Fast food 'can be life-threatening'

Fast food 'can be life-threatening'

 Risk of death from heart disease can go up by 80%, says study

 By MELISSA PANG

 WHILE warnings about eating fast food are common, a study has shown just how life-threatening it can be for Singaporeans. The study, which specifically tracked Chinese-Singaporeans, found eating Western fast food more than four times a week can

increase the risk of dying from heart disease by up to 80 per cent. It also found that those who go for fast food more than twice a week are 30 per cent more likely to develop type 2 diabetes. The joint study - by researchers from the National University

of Singapore (NUS) Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health and the University of Minnesota - is the first of its kind that looks at the impact of fast food on Asians.

Principal investigator, NUS' Associate Professor Koh Woon Puay, said that while the findings may not be surprising, there is still a lot of interest from the West.

 "There is very good evidence to show the effect of a Western diet and its cardiovascular risks on an Asian country that used to eat traditionally," she said.

About 53,000 were surveyed to look at the association of Western fast food with coronary heart disease mortality in Chinese-Singaporeans, and 43,000 for incidence

of type 2 diabetes.

Researchers analysed data from men and women aged 45 to 74 who enrolled in the Singapore Chinese Health Study between 1993 and 1998.

A detailed survey was done on the diet and health of these participants - specifically Hokkiens and Cantonese for genetic homogeneity.

They were asked about their intake of six Western fast foods - hamburgers or cheeseburgers, french fries, pizza, ham and other sandwiches, deep-fried chicken and hot dogs.

Follow-up interviews were conducted between July 1999 and October 2004 to find out if they had been diagnosed with diabetes. Researchers also checked the Registry of Births and Deaths to find out participants' cause of death, up to the end of 2009.

An analysis of the results revealed that those who ate fast food at least, twice a week

had a 27 per cent increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes compared to those who

did not.

They also had a 56 per cent greater risk of dying of a coronary heart disease.

Of the 811 who ate fast food least four times a week, 17 died heart disease.

This group was nearly 80 cent more at risk of dying of heart disease compared to those who did not eat fast food.

Factors like age, sex, body mass index, smoking status educational level that could affect a person's likelihood of getting diabetes or dying of heart disease were adjusted to have minimal effect, said Prof Koh.

At a press briefing yesterday, she also presented the findings a separate study that found a combination of healthy lifestyle habits can significantly lower a person's risk of dying of cardiovascular diseases. The research, involving about 50,000 recruits also from the Singapore Chinese Health Study, gave the thumbs up to a diet in vegetables, fruit and soy; exercise; light to moderate alcohol consumption; sleeping six to eight

hours; not smoking; and a healthy body mass index.

Both studies were published the American Heart Association journal, Circulation.

In Singapore, heart diseases account for about a quarter of deaths while diabetes is the 10th most common cause of death. The Health Promotion Board recommends eating fast food no more than twice a week.

It is also pushing for good habits from a young age through initiatives to provide healthier meals in childcare centres as well as primary and secondary schools.

melpang@sph.com.sg

RISK OF DEATH BY HEART DISEASE
Frequency of Western-style fast food intake	Increase in risk compared to less than once a month
1 - 3 times a month	3%
Once a week	19%
2 or 3 times a week	49%
4 or more times a week	79%

 Source: Associate Professor Koh Woon Puay _ ST GRAPHICS

Celebrating Singapore's BioDiversity!: 22 Apr: Earth Day in Singapore

Celebrating Singapore's BioDiversity!: 22 Apr: Earth Day in Singapore

http://afforestationauroville.blogspot.com/

Using Tidal Power To Produce Electricity At St John’s Island

We can look into the possibility of using tidal power to produce electricity on St John’s Island.  The current at the causeway between St John’s Island and Lazarus Island is extremely strong. The strong tidal current can be used to generate electricity.  It can also be used to desalinate sea water. If the gap under the causeway is made smaller, the current will be even stronger. 

Reference  

http://handlinefishing.com/wheretofish/offshoreislands/stjohns.htm

The incoming and outgoing tides of the sea can be harnessed to produce electrical power. Tides are often very powerful and the sea can move very quickly when the tide is coming into land. When the tide approaches land, the amount of water rushing forwards can be measured in terms of millions of gallons. This is an immense force of moving water. (Picture below)

Reference  

http://technologystudent.com/energy1/tidal1.htm

Income Gap And Wealth Gap

During the budget debate, many MPs have spoken on narrowing the gap between the rich and the poor. MP Ms Denise Phua even suggested making the rich pay more income tax. I support her suggestion.

In addition to looking at the income gap, we should also look at the distribution of wealth. This is a more holistic approach.

Is the chart below representative of the scenario in Singapore?

90% of the national wealth is owned by 10% of Singaporeans (the super rich).

10% of the national wealth is owned by 90% of Singaporeans.

Chart 1

This means 1 person is eating 90% of the pie (the big blue part) while 9 persons are sharing the remaining small part which is 10%.

In our national pledge there is this phrase “based on justice and equality”. By looking at the distribution of wealth, can we say we have achieved justice and equality?

If this is the scenario, it shows the imperfection of our system. Much effort must be made to narrow the gap between the rich and the poor. The government has to act not only with the mind but with the heart and soul for the people in order to succeed.

Of course, changes need time. Changes to policy-making and implementation are not instantaneous. However, if the government can take decisive steps and work together with the people, we can look forward to a fairer distribution of wealth as shown in the chart below.

Chart 2

Can this be the scenario for the future?

70% of the national wealth is owned by 10% of Singaporeans (the super rich).

30% of the national wealth is owned by 90% of Singaporeans.

The chart 2 shows a higher percentage of wealth owned by 90% of Singaporeans as compared to Chart 1.

You may question that the above chart is far from the ideal scenario as it shows that the majority of the wealth is still owned by the few super rich. However, as mentioned previously, change requires time. If the sharing of wealth can move from the scenario in Chart 1 to the scenario in Chart 2, it is an improvement and a step in the right direction. Due to more equal wealth distribution, a greater number of people can be lifted from poverty.

To conclude, I cite the quotation by Sri Aurobindo below to motivate us to create a better society.

“The existence of poverty is the proof of an unjust and ill-organised society, and our public charities are but the first tardy awakening in the conscience of a robber.”

Hougang By-election

MP Yaw Shin Leong has not committed any crime against the law. The Workers’ Party expelled him because of moral obligation to the people of Hougang.
Laws are created by the civilised majority to control and guide the economic barbarians for peace and harmony. Civilised people are guided by moral and ethical values not only by the laws. In this incident, the action of the Workers’ Party is clearly guided by moral values. I am sure our PM knows his moral obligation to the people of Hougang.
There are two possible reasons why PAP is unwilling to announce the date of the by-election.
They are afraid to lose and demoralise party members or they want to have the advantage of keeping the date a secret so that they can make all the preparations for the by-election ahead of the Workers Party.
If you are interested find out why PAP is afraid of by-election, Chiam See Tong has written an article on it in the following website in 1999.
http://www.singapore-window.org/sw99/90605cst.htm

Singapore General Election _Analysis

Opposition parties should be aware of their strengths and limitations, the strength of the ruling party and also the needs and aspiration of the voters.

Aspiration of Electorate

From the last election results, there is an indication that as much as the voters would want more opposition candidates to win, they do not want a change of government. They understand that a sudden change of government will create political instability and there will be a negative effect on the economy.

Moreover, the opposition parties appear disunited, even before the election. It is unlikely that they can unite after the election. A disunited government cannot perform well having to spend a lot of time to overcome their differences and conflict.

In order for the opposition parties to serve the electorate well, they must show that they are sensitive to their needs.

Their election strategy must reflect their understanding of the needs of the electorate. Below are 3 strategies.

Strategy B would be the one supported by the voters.

It will be a good thing to conduct a survey to get feedback on the preference of the majority of the voters.

Strategy A

This is straightforward. The opposition parties should contest in the 12 Single Member Constituency (SMC) wards. Increasing from our present 2 opposition members to 12 is an increase of 600%. When there is a 3-corner contest, there is some complication. Since Worker’s Party has the highest % of votes during the last election, it goes to show that people may vote for this party first, Singapore Democratic Alliance second, Singapore Democratic Party third. For other parties, we will have to look at how strong the individual candidate is. For this, I will have to update after Nomination Day.

Voters can actually force opposition to form only one party. The strongest opposition party is the Workers’ Party. So, each time there is a corner fight, they can all vote for the Workers’ Party forcing the third party to lose its deposit. The Workers’ Party MP has more than 10 years of looking after the constituency. He is a good mentor for all future opposition MPs .

Strategy B

Make use of the by-election strategy and contest less than half the number of seats.

The aim is to stop the ruling party from winning a two- third majority.

Results of last election

PAP 66.60%

Workers’ Party 16.34%

Singapore Democratic Alliance 12.99%

Singapore Democratic Party 4.07%

In the last election, the opposition won 33.4% of the votes. This is more than one third. One third of the total 84 seats in the last election is28. But, the opposition won only 2 seats. By simple Math, the system seems imperfect. However, the system can be worked around.

According to the by-elections strategy, the target number of seats to contest in this election is 43, giving PAP 44 seats via walkover on Nomination Day. Since the electorate has no fear of change of government, they will feel safe to vote for the opposition to put pressure on the ruling party to perform even better.

Based on last election’s results

Workers’ Party 16.34% of 87 seats 14 seats

Singapore Democratic Alliance 12.99% of 87 seats 11 seats

Singapore Democratic Party 4.07% of 87 seats 3.5 (4 )seats

Total 33.4% of 87 seats 29 seats

So, there is an extra (43 – 29) 14 seats.

Workers’ Party should contest (14 ÷ 29 x 14) 6.7 seats ( 7 )

Singapore Democratic Alliance (11 ÷ 29 x 14 ) 5.3 seats ( 5 )

Singapore Democratic Party ( 3.5 ÷ 29 x 14 ) 1.6 seats ( 2 )

Hence, the suggested total number of seats to be contested is as follows:

Workers’ Party 21 seats

Singapore Democratic Alliance 16 seats

Singapore Democratic Party 6 seats

Total 43 seats

By following Plan B, the opposition can win 30 to 43 seats depriving the ruling party a two-third majority.

Increasing from 2 to 30 seats is an increase of 1500%. This will be the most fantastic achievement by the opposition parties in the history of Singapore General Election.

The figures above only serve as a guide for opposition parties to refer to during their discussion.

Strategy C

This is to contest in 50% or more than 50% of the seats.

In the last election held on 6 May 2006, the opposition contested in 47 out of 84 seats. One very important reason why the opposition won only 2 seats is the fear of change of government. Voters are smart. Voting is an investment and not a gamble.

Based on last election results, by following Plan C, the opposition may win 2 and even less seats.

Flood Prevention

"Whatever we do when we get extraordinary rains like we had recently, no amount of engineering can prevent flooding... unless you want to lose half the roads and have canals." (Channel News Asia, 21 July 2010) - Mr Lee Kuan Yew, Minister Mentor

I tend to disagree and would like to suggest two alternative approaches.

One approach is to build pumps and underground pipes to channel rainwater from canals and monsoon-drains in flood-prone areas to other canals or into the reservoirs. This redistribution can prevent overflowing of rainwater and ultimately curb the flooding.
This system has been proven to be effective in China. This is reported in The Epoch Times in Hong Kong on 28 July 2010. As quoted from the article titled “Ancient Chinese drain system saves city from flooding” - “..some experts estimate the system can handle additional three or four times the current rainwater”.

This approach can be adapted to Singapore by constructing underground pipes to channel water from the Bukit Timah Canal to the Catchment Area around MacRitchie and Lower Peirce Reservoir to prevent floods along Coronation Road and Bukit Timah Road. If this is successful, we can also channel rain water from the Stamford Canal to the Bukit Timah Canal, to prevent future floods in the Orchard Road area.

Another approach is to build dams. Dams have been known to help prevent floods. A notable example is the Three Gorges Dam in China’s Hubei province. Why not build dams on a smaller scale across our canals and monsoon-drains in critical areas prone to flooding?

For instance, dams can be built at various sections along the drains and canals that carry water into Stamford Canal. These dams will be able to hold back rain water, thus preventing water from gushing into the Stamford Canal and causing flash floods along Orchard Road. These dams can also trap debris before it is washed down into the Stamford Canal. To prevent stagnant water and mosquito breeding, there can also be a hole at the bottom of the dam.