Halifax Personal Injury Lawyer Blog

The World Health Organization (WHO) has classified cell phone radiation as "possibly carcinogenic" placing it in the same category as gasoline exhaust, and the pesticide DDT.

An international panel of 31 scientists and health experts reviewed dozens of previously published studies and concluded that there was "limited" evidence of a link between cellphone use and glioma and acoustic neuroma, a cancer that develops in the nerves leading from the ear to the brain.

WHO recommended:

"Given the potential consequences for public health of this classification and findings, it is important that additional research be conducted into the long-term, heavy use of mobile phones. Pending the availability of such information, it is important to take pragmatic measures to reduce exposure such as hands-free devices or texting."

Risk Factors

The amount of radiation users are exposed to depends on a number of factors including the number of calls made each day, how close the device is to your head during calls, and how long your calls last.

Reducing the Risk

The report noted some studies have indicated reduced risks for cell phone users who talked less and text more, and those who used a hands-free device to keep the phone away from their heads.

More than 4.6 billion use cellphones worldwide according to the Science Media Centre of Canada. Statistics Canada says that 78 per cent of Canadian households indicated they had a cellphone in 2010.

75% of burns and scalding injuries happen in the home. Water doesn't have to be boiling (100 degrees C) to be a serious danger. At a temperature of 68 degrees Celsius water can cause third degree burns in less than one second!

"What's a Third Degree Burn?"

Third degree burns happen when all three layers of the skin are destroyed. Third degree burns require immediate medical attention. Treatment and recuperation requires skin grafts and can require months of painful rehabilitation.

According to the Journal of Burn Care and Research more than 1,000 children are treated in emergency rooms across Canada every year for burn injuries. Children aged 1 to 5 years were at the highest risk of death.

Don't Understand the Danger

Children are more prone to burn injuries because they do not understand the danger associated with boiling water, hot stoves etc.

They also have thinner skin which gives them less protection against burn injuries. In fact, non-fire related burns are the leading cause of death for children age 4 and younger.

Dangerous Places

Most people assume that the kitchen is where most injuries happen. Few realize that bathrooms and radiators can be just as dangerous. Emergency departments frequently see cases where children have been placed into bath tubs without the parents checking the temperature of the water, resulting in serious scalding injuries. Scalding injuries represent 50% of all hospital admissions due to burns.

Burn Prevention

The easiest way to ensure that you are not scalded by tap, bath or shower water is to make sure that it does not get hot enough to injure yourself or family in the first place.

Make sure your hot water heater isn't set any higher than 48 degrees Celsius. This will greatly reduce the chances of being burned if someone happens to flush the toilet when you or your child is in the shower.

If you are a tenant and don’t have access to your hot water heater, notify your landlord by letter and ask that they turn down the temperature on the hot water heater. It’s unlikely that your landlord will object since turning down the temperature on the hot water heater will save the landlord money.

In the winter some people use space heaters to heat their homes. You can read more about the dangers of space heaters here:Space Heaters: Safety Tips to Prevent Burns Injuries and Fires

Kitchen Injuries
Cooking temperatures are frequently close to boiling which can cause third degree burns in less than a second. Most burn injuries in the kitchen result from hot water or oil spills.

Prevention Tips

• Use back burners whenever possible.
• Keep handles of pots facing in.
• Never leave children alone in the kitchen while you are cooking.

Burn Treatment

If you suffer a burn there are a few simple steps you can take to reduce the chances of suffering long term injuries.

• If the burn is serious call 911 and ask for an ambulance.

• Immediately pour cool (not cold) water on the burned area for 3-5 minutes or until the ambulance arrives.

• Cover the area with clean gauze or bandages. Do not apply aloe or other ointments because impurities can cause infections.

• Do not break any blisters. This can also result in an infection.

• Wear loose clothing while the burns are healing.

Further Resources

Burnsurgery.org

Sick Kids Hospital Burn Prevention Team

Burn Prevention for Families With Children With Special Needs: Video

Bullying has been a problem that every generation has had to deal with.When I was a kid the “class bully” was usually a big child who used his physical size and strength to intimidate or hurt smaller or weaker classmates.

The explosive growth of texting and social networking sites like Facebook, My Space and Twitter allows any child to participate in a new form of bullying: “cyber bullying”.

What is it?

“Cyber bullying” describes the use of the internet, cellphones or other technology to send, post or text statements or images intended to hurt or embarrass another person. Indirect activities like posting rumors on a public website can also be acts of cyber bullying.

Cyber bullying has the potential to have greater impact than“traditional” bullying because of the public nature of the internet and the ease with which intimating and humiliating information can be distributed around the world with the touch of a button.

Anonymity

Cyber bullying is particularly difficult to stop because the bullies can hide behind the anonymity of the internet.

Real danger

If anyone doubts the damaging effects of cyber bullying one need only look to the recent tragic suicides of two Nova Scotia teens. Family members of the teens indicate the girls took their lives after being subjected to repeated harassment and intimidation by cyber bullies.

Task Force

The Nova Scotia government is taking the problem serious. They have hired respected law professor Wayne MacKay to chair a cyberbullying task force to provide the Department of Education with advice and recommendations about prevention.

Tips to Protect Your Child

Create limits: Have a discussion with your child about balancing the amount of time they spend online.Before letting your child to join a social networking site, consider requiring your child to provide you with the password so you can “check in” from time to time. Make sure the family computer is in a shared space. Consider using adult filtering software.

Communicate: Talk to your children about cyber bullying and what is and isn’t acceptable behavior.Teach your children that if they are the subject of online bullying they should not engage with their tormentor but rather tell an adult immediately. Let your child know that they won’t be punished or lose their computer privileges if they let you know what’s happening to them.

Know the Danger Signs: Declining grades, excuses to avoid school, insomnia, depression, stomach aches, headaches and social withdrawal may all be signs that your child is being bullied. Spending lots of time online or, at the other extreme, refusing to use the computer altogether may also be signs of a possible problem.

Private v. Public: Teach your children that whatever they post online can potentially be seen by anyone; and the information is there forever. Posting pictures, text messages, even supposedly private instant messaging conversations can be sent around the world at the click of a button. Personal information should never be shared on the internet without parental supervision.

Tell your kids to never share their passwords with anyone and to change them regularly.

Cyber bullying often takes the form of identity theft where the bully steals someone’s identity and goes online to post insulting or humiliating comments.

Teach Them Right From Wrong: This may sound so obvious that it doesn’t need stating. But the anonymity of the internet means bullies don’t see the pain that they cause their victims. This makes it easier to participate in conduct that your child would never do face to face. Explain to your children that words have the power to hurt and that no one has the right to hurt anyone else regardless of whether it’s done in person or over the internet.

Take Action: If you suspect your child is being bullied, listen carefully to what they are telling you and don’t minimize their pain. Forget the “sticks and stones” lecture. It didn't help when we were kids and it certainly doesn't work now. The humiliation and long lasting emotional pain from bullying is real, damaging and potentially life threatening.

If you suspect your child is being subjected to bullying, contact the authorities at their school to make them aware of the problem. If the threats are serious enough contact the police.

Further Resources

For more information you can contact the Canadian Centre for Child Protection at: www.thedoorthatsnotlocked.ca .

You can report online exploitation of children at: www.cybertip.ca.

Information for Teachers and Other Professionals Who Work With
Young People: www.antibullying.net

I was driving to work this morning and some lady talking on her cell phone almost sideswiped me when she swerved into my lane of traffic. She wasn't holding the cell phone. She was using a headset. But she didn't have a clue about the rush hour traffic that was surrounding her.

Hand Held Cell Phone Ban
It has now been three years since Nova Scotia introduced its law requiring drivers to use hands free cell phones.

However, recent research suggests that the use of hands free cell phones does not reduce the risk associated with cell phones and traffic safety.

The debate about cell phone use while driving basically boils down into two groups. Those who support a partial ban which prohibits the use of hand held cell phones while driving (the Nova Scotia solution) and those jurisdictions that require a total ban on the use of hand held and hands free cell phones while driving.

Cognitive Distraction

The debate revolves around a principle known and “cognitive distraction”. In 2006 psychologists at the University of Utah published a study showing that drivers talking on hand held or hands free cell phones showed the same level of impairment as drunk drivers.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has published studies indicating that whether a driver uses a hand held or hands free phone the level of cognitive distraction is enough to significantly impair a driver’s performance.

The National Safety Council has published a report entitled “Understanding the Distracted Brain…Why Driving While Using Hands Free Cell Phones is Risky Behavior”. According to the report drivers using hands free cell phones have a tendency to “look at” but not “see” objects. The report estimates that drivers using hands free cell phones fail to see up to 50% of the information in their driving environment.

It's pretty clear that the lady that almost crashed into me today didn't "see" the 1627 kilograms of metal that was driving beside her. I think my car's horn interrupted her conversation because she gave me a nasty look.

Drive safe everyone.

Further Resources

Experimental Studies of Driver Cognitive Distraction Caused by Cell Phone Use

Driven to Distraction : FAQ

Understanding Cognitive Distraction - Distracted Driving FAQ: Video

Continue reading " Nova Scotia Car Accident Claims - Hands Free Cell Phones Don’t Reduce Traffic Risks " »

A study of children with minor head trauma at Boston Children’s Hospital suggests CT scans may not be necessary when diagnosing children who have suffered head trauma.

The study indicates that the use of a CT scan can be reduced by up to 50% without compromising care simply by observing children. This is a positive finding because reducing CT Scans reduces children’s exposure to unnecessary radiation.

The June issue of Pediatrics Journal contains the results of a study lead by Boston Children’s Hospital and the Department of Emergency Medicine at UC Davis. One of the co-authors of the study Lise Nigrovic stated:

“Only a small percentage of children with blunt head trauma really have something serious going on. If you can be watched in the ED for a few hours, you may not need a CT”.

The study reviewed the results of more than 40,000 children who had been admitted to emergency departments with blunt head trauma. Some of the children had CT scans ordered immediately. Others were observed before a decision was made about the use of a CT scan.

More Observation = Fewer CT Scans

The authors of the report found the children who were observed had a lower rate of CT Scans then those who were not observed.

The authors found the allowing for an observation period did not compromise the safety of the children. Significant brain injury or injuries requiring surgical intervention was almost equal in both the observed and non-observed groups.

The findings are significant because CT Scans present a risk to children. A child’s growing brain tissue is more sensitive to radiation then adults. Therefore, any exposure to radiation increases the risk of developing a radiation induced cancer later in life.

Guidelines for Parents

Nigrovic suggested the following guidelines for parents to be aware of if their children have suffered a head injury:

1. Check with your family doctor before taking your child to the emergency department;

2. If your child has a headache, vomiting and or confusion, take them to the emergency department immediately;

3. An emergency department physician may choose to observe your child before making a decision about whether to order a CT Scan;

4. Changing symptoms over time (either increasing severity or decreasing severity) is an important factor in deciding whether to order a head CT Scan.

Continue reading " Head Injuries in Children: CT Scans Not Always Necessary For Diagnosis - Nova Scotia Brain Injury Claims " »

The Supreme Court of Canada released it's decision today in Alberta v. Elder Advocates of Alberta Society

A class action was filed on behalf of residents in long-term care facilities in Alberta claiming that the government artificially inflated the accommodation charges to subsidize the cost of medical expenses. They initiated a class action alleging that the Province of Alberta and the the resident's health care. Under provincial legislation, Alberta is responsible for the cost of medical care required by the residents of nursing homes and auxiliary hospitals.

The class members claimed damages for breach of fiduciary duty, negligence, bad faith and/or unjust enrichment. They also filed a claim under s. 15(1) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The certification judge struck out the breach of fiduciary duty claim and limited the duty of care alleged in negligence.

The class members appealed and the Alberta Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and confirmed the right of the class to pursue the causes of action.

Today the Supreme Court of Canada held (unanimously) that the appeal should be allowed in part. The claims for breach of fiduciary duty, negligence and bad faith were struck out (upholding the decision of the certyfication judge). But the claims for unjust enrichment and Charter breach were allowed to proceed to trial.

Chief Justice McLachlin in writing for the unanimous court, said:

"It is a sad reality of life that as people age they may become unable to care for themselves and be obliged to live in special facilities providing greater or lesser degrees of assistance and medical care. In Alberta, chronic care for the elderly is provided through nursing homes and auxiliary hospitals. In principle, the government of Alberta is responsible for the costs of residents' medical care, but residents may be asked to contribute to the costs of their housing and meals through the payment of accommodation charges. In this case, 12,500 residents of Alberta's long-term care facilities ("LTCFs") sue as a class, alleging that the government artificially elevated the required resident contributions to subsidize medical expenses that are properly the responsibility of government.

The class has filed a statement of claim in which it alleges that the government's conduct constitutes a breach of fiduciary duty, negligence, bad faith in the exercise of discretion and/or unjust enrichment. The class seeks the return of monies or damages equivalent to the amount of any over-payment of the permitted accommodation charges. It is on the basis of these allegations that the action was certified. The class also brings an equality claim under s. 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which Alberta does not seek to have struck but argues should not proceed by way of class action.

At certification, the Province of Alberta challenged the claims of fiduciary duty, negligence, and bad faith in the exercise of discretion. The certification judge struck out the plea of breach of fiduciary duty and partially limited the duty of care alleged in negligence (2008 ABQB 490, 94 Alta. L.R. (4th) 10). The Court of Appeal upheld the entitlement of the plaintiff class to pursue all three causes of action (2009 ABCA 403, 16 Alta. L.R. (5th) 1). The Crown in Right of Alberta now appeals to this Court, contending that all the claims should be struck out and the action decertified.

This is not a decision on the merits of the action, but on whether the causes of action pleaded are supportable at law. The question is whether the pleadings, assuming the facts pleaded to be true, disclose a supportable cause of action. If it is plain and obvious that the claim cannot succeed, it should be struck out.

I conclude that the pleas of fiduciary duty, negligence and bad faith in the exercise of discretion disclose no cause of action and should be struck out in their entirety, but that the claim of unjust enrichment should survive. It follows that the certification of the class is upheld, and the unjust enrichment claim may proceed to trial, together with the claim for discrimination under s. 15(1) of the Charter.

...Based on the foregoing, I would allow the appeal in part and strike the pleas of breach of fiduciary duty, negligence and bad faith. Without endorsing them, I would leave untouched the claim of discrimination under s. 15(1) of the Charter and the plea of unjust enrichment, along with any other pleas which survived in the lower courts and were not appealed to this Court. Certification of the class and the unaffected common questions will remain, since the action, in truncated form, survives."

The latest edition of Pediatrics Journal contained a study published by the University Hospital Medical Centre in Cleveland Ohio which shows that 9% of babies are being given a wide variety of herbal supplements. The study states that this is a concern because some of the herbs may pose health risks to babies.

Unregulated

The problem arises because herbal supplements are not regulated the same way as drugs and pharmaceuticals. The herbal remedies may cause adverse drug reactions and may be contaminated.

For example, in 2007 Baby's Bliss brand of Gripe Water, which is used to calm colicky babies, was recalled because it contained a parasite that can cause intestinal infections.

Milk or Formula

Pediatric experts recommend that infants receive only human milk or infant formula for the first 4-6 months of their life.

The milk or formula can be supplemented with vitamins or medicine as recommended by your doctor.

More Resources

Infant/Child Product Recalls (not including toys)strong>

Infant Safety Hazards

Posted by John McKiggan | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Child Injuries , Drug Injuries , Personal Injury , Product Liability