts Players Association (USGPA)

Regular members

 * 1)    🇦🇱, Albania | Albania Flying Disc Federation (AFDF)
 * 2)    🇦🇷, Argentina | Asociación de Deportes del Disco Volador de la Republica Argentina (ADDVRA)
 * 3)    🇦🇺, Australia | Australian Flying Disc Association Inc. (AFDA)
 * 4)    🇦🇹, Austria | Österreichischer Frisbee-Sport Verband (ÖFSV)
 * 5)    🇦🇿, Azerbaijan | Azerbaijan Ultimate (AU)
 * 6)   , Barbados | Barbados Hat (BH)
 * 7)    🇧🇪, Belgium | Belgian Flying Disc Federation (BFDF)
 * 8)   , Bermuda | Bermuda Ultimate Frisbee Federation (BUFF)
 * 9)   , Botswana | Gaborone Ultimate Community (BWA)
 * 10)    🇨🇦, Canada | Ultimate Canada (UC)
 * 11)    🇨🇳, People's Republic of China | Chinese Flying Disc Administrative Committee (CFDAC)
 * 12)    🇨🇮, Côte d'Ivoire| Fédération Ivoirienne De Frisbee (FIDF)
 * 13)    🇨🇩, Democratic Republic of Congo | Federation Congolaise de Disque Volant (FCDV)
 * 14)    🇨🇴, Colombia | Federación Colombiana de Disco Volador (FECODV)
 * 15)    🇨🇺, Cuba | Cuba Ultimate Frisbee (CUF)
 * 16)    🇨🇿, Czech Republic | Czech Flying Disc Association (CALD)
 * 17)   , Denmark | Dansk Frisbee Sport Union (DFSU)
 * 18)    🇩🇴, Dominican Republic | Asociacion Dominicana de Jugadores de Ultimate (ADJU)
 * 19)    🇪🇨, Ecuador | Ecuador Ultimate (EU)
 * 20)    🇪🇬, Egypt | Egyptian Ultimate Players Association (EUPA)
 * 21)   , El Salvador | San Salvador Ultimate Frisbee (SSUF)
 * 22)    🇪🇸, Spain | Federación Española de Disco Volador (FEDV)
 * 23)    🇪🇪, Estonia | Estonian Flying Disc Federation (EFDF)
 * 24)    🇪🇹, Ethiopia | Ethiopia Ultimate (ETH)
 * 25)   , Fiji | Frisbee Fiji (FF)
 * 26)    🇫🇮, Finland | Finnish Flying Disc Association (FFDA)
 * 27)    🇫🇷, France | Federation Française de Flying Disc (FFFD)
 * 28)    🇬🇧, Great Britain | UK Ultimate Ltd (UKU) / 🇬🇧, United Kingdom |British Disc Golf Association (BDGA)
 * 29)   , Georgia | Georgian Flying Disc Federation (GFDF)
 * 30)    🇩🇪, Germany | Deutscher Frisbeesport-Verband e.V. (DFV)
 * 31)   , Greece | Greece Hellas Sport for All (HSA)
 * 32)   , Guatemala | Guatemala City Ultimate Frisbee (GCUF)
 * 33)    🇬🇺, Guam | Guam Ultimate for All Association (GUFA)
 * 34)   , Haiti | Haiti Flying Disc (FD)
 * 35)    🇭🇰, Hong Kong, China | Hong Kong Ultimate Players Association (HKUPA)
 * 36)    🇭🇺, Hungary | Hungarian Flying Disc Federation (HFDF)
 * 37)    🇮🇳, India | Ultimate Players Association of India (UPAI)
 * 38)    🇮🇪, Ireland | Irish Flying Disc Association (IFDA)
 * 39)    🇮🇸, Iceland | Frisbee Sport Federation of Iceland (ICELAND)
 * 40)    🇮🇱, Israel | The Israeli Flying Discs Association (IFDA)
 * 41)    🇮🇹, Italy | Federazione Italiana Flying Disc (FIFD)
 * 42)    🇯🇲, Jamaica | Jamaica Ultimate (JU)
 * 43)    🇯🇵, Japan | Japan Flying Disc Association (JFDA)
 * 44)    🇰🇷, Republic of Korea | Korea Ultimate Players Association (KUPA)
 * 45)   , Saudi Arabia | Ultimate Frisbee Saudi Arabia Amateurmannschaft (UFSA)
 * 46)   , Kuwait | Kuwait Raptors (KR)
 * 47)   , Latvia | Latvian Flying Disc Federation (LFDF)
 * 48)    🇱🇹, Lithuania | Lithuania Flying Disc Federation (LFDF)
 * 49)    🇱🇺, Luxembourg | Luxembourg Flying Disc Federation (LU)
 * 50)    🇲🇴, Macau, China | Macau Ultimate (MU)
 * 51)   , Madagascar | Malagasy Ultimate Disc League (MUDL)
 * 52)    🇲🇦, Morocco | The Moroccan Flying Disc Association (UFMT)
 * 53)   , Malaysia | Malaysian Flying Disc Association (MYFDA)
 * 54)    🇲🇽, Mexico | Ultimate México (MEX)
 * 55)    undefined, Mali | Association Malienne de Flying Disc (AMFD)
 * 56)    🇲🇹, Malta | Malta Sport for All (MSF)
 * 57)   , Mauritius | Mauritius Ultimate Frisbee (UFM)
 * 58)    🇲🇿, Mozambique | Mozambique Ultimate (MOZ)
 * 59)   , Netherlands | Dutch Flying Disc Federation (NFB)
 * 60)   , Nigeria | Abuja Ultimate Frisbee Group (NIG)
 * 61)    🇳🇴, Norway | Norges Amerikanske Idretters Forbund
 * 62)    🇳🇿, New Zealand | New Zealand Ultimate Inc. (NZU)
 * 63)    🇵🇦, Panama | Asociacion de Ultimate – Frisbee de Panamá (PU)
 * 64)    🇵🇪, Peru | Peru Ultimate (PU)
 * 65)    𝜙, Philippines | Philippine Ultimate Association (PUA)
 * 66)   , Palestine | Palestine Flying Disc Association (PFDA)
 * 67)    🇵🇱, Poland | Polskie Stowarzyszenie Graczy Ultimate (PUPA)
 * 68)   , Portugal | Federação Portuguesa de Ultimate e Desportos de Disco (APUDD)
 * 69)   , Puerto Rico | Extreme Flydisk Ultimate Association (PR)
 * 70)   , South Africa | South African Flying Disc Association (SAFDA)
 * 71)    🇷🇺, Russian Federation | Russian Flying Disc Federation (RFDF)
 * 72)    🇸🇳, Senegal | Senegal Ultimate (SEN)
 * 73)    🇸🇬, Singapore | Singapore Ultimate Players Association (UPAS)
 * 74)   , Slovenia | Frizbi zveza Slovenije (FZS)
 * 75)    🇷🇸, Serbia | Serbian Ultimate Frisbee (RS)
 * 76)   , Switzerland | Swiss Disc Sports (SDS) / , Switzerland | Swiss Discgolf Association
 * 77)    🇸🇰, Slovakia | Slovak Association of Frisbee (SAF)
 * 78)    🇸🇪, Sweden | Swedish Frisbeesport Federation (SFF)
 * 79)    🇹🇭, Thailand | Flying Disc Association of Thailand (FDAT)
 * 80)    🇹🇲, Turkmenistan | Turkmenistan Flying Disc Federation (TFDF)
 * 81)   , Chinese Taipei | Chinese Taipei Flying Disc Association (CTFDA)
 * 82)    🇹🇷, Turkey | Turkish Flying Disc Association (TFDA)
 * 83)   , United Arab Emirates | United Arabian Ultimate (UAU)
 * 84)    🇺🇬, Uganda | Uganda Ultimate Frisbee Association (UUFA)
 * 85)    🇺🇦, Ukraine | Ukrainian Flying Disk Federation(UFDF)
 * 86)    🇺🇸, United States of America | USA Ultimate (USAU)
 * 87)    🇻🇪, Venezuela | Venezuelan Ultimate Association (AVU)
 * 88)   , Vietnam | Hanoi Ultimate Club (HUC)
 * 89)   , Zimbabwe | HIS group (HIS)

Provisional members

 * 1)    🇦🇫, Afghanistan | Afghanistan Frisbee Federation (AFF)
 * 2)    🇦🇲, Armenia | Armenian National Frisbee Federation (ANFF)
 * 3)    🇧🇾, Belarus | Belarusian Flying Disc Federation (BFDF)
 * 4)    🇧🇴, Bolivia | Bolivian Flying Disc Association (BFDA)
 * 5)    🇧🇭, Bahrain | Bahrain Flying Disc Association (BFDA)
 * 6)   , Brunei | Brunei Flying Disc Association (BFDA)
 * 7)    🇧🇬, Bulgaria | Bulgarian Flying Disc Informal Federation (BFDA)
 * 8)   , Cambodia | Cambodia Flying Disc Association (CFDA)
 * 9)   , Cayman Islands | Cayman Islands Ultimate Association (CIUA)
 * 10)   , Chile | Asociación Chilena de Ultimate (AChU)
 * 11)   , Costa Rica | Costa Rican Ultimate Frisbee Team (Tocadiscos)
 * 12)   , Croatia | Croatian Flying Disc Federation (CFDF)
 * 13)   , Indonesia | Indonesian Ultimate Discindo (IFDA)
 * 14)   , Islamic Republic of Iran | Iranian Flying Disc Association (IRFDA)
 * 15)    🇯🇴, Jordan | Jordan Flying Disc Federation (JFDF)
 * 16)    🇰🇿, Kazakhstan | Kazakhstan Flying Disc Association (FFDRK)
 * 17)    🇰🇪, Kenya | Kenya Flying Disc Association (KFDA)
 * 18)    🇱🇧, Lebanon | Lebanon Flying Disc Association (LBN)
 * 19)   , Malawi | Malawi Flying Disc Federation (MFDF)
 * 20)    🇲🇩, Republic of Moldova | Moldovan Flying Disc Federation (MFDF)
 * 21)   , Nicaragua | Federación de Disco Volador de Nicaragua (FEDIVONIC)
 * 22)    🇶🇦, Qatar | Ultimate Players Association of Qatar (UPAQ)
 * 23)    🇷🇴, Romania | Romania Flying Disc Association (RFDA)
 * 24)    🇷🇼, Rwanda | Rwanda Ultimate Frisbee Association (RUFA)
 * 25)   , Sri Lanka | Sri Lankan Flying Disc Association (SLFDA)
 * 26)   , Tanzania | Tanzanian Flying Disc Association (TFDA)
 * 27)   , Uruguay | Ultimate Frisbee Uruguay (UU)
 * 28)   , Virgin Islands | US Virgin Islands Ultimate (USVIU)

History
Flying disc sport rose with the invention of plastic and celebrated its 50th anniversary in 2007. The early years of international flying disc play were dominated by the influence of the International Frisbee Association (IFA) which was founded by Ed Headrick in 1967 as the promotional arm of the Wham-O Manufacturing Company. Many of the international affiliates began as Wham-O distributorships that sponsored tours of well-known Frisbee athletes. Several groups of individual disc event stars like Ken Westerfield and Jim Kenner touring Canada in 1972. The brothers Jens and Erwin Velasquez and the team of Peter Bloeme and Dan "Stork" Roddick made several tours of Scandinavia and the rest of Europe in the mid-1970s; Jo Cahow and Stork went to Australia and Japan in 1976 and Victor Malafronte and Monica Lou toured Japan around the same time. Stork—starting as head of the sports marketing arm of the U.S.-based Wham-O in 1975—played a crucial role in encouraging the establishment of national flying disc associations (FDAs) in Sweden, Japan, Australia, and in many of the countries of Western Europe. The FDAs began with freestyle and accuracy competitions but as Ultimate and disc golf caught on, the associations began to broaden their focus.

The concept of an independent world organization for the development and coordination of all of the disc disciplines began in 1980 at an Atlanta, Georgia, meeting of 40 international disc organizers. A loose federation led by Jim Powers was formed from that meeting but never took off. The following year, the relatively well-established national flying disc associations of Europe formed the European Flying Disc Federation (EFDF). In 1983 Wham-O was sold to Kransco and the IFA was disbanded. Spurred on by the demise of the IFA, Stork called a meeting at the US Open Overall Championships in La Mirada, California. A plan was presented by Charlie Mead of England and a formal decision was made to establish a worldwide disc association in Örebro, Sweden during the 1984 European Overall Championships. This decision was confirmed later that year by other flying disc countries in Lucerne, Switzerland, during the World Ultimate and Guts Championships, and thus the World Flying Disc Federation (WFDF) was born.

The first WFDF Congress was held in Helsingborg, Sweden in July 1985, where the first set of statutes was adopted and the first board was elected. The first president was Charlie Mead (England), the first secretary Johan Lindgren (Sweden) and the first treasurer Brendan Nolan (Ireland). Membership was composed of the national flying disc associations and US-oriented organizations such as the Ultimate Players Association, Freestyle Players Associations, and Guts Players Association. Committees were established to oversee international play and rules for each of the disc disciplines. Over the remainder of the 1980s, WFDF took on an increasing role in overseeing and promoting international disc tournaments with Stork as president and Lindgren as secretary-treasurer.

In 1992, Robert L. "Nob" Rauch was elected President of WFDF and Juha Jalovaara become chair of the Ultimate Committee. Over the next two years, WFDF was reorganized to better reflect the increasing growth of Ultimate and the diversity of WFDF's membership. The disc committee structure was simplified into a broad category of team sports (Ultimate and Guts) and individual events (golf and the overall disciplines). The role of the Rules Committee was expanded, headed by Stork, to ensure consistency and an annual rules book was printed. With a variety of representation, the categories of membership were further defined, with national associations able to join as regular, associate, or provisional (non-paying) members depending on level of participation and resources. WFDF's corporate standing was reorganized and incorporated in Colorado, obtaining US tax-exempt status. WFDF, with a fairly nominal budget, found help with the increasing use of e-mail that permitted reasonable communication and coordination. In 1994, the application to join the International World Games Association (IWGA)—championed by Fumio "Moro" Morooka of Japan—was prepared and eventually accepted by the IWGA leading to Ultimate's participation in the 2001 World Games in Akita, Japan, and in each of the subsequent competitions.

In May 2013, under the leadership WFDF President Robert L. "Nob" Rauch, WFDF was granted provisional recognition by the International Olympic Committee and it is now one of 42 sports that are members of the Association of IOC Recognised International Sports Federations.

Due to the impact of the global COVID-19 pandemic, WFDF canceled all its world championship events in both 2020 and 2021. It is planning to recommence world championship events in Ultimate, Beach ultimate, Disc Golf, and Overall in 2022, and to participate in The World Games championships in Birmingham, Alabama, U.S. in July 2022 that had been postponed from 2021.

Disciplines
Disciplines:

 * 1) Ultimate
 * 2) Disc Golf
 * 3) Freestyle
 * 4) Guts
 * 5) Overall
 * 6) Beach Ultimate

Disc sports represented include: Ultimate (outdoor, indoor, beach), disc golf, field events (distance, accuracy, self caught flight, discathon), guts frisbee, double disc court, and freestyle.

WFDF World Ultimate Club Championship
Cincinnati, Ohio, U.S., 23–31 July 2022

Cincinnati, Ohio, U.S., 14–21 July 2018

Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, 29 July - 4 August 2018

Lecco, Italy, 2–9 August 2014

Prague, Czech Republic, 3–10 July 2010

Perth, Australia, 11–18 November 2006

Honolulu, US, 4–10 August 2002

St. Andrews, Scotland, 12–20 August 1999

Vancouver Canada, 27 July – 2 August 1997

Millfield United Kingdom, 22–29 July 1995

Madison, Wisconsin US, 24–31 July 1993

Toronto Canada, 22–28 July 1991

Cologne Germany, 26–30 July 1989

International World Games Ultimate Championship
Kaohsiung Taiwan, 19–21 July 2009
 * US
 * 1) Japan
 * 2) Australia

WFDF 2009 World Overall Flying Disc championships
Jacksonville, Florida, 9–12 July 2009 Open Division
 * 1) Conrad Damon – US
 * 2) Jack Cooksey – US
 * 3) Harvey Brandt – US

Women's Division
 * 1) Mary Lowry – US
 * 2) Stina Persson – SWE
 * 3) Marygrace Sorrentino – US

WFDF World Ultimate and Guts Championship (WUGC)
London, Great Britain, 18–25 June 2016

Sakai, Japan, 7–14 July 2012

Vancouver, Canada, 2–9 August 2008

Turku, Finland, 1–7 August 2004

Heilbronn, Germany, 12–20 August 2000

Blaine, Minnesota, US, 15–22 August 1998

Jönköping, Sweden, 10–17 August 1996

Colchester, United Kingdom, 21–28 August 1994

Utsunomiya, Japan, 17–23 August 1992

Oslo, Norway, 8–14 July 1990

Leuven, Belgium, 29 August – 3 September 1988

Colchester, United Kingdom, 25–31 August 1986

Lucerne, Switzerland, 2–9 September 1984

Gothenburg, Sweden, 29 August – 3 September 1983

title: World Flying Disc Federation


text:
Dorsey

Dorsey may refer to:

People

 * Dorsey (surname)
 * Dorsey (given name)

United States

 * Dorsey, Illinois, an unincorporated community
 * Dorsey, Maryland, an unincorporated community
 * Dorsey station, a passenger rail station
 * Dorsey, Michigan
 * Dorsey, Mississippi, an unincorporated community
 * Dorsey, Nebraska, an unincorporated community

Elsewhere

 * Dorsey, County Armagh, a village in Northern Ireland
 * Dorsey Island, Antarctica

Other uses

 * USS Dorsey (DD-117), a destroyer which served in both world wars
 * Dorsey Road, part of Maryland Route 103
 * Susan Miller Dorsey High School, high school in Baldwin Hills/Crenshaw, Los Angeles, California

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Dorsey


text:
Guts UK

Guts UK, formerly known as the Digestive Disorders Foundation, is a British medical research charity dedicated to the research of digestive disorders.

In 1970, the Council of the British Society of Gastroenterology first considered founding a charity to promote research in this speciality. A steering group, chaired by their President at the time, Dr Nelson Coghill, compiled facts and figures which established the importance of digestive disorders as a national health problem. Using this evidence as a basis for appeal, a Digestive Disorders Trust Fund was established.

Dr Thomas Hunt, a founder member of the British Society of Gastroenterology, agreed to launch the new charity. He succeeded in attracting prominent lay and professional support. By 1974 its funds were sufficient to award the first research fellowship and to inaugurate the charity as a Foundation with Hunt as its first President. On his death in 1980, Sir Francis Avery Jones took over the presidency for the next 12 years. Important landmarks during this time were the appointment of the first full-time director, expansion of research support and the development of the successful patient information programme.

title: Guts UK


text:
Epilepsy Research Institute

Epilepsy Research Institute, formerly Epilepsy Research UK, is a British medical research charity dedicated to funding and supporting research into epilepsy.

In March 2007, the Epilepsy Research Foundation merged with the Fund for Epilepsy to become Epilepsy Research UK (ERUK). ERUK is the only national organisation exclusively engaged in research into epilepsy.

The research projects and fellowships the organisation supports are reported to be of the highest scientific merit as they are subject to rigorous scrutiny, involving a Scientific Advisory Committee, independent expert opinion, interviews and peer review. The clinical research portfolio discovers ways to advance the medical care and management of people living with epilepsy and the lab-based scientific projects investigate causes and methods for improved diagnosis, treatment and prevention.

The organisation also plays a key role in capacity building the research community. The Expert Workshop programme is internationally renowned and the dissemination activities aim to forge local and global collaborations.

The charity is a member of the Association of Medical Research Charities, known to be a hallmark of quality research.

title: Epilepsy Research Institute


text:
Portal:Canada

Project data Featured content - Popular pages - Vital articles

title: Portal:Canada


text:
South (band)

South are an English rock band. The band consisted of lead singer Joel Cadbury, Brett Shaw, and Jamie McDonald. Each member was a multi-instrumentalist and they shared duties on guitars, bass, percussion, keyboards.

Career
Formed at Haverstock School in Chalk Farm, London in 1998, South were originally conceived as an electronic act. The band were mentored by ex-Stone Roses frontman Ian Brown. The band later worked under the tutelage of UNKLE's James Lavelle, who signed the band to his personal record label.

After a promo album, Overused released in the U.S., South released their first official studio album entitled From Here On In. They also played "Paint the Silence" which was featured in the OC. Next came their second album With the Tides in 2003 which included "Colours in Waves" and "Loosen Your Hold", before the band had a couple of years break.

"A Place in Displacement", the first single from their third album, was released early in 2006, followed by the album Adventures in the Underground Journey to the Stars, which came out on 3 April 2006. A UK release followed on 9 October that year.

Their fourth album, You Are Here was released in April 2008.

On Jamie Macdonald's MySpace page, it was announced that the band were taking a hiatus, and that there were no future plans to get back together and record or play live again. Macdonald formed a new band called The Hug with Joel Cadbury on bass. Brett Shaw is currently a producer with his own studio in London and has been working with Florence and the Machine (Island), Rufus Wainwright (Decca), Paul Banks (Interpol), Daughter (4D), Still Corners (sub pop), Eliza Doolittle (EMI), Hawk House (Virgin EMI), Swim Deep (Chess Club), Clean Bandit featuring Jess Glynne (Atlantic).

Macdonald has since released two solo EPs entitled The Head On Collider EP and The Shelf Life EP, both in 2010.

Their fifth album, From Here on Out was released on March 26, 2021.

Albums

 * From Here on In (2001)
 * With the Tides (2003)
 * Adventures in the Underground Journey to the Stars (2006)
 * You Are Here (2008)
 * From Here on Out (2021)

EPs

 * All In For Nothing (2001)
 * Constantly Burning (2001)
 * Speed Up / Slow Down (2005)

Singles
1999 2000 2001 2003 2004 2006 2008
 * "Time To Riot" / "Dub Remedies" (7" - 1000 only, part 1 of 3 x 7" set) (Mo' Wax MWR 117S)
 * "Run On Time" / "Torriano" (7" - 1000 only, part 2 of 3 x 7" set) (Mo' Wax MWR 118S)
 * "Sight Of Me" / "Better Things" (7" - 1000 only, part 3 of 3 x 7" set) (Mo' Wax MWR 119S)
 * "4 Track Sessions" (12") (Mo' Wax MWR 120)
 * "Interim" (10", 12" Promo) (Mo' Wax MWR 133)
 * "Paint The Silence" (12", 12" Promo, 2xCDS) (Mo' Wax MWR 134) - UK No. 69
 * "Keep Close" (10", CDS) (Mo' Wax MWR 144)
 * "Broken Head" (2x12" Promo) (Mo' Wax SOUTH DJ1/SOUTH DJ2)
 * "Loosen Your Hold" (7", CDS) (Double Dragon DD2010) - UK No. 73
 * "Colours In Waves" (12", CDS) (Sanctuary SAN 249) - UK No. 60
 * "Motiveless Crime" (7", CDS) (Sanctuary SAN 286) - UK No. 72
 * "A Place in Displacement" (7", CDS) (Genepool GPOOL010)
 * "Up Close And Personal" (7", CDS) (Cooking Vinyl FRY 278)
 * "Better Things" (7") (Bluhammock Music 80032)
 * "Wasted" (7") (Genepool GPOOL017)

Compilation albums

 * Overused (2000)
 * Music from the OC: Mix 1 (2004, Warner Bros./WEA) - "Paint the Silence"
 * Acoustic 07 (2007, V2 Records) - "Up Close and Personal"
 * From Here on Out (2021)

title: South (band)


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Santa barbara ceramic design

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was Copyvio. -- AllyUnion (talk) 09:19, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Santa barbara ceramic design

 * Advertising. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 18:32, Feb 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, thousands of their pieces have changed hands in secondary markets, and many California glassworks are culturally encyclopedic. This article is helpful. Wyss 19:07, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Title capitalization needs correcting, though. Wyss 19:08, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * Delete, I emailed the author and he says he doesn't care. Wyss 23:49, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * The fact that there might be an article worth writing about this company has no bearing on the fact that the CURRENT "article" is a rather blatant advert. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 23:02, Feb 10, 2005 (UTC)

 * I trust Wyss... but if you need more, 8810 web hits for the name as a string, only one Usenet hit but it's from 1999 and calls it "the famous Santa Barbara Ceramic Design company". 5 results on ebay.com at the moment; the auctions ending today are $177 and $189 already. Notable collectible art label. Keep . Samaritan 20:41, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Now I notice the article is signed and bears a copyright notice. Somebody should email the creator to ask for its release under GFDL then cleanup, or write one afresh. Samaritan 20:43, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Send to Copyright problems. Samaritan 00:40, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * It was already there yesterday. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 18:56, Feb 11, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, advertising, copyvio. Ellsworth 22:42, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, advertising, copyright violation. Megan1967 02:45, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.


text:
Locomotive Acts

The Locomotive Acts (or Red Flag Acts) were a series of Acts of Parliament in the United Kingdom regulating the use of mechanically propelled vehicles on British public highways during the latter part of the 19th century.

The first three, the Locomotive Act 1861 (24 & 25 Vict. c. 70), the Locomotives Act 1865 (28 & 29 Vict. c. 83) and Highways and Locomotives (Amendment) Act 1878 (41 & 42 Vict. c. 77), contained restrictive measures on the manning and speed of operation of road vehicles; they also formalised many important road concepts such as vehicle registration, registration plates, speed limits, maximum vehicle weight over structures such as bridges, and the organisation of highway authorities.

The most strict restrictions and speed limits were imposed by the 1865 act (the "Red Flag Act"), which required all road locomotives, which included automobiles, to travel at a maximum of 4 mi/h in the country and 2 mi/h in the city, as well as requiring a man carrying a red flag to walk in front of road vehicles hauling multiple wagons.

The 1896 act removed some restrictions of the 1865 act and raised the speed to 14 mi/h.

The Locomotives on Highways Act 1896 provided legislation that allowed the automotive industry in the United Kingdom to develop soon after the development of the first practical automobile (see History of the automobile). The last "locomotive act" was the Locomotives Act 1898.

Background
The Highway Act 1835 and subsequent acts (Public Health Act 1875 (38 & 39 Vict. c. 55), Local Government Act 1888 and Local Government Act 1894) attempted to find satisfactory methods of maintaining roads since the UK turnpike trust system had failed following the UK railway boom.

New steam powered road locomotives, some up to 9 feet (2.7 m) wide and 14 tons, were alleged to damage the highway while they were being propelled at "high speeds" of up to 10 mph. There is evidence that the steam carriages' brakes and their wide tyres caused less damage to the roads than horse-drawn carriages because of the absence of horses' hooves striking the road and wheels which did not lock and drag.

It has been claimed that the restrictions in the earlier act were advocated by those with interests in the UK railway industry and horse-drawn carriages.

In addition to any concerns about the state of the roads, by the 1860s, there was concern that the widespread use of traction engines, such as road locomotives and agricultural engines, would endanger the safety of the public. It was feared that engines and their trailers might cause fatal accidents, scare horses, block narrow lanes, and disturb the locals by operating at night. Although all of these fears were justified and were soon realized, there was a gradual acceptance of the machines as they became more common in commerce.

Similar 'Red Flag' legislation was enacted in some states in the United States.

The emerging UK automotive industry advocated very effectively for the 1896 Act during the preceding year. Coventry manufacturer Harry J. Lawson, who had purchased the British Daimler engine patents in 1895 and later was to form The Daimler Motor Company, was very influential. Economic historian Kenneth Richardson has suggested that the 1896 Act may have been written by Sir David Salomons, the founder of the Self-Propelled Traffic Association, on his assumption that no government department personnel would have had the necessary experience to do so themselves.

Locomotive Act 1861

 * An Act for regulating the use of locomotives on turnpike and other roads, and the tolls to be levied on such locomotives and on the waggons and carriages drawn or propelled by the same.

The Locomotives on Highways Act 1861 (24 & 25 Vict. c. 70) recognised that the use of "powered locomotives" on turnpikes and other roads would become commonplace, and that many existing laws (e.g. Turnpike, Highway acts) did not contain any provision for regulation or tolling of such vehicles. The act contained sections on:
 * Toll fees of locomotives and their wagons: to be tolled at every 2 tons of vehicle weight, and equal to the respective tolls charged for horse-drawn vehicles. Vehicles with non-cylindrical wheels were to be charged 50% more. (Section 1)
 * Regulations on the minimum width of wheels of vehicles over 3 tons: and on maximum loads per wheel, and restrictions on vehicles thought to be damaging to roads. (Sections 3, 4, 5)
 * Regulations, restrictions, and procedures for compensation to trustees on the passage of locomotives over bridges and other structures for any damage caused thereon. (Section 7)
 * Requirement for the vehicle to consume its own smoke (Section 8)
 * Requirement for a road locomotive to be manned by at least two persons, with additional persons in charge of trains of wagons, as well as requirements for the vehicle to carry functional lights during nighttime. (Section 9)
 * A speed limit of 10 mph on open roads, or 5 mph in inhabited areas. (Section 11)
 * Requirement for the owners name, and the weight of the vehicle to be clearly displayed on the vehicle. (Section 12)

The act also set out the values of fines for breach of the regulations.

Locomotives Act 1865 (Red Flag Act)

 * An Act for further regulating the use of Locomotives on Turnpike and other roads for Agricultural and other purposes.

The Locomotive Act 1865 (28 & 29 Vict. c. 83):
 * Stipulated that self-propelled vehicles should be accompanied by a crew of three; if the vehicle was attached to two or more vehicles an additional person was to accompany the vehicles; a man with a red flag was to walk at least 60 yd ahead of each vehicle, who was also required to assist with the passage of horses and carriages. The vehicle was required to stop at the signal of the flagbearer. (Section 3)
 * Additionally vehicles were required to have functional lights, and not sound whistles or blow off steam whilst on the road. (Section 3)
 * A speed limit of 4 mph (2 mph in towns) was imposed for road locomotives, with a fine of £10 for contravention. (Section 4)
 * The restricted road locomotive vehicles to 14 tons, and 9 ft in width, as well as requiring the vehicle to have wheels meeting the requirements of the 1861 act. (Section 5)
 * A speed limit of 4 mph (2 mph in towns) was imposed for road locomotives, with a fine of £10 for contravention. (Section 4)
 * The restricted road locomotive vehicles to 14 tons, and 9 ft in width, as well as requiring the vehicle to have wheels meeting the requirements of the 1861 act. (Section 5)
 * The restricted road locomotive vehicles to 14 tons, and 9 ft in width, as well as requiring the vehicle to have wheels meeting the requirements of the 1861 act. (Section 5)
 * The restricted road locomotive vehicles to 14 tons, and 9 ft in width, as well as requiring the vehicle to have wheels meeting the requirements of the 1861 act. (Section 5)

Highways and Locomotives (Amendment) Act 1878

 * An Act to amend the Law relating to Highways in England and the Acts relating to Locomotives on Roads; and for other purposes.

The Highways and Locomotives (Amendment) Act 1878 (41 & 42 Vict. c. 77) contained sections on:
 * Arrangements regarding the formation of 'highway districts'; stipulating that they should roughly correspond with rural sanitary districts, and allowing the sanitary authority to apply to manage the highway districts, taking over property, debts and liabilities relating to the highway. (Part I. 3-12)
 * De-turnpiked roads to become 'main roads' and half their maintenance cost paid through county rates. (Part I. 13)
 * Gave the highway authority powers to request that roads between towns, and roads to railway stations be classified as 'main roads' (Part I. 15)
 * Allow the county authority to contribute to the maintenance of bridges (Part I. 21-22)
 * Provisions to recover maintenance costs from road users operating heavy traffic and causing excess road wear. (Part I. 23)
 * Set out procedures for the highway authority to discontinue any unneeded roads. (Part I. 24)
 * Allowing the repeal and issue of bylaws relating to animal-drawn vehicles that might cause damage to the road; as well as regulations on gates and regulations on bicycles, and allowing the issue of fines relating to such byelaws. (Part I. 26)

The act also repealed and replaced with amendments part of the 1861 and 1865 Locomotive Acts; these included:
 * Section 3 of the 1861 act and section 5 of the Locomotive Act 1865 – clauses relating to the weight, length, and width of tyre of road locomotives (Part II. 28)
 * Section 8 of the 1861 act, requiring road locomotives to consume their own smoke was repealed and amended. (Part II. 30-31)

Locomotives on Highways Act 1896
The Locomotives on Highways Act 1896 introduced a 12 mph speed limit (8 to 16 mph at the local authority's discretion). Speed limits were later increased by the Motor Car Act 1903.

Locomotives Act 1898

 * An Act to amend the Law with respect to the use of Locomotives on Highways, and with respect to extraordinary Traffic.

The Locomotives Act 1898 (61 & 62 Vict. c. 29) required road users to affix signs displaying the weight of wagons; limited length of hauled road trains to three wagons without permission, and gave powers to road authorities to operate weighing machines for the weighing of road vehicles, as well as allowing fines for the contravention of the regulations, and allowed for compensation relating to delay caused by the weighing process. (Sections 2, 3 and 4 respectively)

The act also contained sections on:
 * Regulations relating to number of persons in attendance to road locomotives, assistance to passing horses or carriages, and the requirement for and proper form of illuminating lights (Section 5)
 * Allowing councils to restrict the passage on road locomotives and their wagons on crowded highways, and bridges (in case of damage), whilst allowing bridge restrictions to be lifted on the payment of costs relating to bridge strengthening (Section 6)
 * Gave the right of appeal to road locomotives operators on restrictions under the act of the 1861 act. (Section 7)
 * Restricted passing of locomotives on bridges (Section 8)
 * Required road locomotives used for haulage (excluding agricultural machines, and steam rollers) to be licensed by the county council, and set out the requirement for display of a license plate (Sections 9, 10, 11)

title: Locomotive Acts


text:
Springville High School

Springville High School may refer to:

 * Springville High School (Alabama), Springville, Alabama
 * Springville High School (Iowa), Springville, Iowa
 * Springville High School (New York), Springville
 * Springville High School (Utah), Springville

title: Springville High School


text:
Lepra (charity)

Lepra (Leprosy Relief Association) is a UK-based international charity established in 1924, working to diagnose, treat, and rehabilitate people with leprosy. Lepra currently works in India, Bangladesh, and Zimbabwe.

Lepra is a member of the International Federation of Anti-Leprosy Associations (ILEP), a federation of international non-governmental organisations committed to creating a world free of leprosy and of The UK Coalition against Neglected Tropical Diseases, a collaborative partnership between UK organisations actively engaged in the implementation and research of neglected tropical disease control. Other partners of Lepra include LEPRA India, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, the World Health Organization, and the BIG Lottery Fund, as well as a range of corporate partners.

History
In 1923 Major General Sir Leonard Rogers, ex-Indian Medical Service, agreed to join Rev. Frank Oldrieve in forming a new association. Sir Leonard Rogers had been working on a treatment for leprosy based on chaulmoogra oil for several years and had recorded good results. On 12 July 1923, the British Empire Leprosy Relief Association (BELRA) was constituted at a meeting at the India Office, presided over by Viscount Chelmsford.

BELRA (1924-1964)
On 31 January 1924, the British Empire Leprosy Relief Association was officially founded by Rogers and Oldrieve, with the financial help of Sir Frank Carter, a Calcutta businessman and philanthropist. BELRA was inaugurated by the Prince of Wales (later King Edward VIII) at The Mansion House in London. The association stated its aim as "to rid the Empire of leprosy." It was set up as a medical organisation, spearheading outpatient work instead of the traditional method of (compulsory) segregation. Rogers believed, based on his experience, that it was important to treat leprosy in its earliest stages, and that the segregation system caused people to hide the illness for as long as possible. King Edward VI became the first Patron.

Lepra was founded in 1924 on two principles that, at the time, set the organisation apart. First, it acknowledged that leprosy was surrounded by superstition and myth, leading to prejudice and isolation for those affected by the disease. Lepra sought to move beyond these issues through "evidence-led" policies and practices. Second, Lepra was established as a secular charity, open to all faiths and beliefs, and claiming to favour none above another.

In 1929 Dr Robert Cochrane took over from Oldrieve and became BELRA's Medical and General Secretary.

In 1931 BELRA was recognised as the 'First leprosy prevention organisation' at the International Leprosy Congress in Manila.

In 1935 BELRA launched a Child Adoption Scheme as a method of raising funds for treatment of children who were patients of leprosy hospitals. The child patients were connected with UK sponsors. The royal family would later adopt children through BELRA's Child Adoption Scheme in 1947.

In 1945 BELRA became one of the first organisations to methodically trial Dapsone as a treatment for leprosy and record its impact.

In 1951 Dr Robert Cochrane became Leprosy Adviser to the UK Ministry of Health.

In 1952 The Queen became patron of BELRA.

In 1953 BELRA established the first leprosy research centre in Eastern Africa. The site for the East African Leprosy Research Centre was chosen to be within the grounds of the Itesio Leprosarium in Kenya. In 1959 the name of the centre was changed to Alupe. The centre is now known as The Centre for Infectious and Parasitic Diseases Control Research (CIPDCR) and is one of the 12 centres of the Kenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI).

At the 1957 Annual General Meeting, following the decolonisation process of the British Empire, the Association changed its name to the British Leprosy Relief Association, retaining the abbreviation BELRA.

In 1961 BELRA helped to develop Clofazimine (B663), which to this day remains a part of the multi drug therapy used for multi bacillary leprosy.

In 1962 A mobile exhibition van started touring the UK, promoting BELRA's work.

LEPRA (1964-2013)
In 1964 the Association changed its name from BELRA to LEPRA.

In 1965 the High Commissioner for Malawi and LEPRA's president, Viscount Boyd, approved an agreement on the Malawi Pilot Leprosy Control project, which subsequently began work.

In 1974 LEPRA moved its headquarters from London to Colchester, where its offices are still based today.

As a result of research, in 1975 LEPRA became one of the first associations to use multidrug therapy for treating leprosy, to increase effectiveness and minimise drug resistance.

In 1976 LEPRA became a full member of the International Federation of Anti-Leprosy Associations (ILEP).

In 1992 LEPRA funded research into a new surgical technique to restore sense of touch and temperature to damaged feet and hands, in cooperation with the Royal College of Surgeons in London and a leprosy centre in India.

In 1996 LEPRA was chosen to be the partner charity for the BBC Children's Television programme Blue Peter in their 'Bring and Buy Sale' for leprosy. The appeal raised more than £2.8 million.

In 1998 LEPRA extended its work to helping people with tuberculosis and HIV/AIDS.

In 2000 LEPRA joined the World Health Organisation, ILEP, governments of major endemic countries, and other major organisations in the Global Alliance Against Leprosy.

In 2011 A study from the Blue Peter Health Research Centre identified new biomarkers to detect TB early in HIV-positive people.

Lepra (2013-)
In 2013, LEPRA was re-branded as Lepra and in 2014 celebrated its 90th birthday. This was celebrated with a special anniversary edition of its quarterly magazine Lepra News, including a timeline of many of Lepra's achievements over the years.

In 2017 Lepra's Museum was officially opened by Kate Anderson, Gt. Niece of Sir Frank Carter, one of Lepra's founding members.

Leprosy Review
Each quarter, Lepra publishes Leprosy Review, an English-language scientific journal on leprosy. The open-access academic journal includes original papers on all aspects of leprosy, from research into medical, physical and social aspects of leprosy to information relevant to leprosy control.

A forerunner of Leprosy Review, named Leprosy Notes, was first published in 1928. In its first issue, Rev. Frank Oldrieve, as Secretary of the Association, writes that the hope is "that leprosy workers in the British Empire will find these notes of service." He also invites readers to write in with any notes "on the results obtained from the various treatments that are being tried." In total, seven issues of Leprosy Notes are published across two years.

In 1930, the first issue of Leprosy Review is published, a larger and expanded version of Leprosy Notes, with Dr Robert Cochrane as its first editor. Its aim was to "meet the need for a quarterly periodical giving interesting and practical details to workers, especially to those who have made no attempt to specialise exclusively in the field of leprosy."

In 2004, Leprosy Review was cited as one of the top five medicine journals by the Institute of Scientific Information.

In 2017 Leprosy Review published an article arguing for a return to an active case finding strategy in endemic countries to reduce the numbers of people affected by leprosy.

The Leprosy Notes of 1928 and 1929 as well as all Leprosy Review issues from 1930 to 2001 are freely available online thanks to the Full Text Leprosy Project, an initiative of the Lauro de Souza Lima Institute of Secretary of Health of São Paulo, in cooperation with the Latin American and Caribbean Center on Health Sciences Information and The International Journal of Leprosy. Issues from 2002 onwards are available on Lepra's website.

Current Work
Lepra takes an integrated approach to reducing the incidence and impact of leprosy and lymphatic filariasis. In addition to treating the diseases, Lepra also aims to enable people to improve their livelihoods and overcome disability, discrimination and prejudice.

Locations
As of 2019 Lepra works in India (as LEPRA Society), Bangladesh and Zimbabwe. Lepra's international office is based in Colchester, England.

Over the years Lepra has worked in multiple other countries, including Brazil, Kenya, Malawi, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, Uganda, and Zanzibar.

Bangladesh
In 2000, at the request of the government of Bangladesh, Lepra took over responsibility for leprosy control work in the Sirajganj and Pabna districts.

In 2006 Lepra established a system of "health camps" in Bangladesh to test for TB.

Lepra currently works in 11 districts in the north of Bangladesh, including Bogra, Sirajganj, Pabna and Natore.

LEPRA Society
LEPRA Society is a partner of Lepra, serving the needs of people affected by leprosy across India. While its history dates back to 1925, when Lepra started working in India, it was established as an independent Indian NGO in Hyderabad in 1988 to comply with Indian law. Lepra and LEPRA Society remain closely linked through governance and institutional structures and are a single consolidated charitable entity.

Lepra, through LEPRA Society, works in seven Indian states, namely Telangana, Andhra Pradesh, Jharkhand, Odisha, Madhya Pradesh, Bihar and Delhi. Lepra's projects in India include comprehensive referral centres where self-supporting groups in rural areas, across health education, bespoke footwear for disability, active case finding, livelihood support, reaction treatment and support, mental health counselling, health education, reconstructive surgery and training.

LEPRA Society of India held its inaugural meeting in Hyderabad on 3 August 1989.

In 1990 LEPRA began its BOLEP project in Sonepur, Odisha, India, which had the highest prevalence of leprosy in the world at the time. The project continues to this day.

The Blue Peter Public Health Centre, located in Hyderabad, was officially inaugurated in December 1999. It is a research centre as well as training and treatment facility for those with leprosy. It offers a unique combination of high-quality research and clinical practice.

In 2000 LEPRA introduced health education vans in India.

Diagnosing and treating leprosy
One of Lepra's core activities is the diagnosis and treatment of leprosy. When a doctor, health worker or health volunteer suspects someone has leprosy, Lepra will test skin sensations to determine whether the person can feel their skin being touched with cotton wool, feather or a ballpoint. Another way to determine leprosy infection is by taking a skin smear from a nodule on the skin. The skin smear is only positive, however, if many leprosy bacilli are present, meaning that the patient is heavily infected.

Leprosy is treated by multi drug therapy (MDT), a combination of Dapsone and Rifampicin for six months in the case of low infection ("paucibillary"). For higher infection levels ("multi-bacillary"), Clofazimine is added to the MDT and the treatment period is lengthened to 12 months.

Early diagnoses and active case finding
Lepra also recognises the importance of early detection of leprosy. Their active case finding method involves a screening of people around an infected person. While previous methods focused specifically on people sharing a household with a person affected by leprosy, Lepra focuses on both household members and 20-25 households around an index-case and conducts systematic screening of communities, schools or other places where endemicity is thought to be high.

Lymphatic filariasis
Lymphatic filariasis is a parasitic disease contracted through the bite of an infected mosquito. It causes swelling of body parts and altering of the immune system.Although there is no cure for LF, Lepra implements a number of strategies to make the disease manageable for those affected. They travel to remote communities to teach self-care techniques to reduce swelling and pain. If feet are already severely deformed, Lepra provides people with custom-made protective footwear.

Health education and health worker training
In many of the places where Lepra works, basic health information is often lacking, both for the general public and for health workers. Lepra tries to remedy this by providing health education and health training.

Lepra uses health education vans to bring health information to people living in remote and rural areas. These vans visit villages to educate people about maintaining good health and informing them about the symptoms of leprosy, LF and other prevalent diseases.

Lepra has also visited schools to provide health education. This education includes teaching children the symptoms of leprosy so they can recognise the disease in themselves and their families. School visits are also an important step in dispelling leprosy myths and the stigma surrounding the disease.

Lepra works with governments to improve health worker training. Lepra also trains traditional doctors to recognise the symptoms of leprosy and other neglected diseases so they can refer patients to government facilities when needed.

To fill in the gaps in the health service, Lepra also works with community health volunteers who are trained to recognise symptoms and work in their own communities to spread health messages, follow up on cases, and refer suspected cases of illness to the correct health facilities.

Advocacy and fighting prejudice
People with leprosy or other diseases such as lymphatic filariasis often face stigma and prejudice from their communities, the government, or even their families. Such stigma often remains long after a person has been cured. Many people who have leprosy or used to have leprosy are forced to live in leprosy colonies across India and Bangladesh, isolated from their families and communities.

Lepra aims to fight prejudice and stigma by providing health education to the general population, as well as health worker training.

Lepra also provides support to people who face leprosy and other diseases in the form of counselling services at the Munger Referral Centre.

Lepra is actively working with national and state networks of people affected by leprosy and disability across India and Bangladesh to fight legal discrimination. This can involve educating clients about rights to land, disability and old age benefits, and basic human rights, and finding opportunities for clients to meet with government representatives and local authorities.

Self-help groups
In 2012 Lepra began self-help groups in India, Bangladesh and Mozambique for those affected by LF and leprosy. These groups advise people on how to best help themselves with health care and income generation.

At each meeting, members of the self-help groups make a small financial contribution to a group fund. This fund is then used to provide members with an interest-free business loan to finance business initiatives such as a local shop, goat rearing, or tailoring. Members of the group are also trained in group management skills, self-care, or advocacy skills.

Community disability care and protective footwear
Lepra teaches people how to care for their disabilities, so they are not left unable to work, and also provides people with protective footwear so they can get around more easily.

Lepra organises self-care camps in local communities where people can learn how to care for their disabilities through cleaning and physiotherapy techniques that they can then do at home. People with disabilities are invited to demonstrate to others how they can prevent infection and reduce the severity of their disabilities.

Lepra also provides basic self-care kits to people free of charge. These kits include a bar of soap, anti-bacterial ointment, cream to prevent fungal infections, and a towel.

Lepra provides people with leprosy and LF with specialist, made-to-fit shoes designed for each individual. Shoes provide comfort, encourage healing of wounds and ulcers, and prevent further injury and disability. They can also restore a person's dignity and challenge stigma within the community. Several shoe technicians are working in clinics and referral centres, while Lepra also has a few shoe vans driving across India providing the service to local communities.

Referral centres
When Lepra first sett up referral centres, people with leprosy were not allowed into hospitals or did not receive proper treatment due to stigma and doctors not specialising in the disease. Now, Lepra's referral centres provide services in areas where health facilities are lacking or unable to manage neglected diseases like leprosy or LF, and the disabilities they can cause. The services offered at these referral centres include testing, treatment, disability care, physiotherapy, ulcer care, reconstructive surgery and counselling to people affected by diseases as well as their families.

Lepra runs their referral centres in partnership with state and national health systems. They are often located in government health centres and hospitals. Ultimately, the aim is to hand them over to governments to ensure their sustainability.

Research and innovation
Lepra is one of the world's leading authorities on leprosy. Over the years, Lepra has conducted pioneering research in the treatment of leprosy and has been at the forefront of developing a cure and trialling a multitude of drug treatments.

Today research still forms an important part of Lepra's work, carrying out both scientific and field research to further knowledge of neglected diseases and the effects they have on poor communities.

Recent research has focused on active case finding, disability aids, diagnostic tools and the mental health needs of those affected by leprosy.

Awards
In 1998 Lepra received a National Lottery Charities Board award. That same year, Lepra achieved "Investors in People" status.

In 2003 Lepra's contributions to the fight against leprosy were recognised at the Third Meeting of the Global Alliance for the Elimination of Leprosy (GAEL) in Yangon, Myanmar.

Ambassadors and Patrons
Throughout Lepra's history, the reigning British monarch has consistently been a Lepra patron. King George VI became the first of the Royal family to sponsor children through their adoption scheme at the time, and Queen Elizabeth II became Patron of the British Empire Leprosy Relief Association (BELRA) in 1952 following his death. The Duke of Gloucester, Prince Richard (KG, GCVO), is the current vice-president of Lepra.

Lepra currently has multiple ambassadors who help to support and promote their work:

Fiona Duby has worked in 29 countries in Africa and Asia in health and development programmes in both the public and the private sector. She was awarded an MBE for services to Bangladesh in 1992 and an OBE for services to Nigeria in 1999. In 2000, she was invited to join Lepra's board of trustees. She became an ambassador in 2015.

Victoria Hislop is an author best known for her novel The Island, which features the island of Spinalonga, Greece's former leper colony. Hislop became an ambassador for Lepra in 2013 and has been to India to visit Lepra's projects.

Stuart Miles was one of the Blue Peter presenters at the time when Lepra was selected as the charity for Blue Peter's annual fundraiser in 1996. Miles has since visited projects, helping to raise awareness of leprosy and Lepra's appeals.

In 2018 Stuart Paver became a Lepra ambassador. He is the managing director of Pavers, the shoe company that has helped fund Lepra's Indian shoe vans.

title: Lepra (charity)


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hatanimae

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was delete. -- AllyUnion (talk) 09:21, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Hatanimae
Apparently a hoax. I listed it as an accuracy dispute for a couple days. - RedWordSmith 18:37, Feb 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, the only Google hit is the disputed Wikipedia page, and anyway it sounds like a hoax to me. Wyss 19:05, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, not notable - fails Google test, possible hoax. Megan1967 02:46, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.


text:
Dysfunctional family

A dysfunctional family is a family in which conflict, misbehavior and often child neglect or abuse on the part of individual parents occur continuously and regularly. Children that grow up in such families may think such a situation is normal. Dysfunctional families are primarily a result of two adults, one typically overtly abusive and the other codependent, and may also be affected by substance abuse or other forms of addiction, or sometimes by an untreated mental illness. Parents having grown up in a dysfunctional family may over-correct or emulate their own parents. In some cases, the dominant parent will abuse or neglect their children and the other parent will not object, misleading a child to assume blame.

Examples
Dysfunctional family members have common features and behavior patterns as a result of their experiences within the family structure. This tends to reinforce the dysfunctional behavior, either through enabling or perpetuation. The family unit can be affected by a variety of factors.

Nearly universal
Some features are common to most dysfunctional families:
 * Lack of empathy, understanding, and sensitivity towards certain family members, while expressing extreme empathy or appeasement towards one or more members who have real or perceived special needs. In other words, one family member continuously receives far more than they deserve, while another is marginalized.
 * Denial (refusal to acknowledge abusive behavior, possibly believing that the situation is normal or even beneficial; also known as the "elephant in the room".)
 * Inadequate or missing boundaries for self (e.g. tolerating inappropriate treatment from others, failing to express what is acceptable and unacceptable treatment, tolerance of physical, emotional or sexual abuse.)
 * Disrespect of others' boundaries (e.g. physical contact that other person dislikes; breaking important promises without just cause; purposefully violating a boundary another person has expressed.)
 * Extremes in conflict (either too much fighting or insufficient peaceful arguing between family members.)
 * Unequal or unfair treatment of one or more family members due to their birth order, gender (or gender identity), age, sexual orientation, family role (mother, etc.), abilities, race, caste, etc. (may include frequent appeasement of one member at the expense of others, or an uneven/inconsistent enforcement of rules.)

Not universal
Though not universal among dysfunctional families, and by no means exclusive to them, the following features are typical of dysfunctional families:
 * Abnormally high levels of jealousy or other controlling behaviors.
 * Conflict influenced by marital status:
 * Between separated or divorced parents, usually related to, or arising from their breakup.
 * Conflict between parents who remain married, often for the perceived sake of the children, but whose separation or divorce would in fact remove a detrimental influence on those children (must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, as a breakup may harm children.)
 * Parents who wish to divorce, but cannot due to financial, societal (including religious), or legal reasons.
 * Children afraid to talk (within or outside the family) about what is happening at home, or are otherwise fearful of their parents.
 * Abnormal sexual behavior such as adultery, promiscuity, or incest.
 * Lack of time spent together, especially in recreational activities and social events ("We never do anything as a family.")
 * Parents insist that they treat their children fairly and equitably when that is not the case.
 * Family members (including children) who disown each other, or refuse to be seen together in public (either unilaterally or bilaterally.)
 * Children of parents who are experiencing a substance use disorder or who engage in binge drinking have an increased tendency to adopt substance use disorders later in life.

Specific examples
There are certain times where families can become dysfunctional due to specific situational examples. Some of these include difficulty integrating into a new culture, strain in the relationship between nuclear and extended family members, children in a rebellion phase, and ideological differences in belief systems.

Laundry List
The program Adult Children of Alcoholics includes a "Laundry List", core literature of the program. This list has 14 different statements that relate to being an adult child of a parent with an alcohol addiction. These statements provide commentary on how children have been affected by the trauma of having alcoholic parents. Some highlights of the statements include, "confusing love and pity", "having low self-esteem", and having a "loss of identity". The Laundry List is a helpful tool in group therapy in order to show families that they are not alone in their struggles. Female children whose parents were alcoholics have an increased risk of developing depression. Male children of alcoholics are at a significantly higher risk for developing a substance use disorder.

Unhealthy signs
Unhealthy parenting signs, which could lead to a family becoming dysfunctional include:
 * Unrealistic expectations
 * Ridicule
 * Conditional love
 * Disrespect; especially contempt.
 * Emotional intolerance (family members not allowed to express the "wrong" emotions.)
 * Social dysfunction or isolation (for example, parents unwilling to reach out to other families—especially those with children of the same gender and approximate age, or do nothing to help their "friendless" child.)
 * Stifled speech (children not allowed to dissent or question authority.)
 * Denial of an "inner life" (children are not allowed to develop their own value systems.)
 * Being under- or over-protective
 * Apathy ("I don't care!")
 * Belittling ("You can't do anything right!")
 * Shame ("Shame on you!")
 * Bitterness (regardless of what is said, using a bitter tone of voice.)
 * Hypocrisy ("Do as I say, not as I do.")
 * Lack of forgiveness for minor misdeeds or accidents
 * Judgmental statements or demonization ("You are a liar!")
 * Being overly critical and withholding proper praise. (experts say 80–90% praise, and 10–20% constructive criticism is the most healthy.)
 * Double standards or giving "mixed messages" by having a dual system of values (i.e. one set for the outside world, another when in private, or teaching divergent values to each child.)
 * The absentee parent (seldom available for their child due to work overload, alcohol/drug abuse, gambling, or other addictions.)
 * Unfulfilled projects, activities, and promises affecting children ("We'll do it later.")
 * Giving to one child what rightly belongs to another
 * Gender prejudice (treats one gender of children fairly; the other unfairly.)
 * Discussion and exposure to sexuality: either too much, too soon or too little, too late
 * Faulty discipline based more on emotions or family politics than on established rules (e.g., punishment by "surprise".)
 * Having an unpredictable emotional state due to substance abuse, personality disorder(s), or stress
 * Parents always (or never) take their children's side when others report acts of misbehavior, or teachers report problems at school
 * Scapegoating (knowingly or recklessly blaming one child for the misdeeds of another)
 * "Tunnel vision" diagnosis of children's problems (for example, a parent may think their child is either lazy or has learning disabilities after falling behind in school despite recent absence due to illness.)
 * Older siblings given either no or excessive authority over younger siblings with respect to their age difference and level of maturity.
 * Frequent withholding of consent ("blessing") for culturally common, lawful, and age-appropriate activities a child wants to take part in
 * The "know-it-all" (has no need to obtain child's side of the story when accusing, or listen to child's opinions on matters which greatly impact them.)
 * Regularly forcing children to attend activities for which they are extremely over- or under-qualified (e.g. using a preschool to babysit a typical nine-year-old boy, taking a young child to poker games, etc.)
 * Either being a miser ("scrooge") in totality or selectively allowing children's needs to go unmet (e.g. a father will not buy a bicycle for his son because he wants to save money for retirement or "something important".)
 * Disagreements about nature and nurture (parents, often non-biological, blame common problems on child's heredity, when faulty parenting may be the actual cause.)

"Children as pawns"
One common dysfunctional parental behavior is a parent's manipulation of a child in order to achieve some outcome adverse to the other parent's rights or interests. Examples include verbal manipulation such as spreading gossip about the other parent, communicating with the parent through the child (and in the process exposing the child to the risks of the other parent's displeasure with that communication) rather than doing so directly, trying to obtain information through the child (spying), or causing the child to dislike the other parent, with insufficient or no concern for the damaging effects of the parent's behavior on the child. While many instances of such manipulation occur in shared custody situations that have resulted from separation or divorce, it can also take place in intact families, where it is known as triangulation.

List of other dysfunctional styles

 * "Using" (destructively narcissistic parents who rule by fear and conditional love.)
 * Abusing (parents who use physical violence, or emotionally, or sexually abuse their children.)
 * Perfectionist (fixating on order, prestige, power, or perfect appearances, while preventing their child from failing at anything.)
 * Dogmatic or cult-like (harsh and inflexible discipline, with children not allowed, within reason, to dissent, question authority, or develop their own value system.)
 * Inequitable parenting (going to extremes for one child while continually ignoring the needs of another.)
 * Deprivation (control or neglect by withholding love, support, necessities, sympathy, praise, attention, encouragement, supervision, or otherwise putting their children's well-being at risk.)
 * Abuse among siblings (parents fail to intervene when a sibling physically or sexually abuses another sibling.)
 * Abandonment (a parent who willfully separates from their children, not wishing any further contact, and in some cases without locating alternative, long-term parenting arrangements, leaving them as orphans.)
 * Appeasement (parents who reward bad behavior—even by their own standards—and inevitably punish another child's good behavior in order to maintain the peace and avoid temper tantrums. "Peace at any price.")
 * Loyalty manipulation (giving unearned rewards and lavish attention trying to ensure a favored, yet rebellious child will be the one most loyal and well-behaved, while subtly ignoring the wants and needs of their most loyal child currently.)
 * "Helicopter parenting" (parents who micro-manage their children's lives or relationships among siblings—especially minor conflicts.)
 * "The deceivers" (well-regarded parents in the community, likely to be involved in some charitable/non-profit works, who abuse or mistreat one or more of their children.)
 * "Public image manager" (sometimes related to above, children warned to not disclose what fights, abuse, or damage happens at home, or face severe punishment "Don't tell anyone what goes on in this family".)
 * "The paranoid parent" (a parent having persistent and irrational fear accompanied by anger and false accusations that their child is up to no good or others are plotting harm.)
 * "No friends allowed" (parents discourage, prohibit, or interfere with their child from making friends of the same age and gender.)
 * Role reversal (parents who expect their minor children to take care of them instead.)
 * "Not your business" (children continuously told that a particular brother or sister who is often causing problems is none of their concern.)
 * Ultra-egalitarianism (either a much younger child is permitted to do whatever an older child may, or an older child must wait years until a younger child is mature enough.)
 * "The guard dog" (a parent who blindly attacks family members perceived as causing the slightest upset to their esteemed spouse, partner, or child.)
 * "My baby forever" (a parent who will not allow one or more of their young children to grow up and begin taking care of themselves.)
 * "The cheerleader" (one parent "cheers on" the other parent who is simultaneously abusing their child.)
 * "Along for the ride" (a reluctant de facto, step, foster, or adoptive parent who does not truly care about their non-biological child, but must co-exist in the same home for the sake of their spouse or partner) (See also: Cinderella effect).
 * "The politician" (a parent who repeatedly makes or agrees to children's promises while having little to no intention of keeping them.)
 * "It's taboo" (parents rebuff any questions children may have about sexuality, pregnancy, romance, puberty, certain private body areas, nudity, etc.)
 * Identified patient (one child, usually selected by the mother, who is forced into going to therapy while the family's overall dysfunction is kept hidden.)
 * Münchausen syndrome by proxy (a much more extreme situation than above, where the child is intentionally made ill by a parent seeking attention from physicians and other professionals.)

Dynamical
Coalitions are subsystems within families with more rigid boundaries and are thought to be a sign of family dysfunction.

 * The isolated family member (either a parent or child up against the rest of the otherwise united family.)
 * Parent vs. parent (frequent fights amongst adults, whether married, divorced, or separated, conducted away from the children.)
 * The polarized family (a parent and one or more children on each side of the conflict.)
 * Parents vs. kids (intergenerational conflict, generation gap or culture shock dysfunction.)
 * The balkanized family (named after the three-way war in the Balkans where alliances shift back and forth.)
 * Free-for-all (a family that fights in a "free-for-all" style, though may become polarized when range of possible choices is limited.)

Children
Unlike divorce, and to a lesser extent, separation, there is often no record of an "intact" family being dysfunctional. As a result, friends, relatives, and teachers of such children may be completely unaware of the situation. In addition, a child may be unfairly blamed for the family's dysfunction, and placed under even greater stress than those whose parents separate.

The six basic roles
Children growing up in a dysfunctional family have been known to adopt or be assigned one or more of the following six basic roles:
 * The Golden Child (also known as the Hero or Superkid ): a child who becomes a high achiever or overachiever outside the family (e.g., in academics or athletics) as a means of escaping the dysfunctional family environment, defining themselves independently of their role in the dysfunctional family, currying favor with parents, or shielding themselves from criticism by family members.
 * The Problem Child, Rebel, or Truth Teller: the child who a) causes most problems related to the family's dysfunction or b) "acts out" in response to preexisting family dysfunction, in the latter case often in an attempt to divert attention paid to another member who exhibits a pattern of similar misbehavior.
 * A variant of the "problem child" role is the Scapegoat, who is unjustifiably assigned the "problem child" role by others within the family or even wrongfully blamed by other family members for those members' own individual or collective dysfunction, often despite being the only emotionally stable member of the family.
 * The Caretaker: the one who takes responsibility for the emotional well-being of the family, often assuming a parental role; the intra-familial counterpart of the "Good Child"/"Superkid."
 * The Lost Child or Passive Kid: the inconspicuous, introverted, quiet one, whose needs are usually ignored or hidden.
 * The Mascot or Family Clown: uses comedy to divert attention away from the increasingly dysfunctional family system.
 * The Mastermind: the opportunist who capitalizes on the other family members' faults to get whatever they want; often the object of appeasement by grown-ups.

Effects on children
Children that are a product of dysfunctional families, either at the time or as they grow older, may exhibit behavior that is inappropriate for their expected stage of development due to psychological distress. Children of dysfunctional families may also behave in a manner that is relatively immature when compared to their peers. Conversely, other children may appear to emotionally "grow up too fast"; or be in a mixed mode (e.g. well-behaved, but unable to care for themselves.) Children from dysfunctional environments also have a tendency to demonstrate learned unhealthy attachments due to intergenerational dysfunctional parenting.

The effects of a disordered upbringing may induce an array of mental health issues, including depression and anxiety. A disordered family environment unfortunately places these young individuals at a higher risk of engaging in more severe actions of self-harm and problematic conduct. This troubled environment can also subject the youth to a significantly higher risk of becoming addicted to drugs or developing alcoholism, especially if parents or close peers have a history of substance use. Numerous studies have determined that deviant peer associations are generally associated with substance use and that parental use can account for one-half to two-thirds of future instances of chemical dependency. There is also an increased risk of the young individual developing behavioral addictions in the forms of gambling, pornography addictions, or engaging in other future detrimental activities such as compulsive spending.

Children who are raised in dysfunctional environments are also at a higher risk of developing an eating disorder, including anorexia nervosa or binge eating disorder as an emotional coping method due to psychological distress.

These young individuals may also have difficulty forming and maintaining healthy relationships within their peer group, due to social apprehensions, possible personality disorders, or post-traumatic stress disorders. A child may also demonstrate oppositional defiant characteristics by rebelling against parental authority, and non-family adults, or conversely, upholding their family's values in the face of peer pressure. Children of disordered environments may also demonstrate a lack of self-discipline when their parents are not around, or develop procrastinating tendencies that can have detrimental effects on their educational/occupational obligations.

Additionally, children may demonstrate social inadequacies by spending an inordinate amount of time engaging in activities that lack in-person social interaction. This disordered upbringing can also promote the child to project aggressive behaviors on their peers by bullying or harassing others or becoming a victim of bullying. Both of these roles often lead to an elevated risk of the child having low self-esteem issues, increased prevalence of isolation, and difficulties expressing emotions, a common effect related to emotional and physical abuse.

A lack of parental structure and positive peer influences can lead young individuals to seek alternative forms of peer alliances, including peer groups that engage in juvenile delinquency and those who perform acts that are knowingly illegal or demonstrate symptoms of an oppositional defiant disorder. This habitual behavior and environmental factors can also lead the troubled youth to a life of crime, or to become involved in gang activity.

This lack of socially normative structure and defiant behavior is also notable in cases where sexual abuse was prevalent. Early sexual experiences can lead to sexually inappropriate behavior that could lead to future interest in pedophilia, or facing charges that can result in the individual becoming a sex offender. A 1999 study determined that children who had experienced abusive sexual experiences, "as compared to those without, were more likely to be victims of physical family violence, to have run away, to be substance abusers, and to have family members with drug or alcohol problems" (Kellogg et al, 1999). Additionally, the young individual may be at an elevated risk of becoming poor or homeless, even in cases where the child's environment consisted of an average/above-average socioeconomic standing.

Further socialization problems can be demonstrated by children of dysfunctional families, including habitual or sudden academic performance problems. This notion can be more apparent as the child may exhibit a severe lack of organizational skills in their day-to-day lives. These individuals are also at an elevated inability to maintain healthy interpersonal relationships, which often includes distrusting others or even demonstrating paranoid behaviors that can be indicative of childhood trauma-induced psychosis and schizophrenia. There is also a higher probability of the youth engaging in future unstable empathetical relationships, with higher tendencies to engage in more risky behavior, including sex with multiple partners, becoming pregnant, or becoming a parent of illegitimate children.

Further dysfunctional behaviors can be perpetuated in other future relationships. An individual that was raised in a dysfunctional home environment may also pass this learned behavior on to their offspring, including their substance use habits, conflict resolution methods, and learned social boundaries. These social inadequacies can result in individuals demonstrating self-protective behaviors, to compensate for the difference in their childhoods, as they may have the inability to practice positive self-care and effective emotional coping strategies.

In popular culture

 * Films about dysfunctional families
 * Television series about dysfunctional families
 * Animated television series about dysfunctional families

title: Dysfunctional family


text:
ME Association

The ME Association is a UK health charitable organization that provides information, advocacy, and services to persons and families affected by ME/CFS, and raises funds for research into ME/CFS. It has been reported to be one of the two largest UK charities for ME/CFS.

Activities
The organisation informs its members of developments affecting sufferers, carers, family and friends, via its quarterly magazine ME Essential, its website, and other communication media. It promotes its members' interests in medical and political arenas, and in the media. It produces advice on specific aspects of the illness and its effect on sufferers, particularly in its clinical guidance booklet, 'ME/CFS/PVFS : An exploration of the key clinical issues', which informs both practitioners and patients.

As of 2005, persons with ME/CFS in the UK still had difficulty obtaining treatment literature from their General Practitioners' surgeries. A majority of persons with the illness were able to obtain treatment literature from the ME Association.

The ME Association has conducted a number of patient surveys, including in 2010 and 2015, which have generally reported that most patients found activity pacing one of the most helpful treatments, and they found graded exercise therapy and cognitive behavioral therapy more harmful than helpful.

The ME Association has campaigned for increased biomedical research on ME/CFS and improved treatment within the UK.

The ME Association funds research into ME/CFS, and in 2018 was reported to be funding the running costs of the UK ME/CFS Biobank.

Illness name
In 2001, the ME Association decided to use the term Myalgic Encephalopathy rather than Myalgic Encephalomyelitis, stating that they felt this was a more appropriate description and was a name that doctors "cannot simply dismiss on the grounds that it is pathologically inaccurate in relation to ME (or research defined cases of CFS)".

Treatments
The ME Association (MEA) campaigned against the PACE trial, a very large trial of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and graded exercise therapy (GET) stating that the money should be spent on biomedical research instead and raising concerns about the methodology.

In 2012, a year after the main PACE trial results, the MEA commenced an extensive opinion survey of patients who had used CBT, GET and pacing as interventions for ME/CFS in the UK. They concluded that over 70 percent of patients said exercise therapy worsened their symptoms. Based on the survey's findings, the MEA concluded that GET should not be used for people with ME/CFS. In 2016, the MEA called for graded exercise therapy to be withdrawn and stated that CBT should not be a primary intervention for ME/CFS. In 2018, the MEA repeated that GET should be withdrawn, and this should not be delayed until the ongoing UK's NICE guidelines review was completed.

The 2015 MEA survey results concluded that CBT based on the now disproven assumption that abnormal beliefs and behaviours are responsible for maintaining the illness, are inappropriate, and risked a worsening of symptoms. A CBT practitioner's belief that ME/CFS is a psychological illness also resulted in less symptom improvement, more symptom worsening, and dissatisfaction of treatment by persons with ME/CFS. The MEA stated CBT that counsels patients with practical coping skills and dealing with co-morbid conditions may be appropriate and should be available as required to ME/CFS patients the same as other chronic conditions such as multiple sclerosis, Parkinson's disease, cancer, heart disease, and arthritis etc.

Pacing was considered, "the most effective, safe, acceptable and preferred form of activity management for people with ME/CFS". The MEA recommended it should be the major management strategy.

The ME association was skeptical of the former guidance recommended by The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) for primary treatment of ME/CFS. The MEA considers CBT with GET not safe for ME/CFS patients, or not effective. The ME Association recommends that persons with ME/CFS consider a pacing approach to the illness.

In 2017, the ME Association raised concerns about the use of the controversial lightning process, with medical advisor Charles Shepherd claiming it was "pseudoscience" for a treatment to claim effectiveness for so many different illnesses at once.

Additionally, MEA advocates that NICE has not studied the physiological aspects of persons with ME/CFS.

Long COVID
In 2020, the ME Association's medical advisor said that COVID-19 may lead to some patients developing post-viral fatigue syndrome, which could then lead to ME/CFS. In May 2020, the MEA published several advice leaflets about the coronavirus.

title: ME Association


text:
Marie Curie (charity)

Marie Curie is a registered charitable organisation in the United Kingdom which provides hospice care and support for anyone with an illness they’re likely to die from, and those close to them, and campaigns for better support for dying people. It was established in 1948, the same year as the National Health Service (NHS).

In the financial year 2021/22, the charity supported 66,024 people through its nursing services, hospices and support line calls. It runs nine hospices in Belfast, Bradford, Cardiff, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Hampstead, Liverpool, Newcastle, and the West Midlands. The charity's information and support service was used more than 1.2 million times.

Marie Curie campaigns on issues affecting people with any illness they're likely to die from, their families and carers, and it's the largest charitable UK funder of palliative and end of life care research.

History
Marie Curie was founded in 1948.

The Marie Curie Hospital was founded in Hampstead, North London in 1930. It was staffed entirely by women to treat female cancer patients using radiology and had some research facilities too. A successful scientist, Marie Curie gave the hospital permission to use her name.

In 1944, most of the hospital was destroyed in an air raid during the Second World War. Four years later, Bernard Robinson OBE and a committee set about re-establishing the hospital and decided to separate it from the newly formed NHS. This was the beginning of the Marie Curie Memorial Foundation − a charity which began by dedicating itself to caring for people with cancer, and today has evolved into the leading UK end of life charity for people with any terminal illness including motor neurone disease, Parkinson's and Dementia.

The charity continued to use the name of pioneering scientist Marie Curie, with permission from her daughter Eve.

Following the donation of an engagement ring to help raise money for the charity, the very first appeal was launched and brought in a substantial £4,000.

Nurses
Marie Curie Nurses and Health Care Assistants provide home hospice care for thousands of people with terminal illnesses across the UK every year. This includes managing their pain, and providing practical care and giving emotional support. Marie Curie's nursing service also provide practical and emotional support for families and carers.

Together with statutory government NHS funding, voluntary contributions are essential for Marie Curie to be able to provide nursing services. In the financial year 2021/22, they were funded 46% by charitable donations and 54% by the NHS.

Hospices
Marie Curie Hospices provide specialist care and support for people living with a terminal illness and those close to them through inpatient, outpatient, and virtual services. There are Marie Curie Hospices in Belfast, Bradford, Edinburgh, Glasgow, London (Hampstead), Liverpool, Newcastle, Penarth (near Cardiff), and the Marie Curie Hospice, West Midlands in Solihull.

Marie Curie hospices are free at the point of access. They run on a combination of statutory government NHS funding and voluntary contributions to run. In the financial year 2021/22, they were funded 59% through charitable donations and 41% by the NHS.

Support line
Marie Curie runs a free, UK-wide support line service to provide practical information and emotional support on all aspects of life with terminal illness, dying and bereavement. The service includes a phone line, call-back service, web chat, an online community, and information online and in print.

Marie Curie also offers a free bereavement support service which matches people experiencing grief with specially trained volunteers for regular support.

Both services are funded by charitable donations.

Volunteer services
The charity runs Companion volunteer services at home, in hospitals and over the phone for people living with a terminal illness which provide companionship and respite towards the end of life.

Campaigning
Marie Curie campaigns on issues which affect people living with a terminal illness and those close to them.

In 2021, their Scrap Six Months campaign with the Motor Neurone Disease Association resulted in a change in the law in Scotland, Northern Ireland, England and Wales. This made it easier for people diagnosed with a terminal illness to access the benefits they need.

Previously, there was a rule in place meaning people diagnosed with a terminal illness could only get quick and easy access to financial support if a doctor or nurse said they had less than six months to live.

In 2022, Marie Curie's campaign to Make End of Life Care Fair resulted in a change being made to the UK Government's Health and Care Bill. The change will mean that, in the future, end of life care must be provided by law in every part of England where local people need it.

Policy and research
Marie Curie is the UK's leading charitable funder of palliative and end of life care research. It funds its own researchers, and works in partnership with other organisations. Marie Curie research investments aim to improve the care and support that people affected by any terminal illness and their families receive.

Every year, the charity awards research project grants in open competition through the Marie Curie Research Grants Scheme. All applications are subject to a process of external peer review before a final decision is made by an independent funding committee.

Marie Curie supports and funds the work of two long term Palliative Care Research Facilities across the UK − the Marie Curie Palliative Care Research Unit, UCL and the Marie Curie Palliative Care Research Centre, Cardiff University. It hosts an annual research conference with professionals from across research, policy and health and social care to share the latest evidence and innovation in palliative and end of life care.

The charity also encourages research across its hospices and nursing service. To help achieve this, three posts are held through its Research Facilitator Programme at Marie Curie Hospices in Belfast, Edinburgh and the West Midlands.

Fundraising
Marie Curie adopted the daffodil emblem in 1986 as a positive, resilient, life-affirming symbol, with a bright and joyful yellow colour. Marie Curie's biggest fundraising campaign is called The Great Daffodil Appeal and takes place throughout March each year.

The charity raises money in a variety of ways, including through charity shops, corporate partnerships, philanthropy, mass participation events, social events, direct giving campaigns, digital and TV campaigns, gifts in wills and bucket collections.

The Great Daffodil Appeal is Marie Curie's flagship fundraising campaign. Members of the public fundraise and donate, and wear a daffodil in support of the charity and better end of life care for all.

On 23 March 2021, Marie Curie led the first National Day of Reflection in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic to commemorate the people who had died and support the millions of people who'd been bereaved. This returned for a second and third year in 2022 and 2023.

title: Marie Curie (charity)


text:
1861 in rail transport

February events

 * February 22 – Passenger service began on Strasburg Rail Road with a visit from Abraham Lincoln.

April events

 * April 1 – Budapest Déli station opens as the Buda terminal of the line to Fiume.
 * April – Nathaniel Marsh succeeds Samuel Marsh as president of the Erie Railroad.

May events

 * May 13 – Line opened between Karachi and Kochi (169 km) on 5 ft 6in (1676 mm) gauge, the first railway in modern-day Pakistan.
 * May 24 – The Great Train Raid of 1861 is conducted by Stonewall Jackson.

June events

 * June 16 – Battle of Vienna, Virginia, is the first time in history a railroad is used tactically in battle.
 * June – Opening of first section of rail line in Paraguay, under the auspices of Presidente Carlos Antonio López, with mainly British engineering, 4 km from Asunción to Trinidad on the Iberian gauge of . Regular services to Paraguarí begin on September 21 and on December 25 the line is extended to the city of Luque.

July events

 * July 21 – Railroad transport of Confederate States of America troops delivers decisive reinforcements providing victory in the First Battle of Bull Run.

August events

 * August 6 – An Act is passed to authorize the construction of the Blane Valley Railway in Scotland.

September events

 * September 4 – The Staten Island Railway is placed into receivership with William Henry Vanderbilt as receiver.

December events

 * December 25 – Opening of first rail line in Latvia, between Riga and Dinaburg (Daugavpils), 230 km on the Imperial Russian gauge of.

Unknown date events

 * Jean-Jacques Meyer patents the Meyer locomotive.
 * Jackson and Woodin Manufacturing Company in Berwick, Pennsylvania, later to become part of American Car and Foundry, begins manufacturing railroad infrastructure parts.

January births

 * January 28 – Daniel Willard, president of Baltimore and Ohio Railroad 1910–1941 (d. 1942).

April births

 * April 26 – Zhan Tianyou, Chief Engineer responsible for construction of the Imperial Peking-Kalgan Railway, the first railway constructed in China without foreign assistance (d. 1919).

June births

 * June 8 – Karl Gölsdorf, Austrian steam locomotive designer (d. 1916).

November births

 * November 2 - Oliver Robert Hawke Bury, Chief mechanical engineer and manager of Great Western Railway of Brazil 1892–1894, general manager of the Great Northern Railway (GNR) in England 1902–1912, Director of the GNR 1912–22 and of the London and North Eastern Railway 1923–1945 (d. 1946).

October deaths

 * October 13 – Sir William Cubitt, civil engineer on the South Eastern and Great Northern Railways of England (d. 1861).

title: 1861 in rail transport


text:
Redpath Sugar

Redpath Sugar Ltd. (Sucre Redpath Ltée) is a Canadian sugar refining company that was established in 1854 and the first refining cane sugar in Montreal, Quebec. Headquartered in Toronto, Ontario (with an additional packaging plant in Belleville, Ontario), the company is a subsidiary of the multinational American Sugar Refining.

History
The business was founded in 1854 in Montreal, Quebec, by Scots-Quebecer entrepreneur John Redpath. Located on Saint Patrick Street on the bank of the Lachine Canal, the sugar refinery complex was the first of its kind in Canada, using sugar cane imported from the British West Indies. Its construction was part of the economic boom that, during the 19th century, turned Montreal from a small town to (then) the largest city in Canada and the country's economic engine.

In 1857, John Redpath's eldest son, Peter, became a partner; his brother-in-law, George Alexander Drummond, joined the firm in 1861. Unable to compete with the giant low-cost producers in the United States, for the three years between 1876 and 1878, the company ceased operations.

Following the tariff protections implemented under the National Policy by the government of John A. Macdonald, the company reopened in 1879, as did St. Lawrence Sugar, a new competitor established in Montreal. At that time, the company was reorganized as the Canada Sugar Refining Company Limited. George Drummond took over when Peter Redpath retired in 1888. Under his guidance, the company's success allowed for construction of a new six-storey plant built on the existing site, doubling production capacity.

In 1930, the company merged with the Dominion Sugar Company Limited of Chatham, Ontario, and became known as the Canada and Dominion Sugar Company Limited. In 1959, a controlling interest in the company was acquired by Tate & Lyle, a British firm. In 1973, the company changed its name to Redpath Industries Limited.

The Redpath Sugar Refinery was built on the Toronto waterfront in the late 1950s, at the time of the completion of the Saint Lawrence Seaway, and it is still in operation. Tate family member Saxon Tate and David Davis, later a senior Conservative politician, were sent from Britain to restructure its Canadian subsidiary. In 1980, the Montreal plant was closed and production was shifted to Toronto. In 2007, the company became a subsidiary of American Sugar Refining (ASR Group) following the sale of Tate & Lyle's sugar division, and it was renamed as Redpath Sugar Ltd. at that time.

Refinery
The Redpath Sugar Refinery is a sugar storage, refining and museum complex in Toronto used by Redpath for sugar production. The refinery was founded in 1958 and has included a museum since 1979.

Imagery
The Redpath sugar label shown at right celebrated the company's 150th anniversary in 2004. The Redpath logo, which is derived from John Redpath's own script, is Canada's oldest continuously-used food product trademark.

title: Redpath Sugar