Obesity Statistics Essay

Obesity statistics in Malaysia are getting scarier by the day. The World Health Organization (WHO) survey in 2010 ranked Malaysia as sixth in Asia with the highest adult obesity rate. Obesity statistics from the Malaysian National Health and Morbidity Survey in 2006 showed that 43% of Malaysian adults were obese or overweight at that time. And these obesity statistics showed that overweight children were 38% of the child population in Malaysia. The recent WHO results of 2010 showed that 60% of Malaysians aged 18 and up, had a BMI over 25. A BMI of more than 25 means the person is overweight. In 2008, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) did research on the ‘prevalence of obesity among children’. The results were astounding, showing an increase of obesity of 30% in the 6 to 12 years old age group. In 2007, Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM) did a nationwide, all Malaysian states study on obesity, on Malaysians aged 15 years old and above. A person with a BMI of more than 30 was considered to be obese. Those overweight with a BMI reading of more than 25 were excluded. The UPM researchers found that females were more likely to be obese at 13.8% while men were at 9.6%. Malays and Indians had higher cases of obesity at 13.6% and 13.5%, while Chinese came in 8.5% of their population groups. Sarawak natives had 10.8% cases of obesity while the Sabah natives had the lowest at 7.3%. The data obtained were statistically significant (p< 0.0001). All these obesity statistics have rung alarm bells at the Malaysian Ministry of Health. The Malaysian government is concerned on the health effects, productivity and the healthcare costs implications of an obesity epidemic in the country. The government notes that this obesity and overweight issue is far more serious in Malaysia than in other countries in the region. The Malaysian Ministry of Health had planned for another survey in 2011 to update these obesity statistics. This would have included a study on the incidences of diabetes and kidney diseases in Malaysia. But no results are available as of now.

Parliamentary Supremacy Essay

â€Å"In the absence of a written constitution, the UK Parliament is the sovereign law-making power, incapable of limiting its own power, or being limited by an external power.† In the absence of an unwritten, or rather, uncodified constitution, the doctrine of Parliamentary supremacy (also called â€Å"Parliamentary sovereignty†) emerges as a principle factor granting legitimacy to the exercise of government power within the UK. The doctrine of Parliamentary supremacy is a set of rules that determine how courts should approach Acts of Parliament. This includes rules pertaining to how courts should handle contradictory provisions, or Acts, as well as the status attached to an Act of Parliament. This doctrine recognises Parliament as the ultimately supreme, sovereign law-making body within the UK. The rules that construct the doctrine of Parliamentary Supremacy may be found in a number of sources; case law, constitutional conventions, statute law, and the writing of famous academics. The purpose of this essay is to analyse the extent to which the UK Parliament is â€Å"the sovereign law-making power, incapable of limiting its own power, or being limit ed by an external power.† Anytime the sovereignty of the UK Parliament is mentioned, Prof A.V. Dicey’s classic, three-point definition springs to mind. According to Dicey, a) Parliament has the right to make or unmake any law whatever, b) no Parliament can bind a future Parliament, and c) person or body has the right to override an Act of Parliament. The three points given above summarise the Doctrine of Parliamentary Supremacy (or Sovereignty). Dicey’s first and last points, pertaining to Parliament having the right to legislate on any matter and no person or body being able to override those laws, have been strongly confirmed by UK courts. Judges have repeatedly upheld the principles of Parliamentary sovereignty, in cases and quotes. Sir Ivor Jennings once stated â€Å"Parliament can legislate to ban smoking on the streets of Paris; Parliament can legally make a man into a woman.† In Madzimbamuto v Lardner-Burke (1969), Lord Reid stated â€Å"It is often said that it would be  unconstitutional for the UK parliament to do certain things†¦but that does not mean it is beyond the power of parliament to do such things.† Similarly, in ex parte Simms and O’Brien (1999), Lord Hoffman stated â€Å"Parliamentary sovereignty means Parliament can†¦legslate contrary to fundamental human rights.† In Brit Railways Boards v Pickin (1974) and Edinburgh and Dalkeith Rly Co v Wauchope (1842), the courts refused to challenge the validity of an Act of Parliament, regardless of procedural flaws. This gave rise to what is now the â€Å"Enrolled Bill Rule†- which is courts will not look beyond the â€Å"Parliamentary roll.† In Jackson v AG (2005), the validity of the Act of Parliamen t 1949 and subsequent Acts passed under that procedure, was questioned. The concept of Parliamentary supremacy was challenged in obiter statements of three judges; however, the Acts were ruled as valid and the sovereignty of Parliament was again confirmed by the courts. Dicey’s second point relates to Parliament being unable to bind its’ successors. The mechanism through which courts give effect to this point is known as the â€Å"doctrine of implied repeal.† This requires courts to enforce the latter, and impliedly repeal the former, when two Acts conflict with each other. This is exemplified in the Ellen Street Estates Ltd v Minister of Health (1934). Thoburn v Sunderland City Council (2002) examined the doctrine of implied repeal more closely and held there is a special class of statutes, called, â€Å"constitutional statutes†, that cannot be impliedly repealed. Rather, they can only be expressly repealed. These constitutional statutes are those defining fundamental rights, such as the Magna Carta and Bill of Rights 1689. The Act of Union 1706 Act intended to bind future UK Parliaments, but that eventually failed. In MacCormick v Lord Advocate (1953), it was argued the principle of Parliamentary sovereignty is not reco gnised in Scottish law. The â€Å"manner and form argument† declares that although there is no limit to the subject matter on which Parliament can legislate, and a Parliament cannot bind its successors, the manner and form in which it legislates may be limited. Special procedures for legislation may be set down by the courts. This was illustrated in Minister of the Interior v Harris (1952). The two factors that challenge the concept of Parliamentary sovereignty are  the ECA 1972 and the HRA 1998. EctJ judgements are binding on all UK courts, and according to S.2 of the ECA 1972, all Acts of Parliament are to be construed according to EU law. EctHR judgements are not strictly binding on the UK Supreme Court (formerly House of Lords), but the HRA 1998 calls for all legislation to be interpreted according to Convention rights. If an Act of Parliament is incompatible with the HRA, a â€Å"declaration of incompatibility† will be issued by the courts but the Act will remain in force until Parliament amends it. This â€Å"declaration of incompatibility,† in fact, enphasises the sovereignty of Parliament. In the Jackson case, Lord Hope states the supremacy of Community law limits the sovereignty of the UK Parliament. In summary, it appears the UK Parliament, to a large extent, is a â€Å"sovereign law-making power, incapable of limiting its own power,† as evidenced by many cases mentioned above. Parliament can legislate on any subject matter it chooses to, and no body has the authority t override an Act of Parliament. As illustrated by the Enrolled Bill Rule, even procedural flaws cannot invalidate an Act of Parliament. However, it is limited slightly by external powers, such as the ECA 1972, the HRA 1998, and special procedures may be laid down to make legislation difficult. However, the fact that Parliament, of its own free will, chose to pass the ECA and HRA indicates that these Acts do not limit its’ sovereignty. Parliament can, after all, legislate to undo the above-mentioned Acts and procedures if it chooses to. The phrase â€Å"what the queen enacts in Parliament is law† remains a fairly accurate embodiment of the doctrine of Parliamentary Sovereignty.

The Code of Hammurabi

The Code of Hammurabi The overall success in any society largely depends on the order and the stability in that society. Of course, the prosperity of any particular civilization is based on the stability of the economy in that civilization. But the laws and the basic moral principles have a huge influence on economy and on overall welfare of the people. The laws should include sections on social, moral, religious, civil, commercial, and criminal law. The laws reflect the level of development of the society at the specific period of time. Laws cannot be perfect and they cannot equally protect everyone, but the societies that live by the laws have numerous advantages over those that don't. The laws make a society civilized.Code of laws of HammurabiHammurabi was the ruler of the Old Babylonian Empire, during the 18th century BCE. He was a smart military leader and legislator. He developed the first known legal code in history, Hammurabi's Code. He clearly understood the importance of the jurisprudence system and even put his code of laws among his most significant accomplishments. Hammurabi made his set of laws public, clearly explaining what was required of the citizens, and what the punishments were for not following these laws. Although the system of justice was not applied equally to all during the time of Hammurabi, the laws were fair, considering the times and the society of that time. One of the most well known aspects of the code is the principle "an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth". So, for example, if someone has plucked out a neighbor's eye he would have his eye removed.Unfortunately, just like in any other civilization at that time, lower classes of people were not treated equally to the higher classes of aristocrats. Of course, no one could get away...

The Psychic Crisis Theory of the Salem Witch Trials essays

The Psychic Crisis Theory of the Salem Witch Trials essays Psycho-history lends insight into the possible states of mind of individuals. Historians have attempted to use psychological and sociological theories to explain historical events and show how the human psyche creates historical crises. The psychic crisis theory of the Salem witchcraft hysteria can explain several aspects of the witch trials because historical fact alone may not be able to completely account for the underlying reasons for the persecutions. As such, the psychic crisis theory is a reasonable extension of a more meat and potatoes history, which readily takes into account issues such as religiosity, social norms, trends, and politics. Just as it may be reasonable to assume that Van Gogh suffered from a mental illness in addition to epilepsy, it may also be reasonable for historians to assume that the hysteria over witchcraft stemmed from a psycho-social crisis. The behaviors of both the accused and the accusers may have been due to psychic crises: caused by social confli ct, psychological turmoil, or the ingestion of psychedelics. However, because it is largely speculative, psycho-history can never be as reliable as cold, hard facts. Calling witchcraft hysteria a psychic crisis infers too much about the root causes of the historical phenomenon. History should always be based on factual evidence in the same way science or law must also be based on hard evidence. At the same time, psycho-history can offer meaningful alternative perspectives on persons and events, filling in the gaps cold, hard facts cannot fill. Historians should feel free to speculate about the potential psychic causes of the witchcraft hysteria as well as about the states of mind of the individuals on both sides of the stake. In some cases, meat and potatoes facts can prove unreliable or misleading, which is why psycho-history should not be completely abandoned. Students of history also appreciate alternative perspectives that s...

Definition and Examples of Janus Words in English

Definition and Examples of Janus Words in English Janus word is a word (such as cleave) having opposite or contradictory meanings depending on the context in which the word is used. Also called antilogy, contronym, contranym, autantonym, auto-antonym, and contradictanyma. Examples and Observations To weather can mean to endure or to erode.Sanction can mean to allow or to prohibit.Fix can mean a solution (as in find a quick fix) or a problem (left us in a fix).Clip can mean to separate (as in clip the coupon from the paper) or to join (as in clip the answer sheets together).Left as a verb in the past tense means to have gone; as an adjective, it means remaining.Wear can mean to last under use or to erode under use.Buckle can mean to fasten or to bend and then break.The verb bolt can mean to secure, lock or to start suddenly and run away.Screen can mean to conceal or to show.Fast can mean moving quickly (as in running fast) or not moving (as in stuck fast). The Verb Table in British English and American English In British English, when you table a document, you add it to the agenda for a meeting, usually by placing copies on the table at the beginning of the meeting because it was not ready in time to be sent out. In American English, however, when you table a document, you remove it indefinitely from the agenda. Writers on both sides of the Atlantic should be aware of this possible source of confusion.(R.L. Trask, Mind the Gaffe! Harper, 2006) Literally [T]his usage of literally [to mean figuratively] . . . is not the first, nor will it be the last, instance of a word that is used in a seemingly contradictory way. There are many such words, and they arise through various means. Called Janus words, contranyms, or auto-antonyms, they include cleave (to stick to and to split apart) . . . and peruse and scan (each meaning both to read closely and to glance at hastily; skim). Usage writers often criticize such words as potentially confusing and usually single out one of the meanings as wrong, the right meaning being the older one, or the one closer to the words etymological meaning, or the one more frequent when 18th-century grammarians began to examine language systematically.  (Jesse Sheidlower, The Word We Love to Hate. Slate, Nov. 1, 2005) Factoid [Factoid is a] term created by Norman Mailer in 1973 for a piece of information that becomes accepted as a fact, although it is not actually true; or an invented fact believed to be true because it appears in print. Mailer wrote in Marilyn: Factoids . . . that is, facts which have no existence before appearing in a magazine or newspaper, creations which are not so much lies as a product to manipulate emotion in the Silent Majority. Lately, factoid has come to mean a trivial fact. That usage makes it a contranym (also called a Janus word) in that it means both one thing and its opposite . . ..(Paul Dickson, How Authors From Dickens to Dr. Seuss Invented the Words We Use Every Day. The Guardian, June 17, 2014) Schizophrenic Words Best and worst both mean to defeat. Cleave means both to cling to and to split apart. Fast means both speedy and immobilized (as well as several other things). Dress means to put on apparel, as a person does, or to take it off, as is done to a chicken. And while you are reflecting on such oddities, you may as well know that bleach means also blacking; bluefish also greenfish; bosom also depression; emancipate also to enslave; and help also to hinder.​(Willard R. Espy, The Garden of Eloquence: A Rhetorical Bestiary. Harper Row, 1983)

How Technology Impacts Wellness Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words - 1

How Technology Impacts Wellness - Essay Example These have made communication easy and more convenient for people that many have found themselves doing two or three things at the same time. Nevertheless, like the old saying goes too much of a good thing can be bad. The people behind Frontline’s documentary entitled Digital Nation takes a step back to assess the impact of technology on the different aspects of an individual’s well-being. At the start of the computer age, everyone was amazed at how fast it had become to do things. With the creation of the Internet, everyone was in awe that they could see colleagues and family from the other side of the world. Now, the Internet and the computer have become so much a part of a person’s life these people find it difficult to imagine how their life would be without the conveniences of today. Computers, cellular phones and the Internet have become a necessity for the people in the digital world, making them feel vulnerable without it. Mentally, technology has made some people cope better with events in their life. For example, the documentary featured the military employing technology in recruitment, the treatment of post-traumatic stress disorder and selected missions. Through simulations of actual military activities, people in the service who have come back with PTSD are able to evaluate the stressful circumstances over and over again until they overcome their anxiety. According to the film, these simulations have also encouraged eligible youth to sign up and help protect the country in the face of objections from parents. The youths say they are old enough to distinguish between games and real combat to make their own decisions. Technology has also helped lower the casualties in combat situations through the use of drones. Controlled remotely from the US, the personnel are able to hurt the county’s enemies but are safe from retaliation. Multi-tasking is a common practice in the digital age. As the students and professors in the documentary shared, they will be sending messages from their phones while browsing the Internet on the computers and listening to music on their MP3 players.     

Nonconsequensialists and Consequensialists Essay

Nonconsequensialists and Consequensialists - Essay Example As in consequentialism, a consequentialist may argue that lying is wrong, and the reason he or she will gave is that it generates negative consequences or the results. But a consequentialist might allow this in some foreseeable consequences, and where lie is good enough, so people can lie in those situations. On the other hand a deontologist may argue that lying is always wrong, no matter what good it can bring to the liar. They will never allow this in any situation or the circumstances. G. E. M Anscombe, in 1958, came up with the term consequentilism first time in her essay "Modern Moral Philosophy". In her essay, she expressed what she thought as the major error of some moral theories, for example by Mill and Sidgwick. 1 The term, consequentilism became popular further and many authors used it in their writings. The ethical theories are sorted into two groups, one theory is regarding the wrong and right actions, and this is called consequentialist theory. The other theory is non-consequentialist theory; utilitarianism is an example of consequentialist theory. And that judgment in consequentiatlist theory is done by the rightness ad wrongness of any action and also the results of those acts. ... On the other hand, the non-consequentialist theory in ethics concludes the right or wrong acts not on the base of consequences but on their properties and attributes. Libertarians support this theory and believe that people should be free to do whatever they want to. If someone's action is hurting or harming other people than it does not mean that people should stop doing things on their own will. They should do what ever they want to but they should respect the privacy and freedom of others too, but should not hold back their actions only because of people. The major difference between consequentialist and non-consequentialist is the judgment of action and in consequentialist theory; the final conclusion is based upon the consequences and results whereas in non-consequentialists theory, it checks the nature of the action. What happens normally is that non-consequentialists limit the scope and range of facts, which should be reviewed to perform the right action. Non-consequentialists try to ignore the consequences, which is not actually possible and can create a lot of problems in future. So the non-consequentialist theory limits the range of considerations that could be used in determining the rightness and wrongness of any action. Though it is proved psychologically that the acts by people are limited because of many constraints, for example, time limit, finite processing capacities etc. So non-consequentialist ethics is suitable for the decision procedures, where the empirical restrictions are rationality talked about. Many philosophers agreed that non-consequentialist theory can be successful only after the proper judgment of