Tonnes of rubbish get incinerated daily. Does this mean the air gets more polluted as years go by?
Tonnes of rubbish get incinerated daily. Does this mean the air gets more polluted as years go by?
It seems that modern rubbish incinerators do not contribute significantly to air pollution.
According to a press release by the Health Protection Agency of the United Kingdom, "evidence suggests that air pollution from incinerators (only) makes up a fraction of one percent of the country's particulate emissions (whereas) industry and traffic account for more than fifty per cent."
However, incinerators can be a source of air pollutants such as dioxin and mercury if not built properly, according to an article in the New York Times ("China's Incinerators Loom as a Global Hazard", August 11, 2009). More information can be found in the full-text of the article that is available online.
According to the National Environmental Agency (NEA), the levels of air pollutants, such as dioxins and furans, "emitted by the incineration plants in Singapore are low and comparable to those of developed countries".
NEA also states that "with the use of advanced incineration technology, pollution control equipment and strict control on the disposal of dioxin precursor compounds in the waste stream, dioxins and furans generation and emissions have been minimised in our incineration plants."
According to a press release by the Health Protection Agency of the United Kingdom, "evidence suggests that air pollution from incinerators (only) makes up a fraction of one percent of the country's particulate emissions (whereas) industry and traffic account for more than fifty per cent."
However, incinerators can be a source of air pollutants such as dioxin and mercury if not built properly, according to an article in the New York Times ("China's Incinerators Loom as a Global Hazard", August 11, 2009). More information can be found in the full-text of the article that is available online.
According to the National Environmental Agency (NEA), the levels of air pollutants, such as dioxins and furans, "emitted by the incineration plants in Singapore are low and comparable to those of developed countries".
NEA also states that "with the use of advanced incineration technology, pollution control equipment and strict control on the disposal of dioxin precursor compounds in the waste stream, dioxins and furans generation and emissions have been minimised in our incineration plants."
How can I stop excessive perspiration at the underarm area?
How can I stop excessive perspiration at the underarm area?
Depending on how severe your problem is, there are several treatment options.
From the newspaper article "Don’t sweat it; Is constant and excessive perspiration causing your embarrassment? Fret not, help is at hand” in TODAY, Dr Yeak Hwee Lee, medical director of Singapore Aesthetic Centre mentioned that: “For milder cases, there are antiperspirants which contain aluminium chloride. These antiperspirants block the sweat glands, and are different from deodorants which only masks odour. Those with a higher percentage of aluminium chloride will help you to stay dry for a longer period of time.”
From the same article, Dr Lee Haur Yeah, an associate consultant at Singapore General Hospital’s department of dermatology, added on that: “Surgery is usually used to treat more severe cases. This involves either surgically destroying the nerves responsible for the abnormal sweating or removing the sweat glands in the affected area.”
A newer way to stay dry is through botox injections.
According to the newspaper article “No sweat with botox” in The New Paper, there seems to be a growing number of people who want a botox jab to stop perspiring.
The Daily Mail reported that in Britain, up to 50,000 people a year are going for botox injections to stop excessive perspiration or to stop perspiring completely. Dubbed Sweatox, the injection works the same way as ordinary botox, which temporarily paralyses muscles with a mild dose of toxins. But instead of targeting muscles, it freezes sweat glands to stop them reacting to heat. Botox experts say that the treatment is sought after by those who have hyperhidrosis, or excessive perspiration. One in 100 adults suffer from this condition, caused by an overreaction to the body’s sweat glands.
But how effective is this?
Dr Chua Sze Hon, senior consultant at the National Skin Centre, told The New Paper in the article “Botox away that smell”: “It is an effective treatment for sweaty underarms. There is no scarring compared to other surgical options. The effect can last between 6 and 12 months. One should avoid re-injecting the same area within a month. Generally, you can go for botox jabs once every four to six months when the effects wear off. In the case of excessive usage, the patient may develop neutralising antibodies to the toxin. This makes the toxin ineffective in achieving the desired results.”
But it’s only a temporary solution for those who suffer from excessive perspiration known as diaphoresis or hyperhidrosis. It is caused by the failure of the sympathetic nervous system that controls perspiration, blushing and salivation. There are oral medication and surgical procedures to treat hyperhidrosis.
The most effective way is to cut the nerves that supply the sweat glands (in the armpits) through small incisions in the chest. This method is called thoracoscopic sympathectomy.
We hope that the information is useful to you. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you need further assistance.
Please note that the information given is according to the resources available in the library and the website. It is provided for informational purposes only and not as a substitute for professional medical advice. It is important to consult a licensed medical practitioner.
Sources:
Gan, E. (2010, July 27). Don’t sweat it ; Is constant and excessive perspiration causing you embarrassment? Fret not, help is at hand. TODAY, p. 14.
No sweat with botox. (2008, August 11). The New Paper.
Miriah, C. (2006, September 18). Botox away that smell. The New Paper
From the newspaper article "Don’t sweat it; Is constant and excessive perspiration causing your embarrassment? Fret not, help is at hand” in TODAY, Dr Yeak Hwee Lee, medical director of Singapore Aesthetic Centre mentioned that: “For milder cases, there are antiperspirants which contain aluminium chloride. These antiperspirants block the sweat glands, and are different from deodorants which only masks odour. Those with a higher percentage of aluminium chloride will help you to stay dry for a longer period of time.”
From the same article, Dr Lee Haur Yeah, an associate consultant at Singapore General Hospital’s department of dermatology, added on that: “Surgery is usually used to treat more severe cases. This involves either surgically destroying the nerves responsible for the abnormal sweating or removing the sweat glands in the affected area.”
A newer way to stay dry is through botox injections.
According to the newspaper article “No sweat with botox” in The New Paper, there seems to be a growing number of people who want a botox jab to stop perspiring.
The Daily Mail reported that in Britain, up to 50,000 people a year are going for botox injections to stop excessive perspiration or to stop perspiring completely. Dubbed Sweatox, the injection works the same way as ordinary botox, which temporarily paralyses muscles with a mild dose of toxins. But instead of targeting muscles, it freezes sweat glands to stop them reacting to heat. Botox experts say that the treatment is sought after by those who have hyperhidrosis, or excessive perspiration. One in 100 adults suffer from this condition, caused by an overreaction to the body’s sweat glands.
But how effective is this?
Dr Chua Sze Hon, senior consultant at the National Skin Centre, told The New Paper in the article “Botox away that smell”: “It is an effective treatment for sweaty underarms. There is no scarring compared to other surgical options. The effect can last between 6 and 12 months. One should avoid re-injecting the same area within a month. Generally, you can go for botox jabs once every four to six months when the effects wear off. In the case of excessive usage, the patient may develop neutralising antibodies to the toxin. This makes the toxin ineffective in achieving the desired results.”
But it’s only a temporary solution for those who suffer from excessive perspiration known as diaphoresis or hyperhidrosis. It is caused by the failure of the sympathetic nervous system that controls perspiration, blushing and salivation. There are oral medication and surgical procedures to treat hyperhidrosis.
The most effective way is to cut the nerves that supply the sweat glands (in the armpits) through small incisions in the chest. This method is called thoracoscopic sympathectomy.
We hope that the information is useful to you. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you need further assistance.
Please note that the information given is according to the resources available in the library and the website. It is provided for informational purposes only and not as a substitute for professional medical advice. It is important to consult a licensed medical practitioner.
Sources:
Gan, E. (2010, July 27). Don’t sweat it ; Is constant and excessive perspiration causing you embarrassment? Fret not, help is at hand. TODAY, p. 14.
No sweat with botox. (2008, August 11). The New Paper.
Miriah, C. (2006, September 18). Botox away that smell. The New Paper
Singapore's most common form of cancer is colorectal cancer. Is gluten the cause?
Are Singaporeans gluten educated? On a recent pre-move trip to Singapore, I was shocked to read that the leading type of cancer here is colorectal. As a Canadian Mom who cooks for 3 coeliacs, intestinal cancers are of great concern to me and my family, and we adhere to a strict gluten-free diet. In relation to this, I was also surprised at the limited availability of gluten-free products in food stores, the very high cost of what I could find, as well as an almost complete lack of knowledge about gluten at the restaurants I visited. Why is colorectal cancer the most prevalent form of cancer in Singapore? When was bread/wheat/gluten introduced to your culture? Are Singaporeans being screened for gluten intolerance/coeliac disease?
Doctors have identified affluence and changing lifestyles as key factors to the increasing prevalence of colorectal cancer, which rose from around 200 cases per year in the 1960s to 1,400 cases in recent years to become the most common cancer, as documented in news articles "Singapore's No.1 killer" and "Stop No.1 Cancer". (The Straits Times, 9 September 1991; The Straits Times, 5 March 2009).
In the latter article, Professor John Zalcberg, a visiting medical oncologist from Melbourne, observed that "nowadays, people are eating more but are less active. We are also eating less fruits and vegetables, which is said to help reduce the risk of the cancer."
We can trace the introduction of wheat into Singapore's food culture back to the traditional food cultures of our migrants. Sinologist Professor David Knechtges noted in a review published in the journal "American Oriental Society" that wheat-based flour products, such as noodles, became common in China as early as the Han dynasty (206 B.C. – 220 A.D.).
Thus, we would expect such wheat food products to be brought into Singapore during the surge of Chinese migrants in the 19th century. There are signs that wheat food products have become fairly common in Singapore by the early 20th century. For example, in a British Medical Journal article, Dr Lucius Nicholls noted that wheat was one of the principal import foods in the 1940s.
Based on the published information, there is no routine screening for gluten intolerance in Singapore, which is thought to be comparatively rare here, as reported in a news article "Eat at your own peril" (The Straits Times, 15 April 2010).
Similarly, there does not appear to be routine screening for coeliac disease. Patients wishing to seek a diagnosis for either of the two conditions can consult their doctors or gastroenterologists at local clinics and hospitals.
However, tests for colorectal cancer are part of a nationwide Integrated Screening Programme.
Details of this programme can be found at the Health Promotion Board's website (http://www.hpb.gov.sg).
In the latter article, Professor John Zalcberg, a visiting medical oncologist from Melbourne, observed that "nowadays, people are eating more but are less active. We are also eating less fruits and vegetables, which is said to help reduce the risk of the cancer."
We can trace the introduction of wheat into Singapore's food culture back to the traditional food cultures of our migrants. Sinologist Professor David Knechtges noted in a review published in the journal "American Oriental Society" that wheat-based flour products, such as noodles, became common in China as early as the Han dynasty (206 B.C. – 220 A.D.).
Thus, we would expect such wheat food products to be brought into Singapore during the surge of Chinese migrants in the 19th century. There are signs that wheat food products have become fairly common in Singapore by the early 20th century. For example, in a British Medical Journal article, Dr Lucius Nicholls noted that wheat was one of the principal import foods in the 1940s.
Based on the published information, there is no routine screening for gluten intolerance in Singapore, which is thought to be comparatively rare here, as reported in a news article "Eat at your own peril" (The Straits Times, 15 April 2010).
Similarly, there does not appear to be routine screening for coeliac disease. Patients wishing to seek a diagnosis for either of the two conditions can consult their doctors or gastroenterologists at local clinics and hospitals.
However, tests for colorectal cancer are part of a nationwide Integrated Screening Programme.
Details of this programme can be found at the Health Promotion Board's website (http://www.hpb.gov.sg).
Is it illegal for a driver to use a mobile phones for messaging when the vehicle is stopped at a traffic light?
Are drivers allowed to send messages on a mobile phone when the vehicle is stopped at a traffic light?
According to the Road Traffic Act, a driver who uses a mobile phone while his vehicle is in motion will be guilty of the offence.
Thus, technically, it may not be an offence if you use a mobile phone while the vehicle is not in motion.
Rule 65B of the Road Traffic Act states that: "Any person who, being the driver of a motor vehicle on a road or in a public place, uses a mobile telephone while the motor vehicle is in motion shall be guilty of an offence..."
The full act may be accessed from Singapore Statues Online athttp://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;ident=f050e6d2-de84-4cb2-bf37-b3be6399b095;page=0;query=DocId%3A%22ba3acbce-2ce4-4b3f-8011-5bfae19cfbbc%22%20Status%3Apublished%20Depth%3A0;rec=0#pr65B-he-.
The police have also clarified what constitutes 'mobile phone driving' in the news article "Police clarify erroneous internet postings" (The Straits Times, 6 May 2005).
According to the statement issued, three things must take place at the same time for a mobile phone driving offence to occur:
"The vehicle must be in motion;
The driver must be holding onto the mobile phone with one hand while driving; and
The driver must be communicating with that phone while driving.
Communicating includes making a call, paging someone, or reading, writing or sending SMS messages."
It is also interesting to note then that "it does not mean you cannot answer a call. Police said people just shouldn't hold a phone while driving.
So it is acceptable to press a button on the mobile phone's keypad to receive a call via speakerphone, or via a hands-free kit."
Please note that the information given is according to resources available in the library and the website.
It is provided for informational purposes only and is not intended to constitute legal advice.
It is important to consult a legal practitioner for professional advice.
Thus, technically, it may not be an offence if you use a mobile phone while the vehicle is not in motion.
Rule 65B of the Road Traffic Act states that: "Any person who, being the driver of a motor vehicle on a road or in a public place, uses a mobile telephone while the motor vehicle is in motion shall be guilty of an offence..."
The full act may be accessed from Singapore Statues Online athttp://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;ident=f050e6d2-de84-4cb2-bf37-b3be6399b095;page=0;query=DocId%3A%22ba3acbce-2ce4-4b3f-8011-5bfae19cfbbc%22%20Status%3Apublished%20Depth%3A0;rec=0#pr65B-he-.
The police have also clarified what constitutes 'mobile phone driving' in the news article "Police clarify erroneous internet postings" (The Straits Times, 6 May 2005).
According to the statement issued, three things must take place at the same time for a mobile phone driving offence to occur:
"The vehicle must be in motion;
The driver must be holding onto the mobile phone with one hand while driving; and
The driver must be communicating with that phone while driving.
Communicating includes making a call, paging someone, or reading, writing or sending SMS messages."
It is also interesting to note then that "it does not mean you cannot answer a call. Police said people just shouldn't hold a phone while driving.
So it is acceptable to press a button on the mobile phone's keypad to receive a call via speakerphone, or via a hands-free kit."
Please note that the information given is according to resources available in the library and the website.
It is provided for informational purposes only and is not intended to constitute legal advice.
It is important to consult a legal practitioner for professional advice.
How do I dispose of a fire extinguisher?
How do I dispose of a fire extinguisher?
We contacted SCDF and they advised to approach a professional workshop for servicing and disposal of fire extinguishers.
The list of approved workshops can be found on the SCDF website, under 'Building Professionals' -> 'Downloads' -> 'Servicing Portable Fire Extinguishers'. Link:http://www.scdf.gov.sg/content/dam/scdf_inter/download/FE_Workshops_010312.pdf
For more information, you may wish to call the SCDF General Enquiries line at 1800 286 5555.
The list of approved workshops can be found on the SCDF website, under 'Building Professionals' -> 'Downloads' -> 'Servicing Portable Fire Extinguishers'. Link:http://www.scdf.gov.sg/content/dam/scdf_inter/download/FE_Workshops_010312.pdf
For more information, you may wish to call the SCDF General Enquiries line at 1800 286 5555.
Are cyclists supposed to take up a whole lane on the road? Am I right to horn at them if they do?
Is it legal to horn/honk at cyclists who cycle on the road if they take up a whole lane? Is it legal to cycle on the road?
Using the horn at cyclists on the road may not be illegal in itself.
However, the Singapore Police Force's Road Safety Advisory advises that using the horn unnecessarily may alarm or anger other road users into making unpredictable moves which may lead to accidents; the use of the horn should be to warn others of danger and not to express frustration.
According to information in the news article "Hit by bike, then beaten by cyclist" (The New Paper, 6 September 2011), cyclists are required to ride their bicycles on the road.
The article states that "bicycles are classified in the same category as motor vehicles.
They are to be ridden on the road and cyclists are required to abide by all relevant traffic rules and regulations."
In a reply by the police that was published in the Straits Times ("Your Letter; Police clarify rules on cluster cycling", The Straits Times, 8 January 2012), Rule 8 of the Road Traffic (Bicycles) Rules specifies that "that cyclists should keep to the left-hand edge of the roadway and not in a manner as to obstruct other vehicles moving at a faster speed."
The reply further clarifies that "cyclists who cause obstruction or endanger the safety of other road users will contravene the cycling rules."
However, the Singapore Police Force's Road Safety Advisory advises that using the horn unnecessarily may alarm or anger other road users into making unpredictable moves which may lead to accidents; the use of the horn should be to warn others of danger and not to express frustration.
According to information in the news article "Hit by bike, then beaten by cyclist" (The New Paper, 6 September 2011), cyclists are required to ride their bicycles on the road.
The article states that "bicycles are classified in the same category as motor vehicles.
They are to be ridden on the road and cyclists are required to abide by all relevant traffic rules and regulations."
In a reply by the police that was published in the Straits Times ("Your Letter; Police clarify rules on cluster cycling", The Straits Times, 8 January 2012), Rule 8 of the Road Traffic (Bicycles) Rules specifies that "that cyclists should keep to the left-hand edge of the roadway and not in a manner as to obstruct other vehicles moving at a faster speed."
The reply further clarifies that "cyclists who cause obstruction or endanger the safety of other road users will contravene the cycling rules."
Will I be blacklisted by a firm if I reject their job offer?
Will I be blacklisted by a firm if I reject their job offer?
Companies' hiring policies are generally private, so we cannot confirm whether individual firms have a blacklist of people who have reject their previous job offers.
Within the job placement industry however, the practice of blacklisting 'undesirable' job seekers is known to exist.
According to an article entitled 'Local man finds it's hard to wipe name from Internet' published in the The State Journal-Register in Mar 2012, there have been cases where a person's work history on the internet has prevented that person from getting another job.
Some search firms and hiring managers in the US have also been alleged to keep blacklists of undesirable job applicants because they did not take up offers that they were offered, usually after managers spent a great deal of time negotiating terms on their behalf.
Within the job placement industry however, the practice of blacklisting 'undesirable' job seekers is known to exist.
According to an article entitled 'Local man finds it's hard to wipe name from Internet' published in the The State Journal-Register in Mar 2012, there have been cases where a person's work history on the internet has prevented that person from getting another job.
Some search firms and hiring managers in the US have also been alleged to keep blacklists of undesirable job applicants because they did not take up offers that they were offered, usually after managers spent a great deal of time negotiating terms on their behalf.