Food Issues - Topic of the Month: Milk from Cloned Cows

UPDATE 15 August: From Pete Redwood (UK)

It was explained by a geneticist on Radio 4 the other day that cloning involves extracting the DNA from one animal and inserting into the embryo of another.  

Sometimes the DNA gets "mixed up" and whilst the animal may appear to be perfect they cannot guarantee that everything functions correctly. Nobody knows if this may affect milk or meat - even subtly - as far as human consumption is concerned.

Monetary reward is playing too large a part in food production these days and no company is prepared to take a precautionary approach. It is assumed to be safe unless it can be proved within all reasonable doubt to be harmful. That proof can take twenty or thirty years to materialise.
A study carried out recently has found that the mineral content of many of our vegetables is anything up to 30% lower than it was 30 years ago when the last study was done. This is mainly due to the fact that modern intensive agriculture strips the soil of its nutrients then artificially puts back just a selected few. Organically grown veg fared rather better but was still lower than thirty years ago. Our bodies rely on those minerals to help us combat the other "nasties" that are added to our food. At a Pesticides Residues Committee conference I attended last year the question was asked "Each individual chemical has its "safe" limits but what work has been done on the cocktail of "safe" limits that we ingest daily?" The answer was "None whatsoever!! "
As far as cloning, GM and all similar technologies are concerned human being are getting too clever for their own good. Selective breeding is one thing but playing about with the building blocks themselves in the laboratory - effectively playing God - leaves far too much to chance. The Western World, forced to eat a diet of manipulated food is extremely unhealthy with food allergies, food intolerance, diabetes, arthritis, asthma, eczma, all escalating. It has been shown so many times that when people suffering such complaints get back to a diet of unadulterated food their symptoms diminish and often disappear completely.
This is why I am against such processes - until such time as it can be proved conclusively that it cannot have any adverse affect whatsoever on anybody.

Posted 8/10/10 - While UK residents may already be picking up milk from cloned cows at the grocer, things in the states haven't moved quite as swiftly, according to reports from the Organic Consumers Association.

Company Wants to Sell Untested Milk From Cloned Cows

Along with this news don't forget to check out CyClone Dairy

MILK FROM CLONED COWS ‘ON SALE IN UK’
British shoppers could be unwittingly buying milk from the calves of cloned cows

Monday August 2,2010
By Daily Express Reporter

BRITISH shoppers could be unwittingly buying milk from the calves of cloned cows, it was claimed last night.

It follows revelations from a dairy farmer who blew the whistle on the ­illegal practice. He said the milk is being sold in high street shops and its source ­is ­unidentified – leaving consumers in the dark about what they are drinking.

Last night the Food Standards Agency said it was launching an investigation. It said it believed the sale of milk from cloned cows and their calves was ­illegal.

European experts have not identified a food safety risk associated with ­cloning.

But some campaigners claim it could allow new diseases to pass from farm animals to humans. Research has also identified serious concerns for the health and well-being of animals produced as a result of cloning, with evidence of premature births, deformities and early death.

Supporters of cloned meat say that it could produce super-sized, disease-resistant animals with leaner meat and higher milk yields.

However, a survey by the UK Food Standard Agency in 2008 found most consumers do not want food from cloned animals on supermarket shelves.

The first calf grown from an embryo taken from a cloned cow was born on a British farm in 2007. The calf, named Dundee Paradise, was born near Wolverhampton after being created by ­scientists in the US.

Details of the latest claims, which were printed in a US paper, suggested that the British dairy farmer had admitted using milk from a cow bred from a clone as part of his daily production.

An FSA spokesman said: “Since 2007 the FSA interpretation of the law has been that meat and products from clones and their offspring are ‘novel’ foods and would therefore need to be authorised before being placed on the market.

“As the UK authority responsible for accepting novel food applications, the agency has not received any applications relating to cloning and no authorisations have been made.”
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/190642/Milk-from-cloned-cows-on-sale-in-UK-Milk-from-cloned-cows-on-sale-in-UK-

Cancer: A Nutritional Disease, An Environmental Disease

Please refer to our Cancer pages for more information.

http://www.leaflady.org/cancer.htm
http://www.leaflady.org/cancer2.htm
Good News Today for Natural Health Care Advocates

And, please, do improve your nutrition and supplemental support to counter the disease and current treatments. Go ORGANIC or purchase our food cleaning booklet “FOOD SAFETY: CLEANSING OPTIONS” on line.

Five-a-day 'will not cut cancer'
By Clare Murphy, Health reporter, BBC News

Eating more fruit and vegetables has only a modest effect on protecting against cancer, a study into the link between diet and disease has found.

The study of 500,000 Europeans joins a growing body of evidence undermining the high hopes that pushing "five-a-day" might slash Western cancer rates.

The international team of researchers estimates only around 2.5% of cancers could be averted by increasing intake.

But experts stress eating fruit and vegetables is still key to good health.

In 1990, the World Health Organization recommended that everyone consume at least five portions of fruit and vegetables a day to prevent cancer and other chronic diseases.

The advice has formed a central plank of public health campaigns in many developed countries. It has been promoted in the UK since 2003 and in the US for nearly two decades.

But research has failed to substantiate the suggestion that as many as 50% of cancers could be prevented by boosting the public's consumption of fruit and vegetables.


“ It's still a good idea to eat your five-a-day but remember that fruits and vegetables are pieces in a much larger lifestyle jigsaw ”
Yinka Ebo Cancer Research UK
This latest study, which analysed recruits from 10 countries to the highly-regarded European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition, confirms that the association between fruit and vegetable intake and reduced cancer risk is indeed weak.

The team, led by researchers from the Mount Sinai School of Medicine, in New York, took into account lifestyle factors such as smoking and exercise when drawing their conclusions.

But writing in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, they said they could not rule out that even the small reduction in cancer risk seen was down to the fact that the kind of people who ate more fruit and vegetables lived healthier lives in many other respects too.

Broccoli not biscuits

In the best case scenario, an extra two portions of fruit and vegetables each day could prevent 2.6% of cancers in men and 2.3% of cases in women, the study concluded.


“ Research should focus more sharply on specific fruits and vegetables and their constitutents ”
Walter Willett Harvard School of Public Health
Vegetables, which tend to be richer in nutrients, appeared to be more beneficial than fruits, while heavy drinkers seemed to gain the most from a higher intake of both when it came to protection from cancers caused by alcohol and smoking.

In an accompanying editorial, Professor Walter Willet of Harvard University said the research strongly confirmed the findings of other studies, showing "that any association of intake and fruits and vegetables with risk of cancer is weak at best".

But he stressed specific substances contained in certain fruit and vegetables, if harnessed, could still have an important, protective effect.

Substantial evidence suggests lycopene from tomatoes, for instance, may reduce the risk of prostate cancer, while chemicals in broccoli are thought to stimulate a gene which protects against bowel cancer.

And data still suggests fruit and vegetables may provide protection against cardiovascular disease, one of the major killers in the developed world - although this too has yet to be proven categorically.


Keeping lean

But while the links between diet and cancer remain unclear, obesity is now seen as an established risk factor.

Fruit and vegetables could therefore be beneficial just by virtue of taking the place of more calorific fare, health experts say.

In any event, a reduced risk of 2.5% should not be dismissed out of hand, the World Cancer Research Fund argues.

"For the UK, this works out as about 7,000 cases a year, which is a significant number," says Dr Rachel Thompson from the charity, which in a major 1997 report said there was "convincing evidence" of the protective effect of fruit and vegetables.

Yinka Ebo of Cancer Research UK said: "It's still a good idea to eat your five-a-day but remember that fruits and vegetables are pieces in a much larger lifestyle jigsaw.

"There are many things we can do to lower our chances of developing cancer such as not smoking, keeping a healthy weight, cutting down on alcohol, eating a healthy balanced diet, being physically active and staying safe in the sun."

Story from BBC NEWS:http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/health/8605270.stm
Published: 2010/04/07 00:31:56 GMT © BBC MMX

Another anti-cancer food

Dirtiest Find in the Hospital: Cell Phones

Several years ago I raised the issue of a problem related to infection control directly related to the cell phone use of doctor's in hospital.

EMF generated by cell phones and other similar EMF producing appliances creates a static charge that draws bacteria to these units. As the doctors go from patient room to patient room they collect and transport ever more dirt!

I liken this to the Ignatz Semmelweiss discovery that hand washing between patient visits reduced hospital infection rates. Disinfecting the cell phone in between rooms might help too, in the more modern health outpost.

A year or so ago some attention was drawn to computer keyboards in the MRSA discussion, and this article supports the issue -

Keyboard that warns users when it is dirty could banish hospital superbugs
By Daily Mail Reporter, 18th June 2008

Health chiefs are spending £1 million on the latest weapon against superbugs - "infection-resistant" computer keyboards.

Experts at University College London Hospital have developed a keyboard which is easier to clean than conventional designs.It also includes an alarm to warn staff when it needs cleaning.

The flat silicone keyboards will be rolled out in hospitals across England, and it is hoped they will save the NHS millions cut rates of MRSA by 10 per cent.

Microbiologist Dr Peter Wilson helped develop the keyboard. Just last month he found the average keyboard was five times dirtier than a toilet seat. Swabs taken from office and hospital desks revealed 150 times the recommended limit for bacteria.

"Should somebody have a cold in your office, or even have gastroenteritis, you're very likely to pick it up from a keyboard," the professor said.

The NHS spends more than £1.6 billion a year on combating superbugs.

There has been a huge drive to encourage nurses and doctors to wash their hands between examining patients but a persistent problem is staff spreading infection by touching keyboards, picking up bacteria and then transferring this to other surfaces.

Research by microbiologists at UCLH has shown bacterial levels on the new style keyboards fall by 70 per cent if they are cleaned every 12 hours.

UCLH microbiologist Dr Peter Wilson, who helped invent the keyboard, said: "Doctors and nurses were going from patient to keyboard without washing their hands.

"That's quite understandable because you would wash your hands between patients but not between a patient and a keyboard."

Traditional keyboards are high-risk areas in hospitals because they can harbour bacteria and cannot be cleaned with water or fluids.

Keyboard covers are also to blame for spreading infection because they are rarely cleaned so hospital workers who use them spread potentially lethal bacteria.

The new type of computer keyboard has hidden sensors to make sure its surfaces are cleaned properly with alcohol wipes.

Manufactured by American company Esterline and distributed by British firm Advanced Power Components, it has incorporated a warning light system that activates every three or 12 hours.

The keyboard is also covered with a hypo-allergenic material resistant to bacterial growth.

Artificial fingernails also became part of this discussion.

And now over six years later, the dirty phone issue raises once more its ugly head.

Mobile phones have 18 times more bacteria than toilet handle

By Andrew Levy
Last updated at 8:51 AM on 30th July 2010

They are pretty much essential, but you may want to ditch your mobile phone for ever after reading this.

The average handset carries 18 times more potentially harmful germs than a flush handle in a men's toilet, tests have revealed.

An analysis of handsets found almost a quarter were so dirty that they had up to ten times an acceptable level of TVC bacteria.

One of the phones in the test had such high levels of bacteria it could have given its owner a serious stomach upset.

While TVC is not immediately harmful, elevated levels indicate poor personal hygiene and act as a breeding ground for other bugs.

The findings from a sample of 30 phones by Which? magazine suggest 14.7million of the 63million mobiles in use in the UK today could be potential health hazards.

Hygiene expert Jim Francis, who carried out the tests, said: 'The levels of potentially harmful bacteria on one mobile were off the scale. That phone needs sterilising.'

The most unhygienic phone had more than ten times the acceptable level of TVC and seven were above the threshold.

This worst handset also had 39 times the safe level of enterobacteria, a group of bacteria that live in the lower intestines of humans and animals and include bugs such as Salmonella.

It boasted 170 times the acceptable level of faecal coliforms, which are associated with human waste.

Other bacteria including food poisoning bugs e.coli and staphylococcus aureus were found on the phones but at safe levels.

Which? researcher Ceri Stanaway said: 'Most phones didn't have any immediately harmful bacteria that would make you sick straight away but they were grubbier than they could be.

'The bugs can end up on your hands which is a breeding ground and be passed back to your phone. They can be transferred back and forth and eventually you could catch something nasty.

'What this shows is how easy it is to come into contact with bacteria. People see toilet flushes as being something dirty to touch but they have less bacteria than phones.

'People need to be mindful of that by observing good hygiene themselves and among others who they pass the phone to when looking at photos, for example.'

Which? has previously found that some computer keyboards carry more harmful bacteria than a lavatory seat.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1298057/Mobile-phones-18-times-bacteria-toilet-handle.html##ixzz0vUl6drSD

I'd suppose this might give you pause for reflection. It should to the health care CEOs who have a head in the sand approach to the MRSA concern.

Dr Becker, Rife, Tesla and the Ancients

Dr. Robert O. Becker, M.D., orthopedic surgeon and medical research doctor, is one of the early pioneers in energy medicine. Through his fascinating journey which spans over three decades of dedicated research, he has brilliantly explored bioelectric and electromagnetic systems, reaching to understand and control the growth and healing process in complex organisms. He is well known for his book, "The Body Electric".

Becker follows on the knowledge base provided to us by Rife, Tesla and the Ancients, and for those of us in support of this valid work, we applaud this report.

Zapper Kills Cancer Cells

Now we have more substantiation -

Psychiatrist's Research Finds You Really Can Feel a Person's Stare
Paper by Dr. Colin A. Ross Explains How to Measure the Eye's Electromagnetic Energy

Press Release Source: Colin A. Ross Institute for Psychological Trauma On Monday April 5, 2010, 9:23 am EDT

DALLAS, TX--(Marketwire - 04/05/10) - Noted psychiatrist and author Colin A. Ross, M.D., has published experimental data that supports his scientific hypothesis that the eyes emit energy that can be captured and measured. Dr. Ross' paper, "The Electrophysiological Basis of Evil Eye Belief," is published in the current issue of Anthropology of Consciousness, a journal of the American Anthropological Association. The full paper is available at http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123310535/PDFSTART.

Although nearly everyone has experienced the sense of being stared at only to find that a person or animal really was looking, Western science has long rejected that the human eye can emit any form of energy. Dr. Ross says his findings move "human ocular extramission," which he also refers to as an "eyebeam," from the realm of superstition to science.

"We used our patent pending Electromagnetic Beam Detection System, which includes modified EEG neurofeedback equipment, to prove that the human eye emits an electromagnetic signal that can be measured scientifically," said Dr. Ross. "I hope that future experiments will determine why energy emitted from the eye is so strong and whether it can be harnessed through focused attention."

A series of videos in which Dr. Ross discusses the paper can be viewed at http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=78E31282619EEF4D.

Dr. Ross has been researching a new science and medicine focused on the human body's electromagnetic field, which he detailed in his 2009 book, Human Energy Fields (ISBN-13: 978-0-9821851-0-0).

Dr. Ross previously made headlines by applying to the $1 Million Dollar Paranormal Challenge administered by the James Randi Educational Foundation (JREF) (www.randi.org). Although Dr. Ross can prove that his eyebeam can make a tone sound out of a computer, JREF insists that no energy can be emitted from the eyes and mocked Dr. Ross with its Pigasus Award. JREF has not responded to Dr. Ross' test protocol.

Dr. Ross is the author of 140 papers in professional journals and 23 books. He has lectured widely in North America, Europe, China, New Zealand and Australia, has reviewed for many different psychiatry journals, and received a number of research grants. His writing also includes short stories, poems, aphorisms, plays and essays on a wide range of topics. For more information about Dr. Ross and the Colin A. Ross Institute for Psychological Trauma, visit www.rossinst.com.

New High-tech Mosquito Repellants Replace DEET

N-acylpiperidine, the chemical heir apparent to neurotoxic DEET is coming to your bug repellent, is it safe?
DailyTech - New High-tech Mosquito Repellants Replace DEET

The chemists of the University of Florida and the U.S. department of agriculture feel your pain. They’ve just published a study that might lead to improving the lives mosquito haters everywhere. Currently, the most effective ingredient in insect repellent on the market is DEET (N,N-diethyl-m-toluamide). DEET has been the gold standard for over 50 years and it protects us from the various diseases we can contract from mosquito bites such as malaria, West Nile Virus, yellow fever, encephalitis, Lyme disease and dengue fever. DEET is the ingredient used in most insect repellents. Around one third of the American population use insect repellent according to the US Environmental Protection Agency.
Kenan Professor Alan R Katritzky of the University of Florida led the way having researchers review hundreds of chemicals, data that has been collected by the USDA for the past 50 years. After each chemical was reviewed, they were rated on effectiveness on a scale of 1 to 5. They took all the highest ratings and compared the chemicals in order to figure out what the common factor was.
N-acylpiperidines (compounds from black pepper) was the chemical that they found the most effective compounds had in common. N-acylpiperidine, according to the New York Times, is similar to the active ingredient found in pepper. They took 34 of the most effective, then weeded it down to 10, and then again to 7. These 7 chemicals were vigorously scrutinized on factors such as production cost and level of toxicity.
These researchers have found these 7 chemicals that may pave the way to a new and improved mosquito repellent. DEET on average lasts about 17.5 days after its initial application. These new chemicals haven’t been safely tested on fully exposed skin yet, but when they were tested on volunteers they discovered that they were still repelling mosquitoes up to 50 days later. A couple of the chemicals even were found to last 73 days later, about four times longer than DEET.
The tests involved the volunteers wearing gloves with holes in them and then their gloved hands were wrapped in a cloth saturated with the chemical. The volunteer’s wrapped hand would be place into box containing live mosquitoes for precisely one minute; this process was then repeated every day. Failure of the test was determined if 5 mosquitoes or more bit through the cloth.
So far so good, the research holds a lot of potential for creating superior insect repellents everywhere. DEET should enjoy its reign while it can, as it may be replaced soon.

From Natural Health News:

Mosquitoes inherit DEET resistance

May 04, 2010

Although Vincent Corbel is quick to note that the dangers of DEET when applied as recommended are lower than the dangers of mosquito-borne diseases in the tropics, his work at the Institute of Research for Development in France might ...

http://naturalhealthnews.blogspot.com/

More on Herbs for Health: cancer, malaria

Jul 08, 2010

He next wants to test the evolution of DEET sensitivity using wild populations of mosquitoes, including those that spread malaria. "We're not saying that repellents shouldn't be used," he says. "But we have to understand how they work . ...

http://naturalhealthnews.blogspot.com/

If vitamins are so bad why is FDA giving them to PhRMA

Help protect your right to supplements -

Alert: Protect Your Right To Natural and Bio-available Vitamin B-6!
ANH-USA On April 6, 2010 @ 3:18 pm

Human beings cannot live without vitamin B-6. It is also important for the prevention of cancer and the prevention and treatment of seizures, anemia, mental disorders including schizophrenia, carpal tunnel syndrome, and other conditions. Its effect on carpal tunnel can seem almost miraculous [1].

A natural form of the vitamin, Pyridoxamine, was recently yanked off the market by the FDA. Why? Because a pharmaceutical company, BioStratum, wanted sole use of pyridoxamine in a drug, a drug which may or may not ever appear. The company filed a so-called citizens petition and the FDA agreed, notwithstanding protests from ANH-USA, other organizations, and thousands of citizens. You might ask: how can Pharma take a supplement off the market and claim exclusive use of it as a prescription drug? The FDA does not presently feel obligated to answer this question.

Unfortunately, this isn’t all the bad news about vitamin B6. All forms of B-6, natural or synthetic, must be converted to P5P, another natural form, for the body to use it. Another drug company, Medicure Pharma, wants sole use of P5P and so has petitioned the FDA to ban its use as a supplement as well.

Medicure has yet to market a drug made from P5P, but wants the ban to take place now. And never mind that any individual unable to convert synthetic B6 to P5P would have to rely solely on Medicure’s product to stay alive.

How does Medicure think it can get away with this? Its petition states rather candidly: “Pharmaceutical companies developing new drugs must be protected from companies that may seek to market the ingredients in those drugs as dietary supplements. The marketing of such products has the potential to undermine the incentive for the development of new drugs because many people may choose to purchase the supplements rather than the drugs.”

This is not of course a case of supplement producers creating a product to compete with an existing prescription drug. It is just the reverse. P5P, the natural and bioactive form of B6, has existed in food for as long as there have been humans and has been available as a supplement for years. Medicure seems to be saying: If it seems profitable, let’s just turn a critical vitamin, one essential for human life, into a drug, make it available only by subscription, and mark up the price. This is truly outrageous.

The FDA has not yet responded to Medicure’s petition. We have asked you in the past to send a message to the FDA and Congress protesting Medicure’s P5P grab, and the time has come to send some more messages. So if you haven’t sent in a message to the FDA and Congress yet, or even if you have, please send one today [2].

[2]

While we are discussing Vitamin B6, here is the latest scientific report. An analysis of 13 U.S., European and Asian studies of vitamin B6 and colon cancer, conducted from 2002-2009, has been published in a special edition of the Journal of the American Medical Association. Studies of the range of B6 doses found that vitamin B6 taken in higher doses reduced the risk of colon cancer by 21 percent. In one study, Dr. Susanna Larsson and her colleagues at Sweden’s National Institute of Environmental Medicine reported an inverse relationship between the intake of vitamin B6 or pyridoxine and the risk of colon cancer. Dr. Larsson linked the effect to bloodstream levels of pyridoxal-phosphate (PLP), the main active coenzyme form of vitamin B6 [3]. Pyridoxal-phosphate is also known as pyridoxal 5-phosphate or (as we referred to it above) P5P.

Don’t let the FDA take away our access to the natural and most bioavailable form of B6, P5P. Please take action now [2].


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Article printed from Alliance for Natural Health – US: http://www.anh-usa.org

URL to article: http://www.anh-usa.org/alert-protect-your-right-to-natural-and-bio-available-vitamin-b-6/

URLs in this post:

[1] Its effect on carpal tunnel can seem almost miraculous: http://search.vitasearch.com/search?q=pyridoxine+carpal+tunnel+syndrome&restrict=Summaries&site=CP&client=CP&proxystylesheet=CP&output=xml_no_dtd&filter=0&getfields=*

[2] please send one today: https://secure3.convio.net/aahf/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=334

[3] inked the effect to bloodstream levels of pyridoxal-phosphate (PLP), the main active coenzyme form of vitamin B6: http://www.physorg.com/print187978106.html

Anti-psychotic drugs link to pneumonia

I have been warning against this for many years, but I also counsel on the effective use of vitamin A in high dose for short term use to prevent and correct pneumonia.

Nettle tea is also very helpful in the strengthening of the lungs.

Perhaps some of the readers of the Annals of Internal Medicine will take heed.

Anti-psychotic pneumonia warning
The use of anti-psychotic drugs in the elderly doubles the risk of potentially fatal pneumonia, say Dutch researchers.

A study of almost 2,000 patients found the increased risk starts soon after treatment begins and concluded that patients should be closely monitored.

An expert review published in 2009 found the drugs are overused in many cases and are responsible for up to 1,800 deaths in the UK every year.

Ministers have said they want to see a significant cut in their use.

The latest research published in the Annals of Internal Medicine compared the health records of 258 over-65s with pneumonia with 1,686 patients without the infection.

“ This paper yet again gives us evidence why we should not prescribe them unless absolutely necessary ” Professor Steve Field, Royal College of GPs

Of those with pneumonia, a quarter died within a month.

When they looked at prescribed drugs, they found current use of anti-psychotics was associated with a roughly two-fold increase in the risk of pneumonia.

Those on the newer types of anti-psychotic drugs were slightly less likely to have the infection than those on the older class of drugs but were still at significant increased risk.

The risk was found to start soon after treatment and increased the higher the dose of drugs the patient was prescribed.

Evidence

The researchers from Erasmus University Medical Center in Rotterdam said: "Clinicians who start treatment with anti-psychotic drugs should closely monitor patients, particularly at the start of therapy and if high doses are given."

Last year's UK review found that around 180,000 dementia patients a year are given the drugs in care homes, hospitals and their own homes to manage aggression but only around 36,000 would actually benefit from them.

Measures suggested in the report and accepted by the government included better monitoring of prescribing practices and ensuring that, where necessary, they were prescribed for short periods of time.

Professor Steve Field, chair of the Royal College of GPs said: "Anti-psychotics are prescribed too frequently without doctors thinking about the consequences.

"This paper yet again gives us evidence why we should not prescribe them unless absolutely necessary and if you do you should closely monitor the patient."

Story from BBC NEWS:http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/health/8599443.stm

Published: 2010/04/05 23:49:58 GMT, © BBC MMX