 |
Thursday,
January 10, 2002, Chandigarh, India  
|
War tax by
other name Govindacharya=Madhok Indictment
and after |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tony
Blair’s mission and after
A
threatened Taj
Footprints
on sands of time A view
of war from border
The use
of honey can heal wounds: study
1971, Physics: DENNIS GABOR
|
War tax by other name UNTIL the other day Union Finance Minister Yashwant Sinha assured the people that any additional expenditure because of a likely war with Pakistan could be met within the budgeted funds. That was a bravado performance. Not many believed him what with several economic think-tanks warning of a crisis-like situation in revenue collection and breaking the ceiling on fiscal deficit. Mr Sinha has changed his stand dramatically and his critics have turned out to be right. On Tuesday the Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs empowered him to hike excise duty on any item by any percentage he wants. This is unprecedented. Until now commodities which do not attract excise duty — the zero tax items — can be brought under a maximum of 50 per cent of their factory gate value or ad valorem. This provision has been retained. For all other items the old ceiling of a 100 per cent increase has been knocked out and the Finance Ministry is free to hike excise by 200 or 300 per cent. This authority is wide- ranging and can be efficiently used and also recklessly misused. For instance, he can selectively increase the duty on those items that have popular support but at a rate which will not dampen demand and he can also spare those goods. Since Independence excise duty has been manipulated, sometimes successfully and often whimsically, to rob the rich and pay the poor. Now Mr Sinha faces a major challenge in selecting those sectors which will boost revenue collection without hurting the common man. Mediamen have dubbed the latest decision to issue an ordinance to push up excise duty as imposing a war tax. The Finance Ministry has denied it and said it is essentially meant to give a healthy look to the Centre's finances. The government was merely exploiting the border tension to raise additional revenue and keep its financial position within safe limits. This is a strong indictment of its gross mishandling. It has been known for some months that the economy was slowing down and customs realisation was dipping. Even corporate tax was less than the budgeted target. Still Mr Sinha took no aggressive step to stem the rot. He was busy harping on the feel good factor and whistling that the growth rate would be close to 7 per cent. But reality is rather grim. Indian economic planners do not expect more than a 5 per cent or 5.5 per cent growth in the GDP. Hard-nosed industrialists have asked Mr Sinha to invest heavily in agriculture and rural development to ensure a healthy economic growth. It is a clear admission that industry as such cannot contribute to the proposed 5 per cent growth. The service sector is growing but not doing its best to boost revenue. But the fact is that the farm sector has its own limitations and also problems and has only a limited capacity to economic growth. An overview will convince anyone that the policy indecision or even misplaced emphasis has knocked out the dynamism of the Indian economy. The war tax in disguise brings out all these in a glaring fashion. |
|
Govindacharya=Madhok THE Sangh Parivar, or more specifically the RSS, merely completed a formality by showing Mr K. Govindacharya the door on Monday. He had it coming because of the position he had taken on certain contentious issues, particularly the economic policy of the BJP. It must be remembered that the controversial pracharak was once a "political talisman" of the saffron brigade. Few can match him in the art of enunciating a certain stand one day and taking a diametrically different position the next day without batting an eyelid. The arguments for the shift in the stand would invariably be as convincing as the ones he had offered earlier. He had joined the Bharatiya Janata Party in October, 1988, on deputation from his parent organisation. Even Mr Govindacharya's critics would acknowledge his contribution to the growth of the BJP. As the party's ideologue he was streets ahead of the rest of the pack of BJP spokesmen. He was primarily responsible for ensuring direct contests between the BJP and the Congress in Uttar Pradesh and elsewhere during the Lok Sabha elections in 1989. However, to be brilliant among a group of mediocre partymen is not necessarily a plus point. In his case at least his oratorical and ideological brilliance contributed to his being marginalised before being given the marching orders by the hierarchy-driven RSS. As part of the BJP, he invited the wrath of the top leaders by describing Mr Atal Behari Vajpayee's public face as a "mukhota". Of course, he did try to disown the controversial description of the man who is now acknowledged as the moderate face of the BJP. But the top leadership was not convinced. His matters of heart too were usually another source of embarrassment for Sangh Parivar hypocrites. Mr Govindacharya has ultimately been made to pay the price for his outspokenness and unconventional [not conforming to the Sangh Parivar public view of issues] political style of work. The similarity between the fate that has befallen him and that of Mr Balraj Madhok is not incidental. Mr Madhok was among the most articulate members of the Jan Sangh [now BJP]. Like Mr Govindacharya he too was in the habit of speaking out of turn and often took a contrary political line than one approved by the Sangh Parivar. In the overall context only the Congress outcasts have managed to survive and flourish in politics. Take for instance Morarji Desai and other Congress leaders who were expelled by Indira Gandhi. In fact, the first four non-Congress Prime Ministers were former Congressmen. If one includes Mr I. K. Gujral, it would appear that for Congressmen to shine, though briefly, it is essential for them to leave the party. The same cannot be said about the non-Congress outfits. Ms Mamta Banerjee and Mr Sharad Pawar, as also most of their followers, have come from the Congress. How many non-Congress politicians have survived expulsion from the parent organisation? Where is Mr Saifuddin Chaudhary after he parted company with the communists? It remains to be seen whether Mr Govindacharya proves the pundits of doom wrong or finds himself in the company of Mr Madhok. |
|
Indictment and after THE cold weather of Himachal Pradesh has been warmed up a lot by the heat from the indictment of former Chief Minister Virbhadra Singh and five Congress MLAs for "violence and criminal acts" in March, 1998, at Shimla. Mr Virbhadra Singh has also been held "vicariously" responsible for "forcing" independent MLA Ramesh Dhwala to support the Congress in forming a government after a hung Assembly emerged from a snap poll. The Kainthla Commission appointed by the BJP-HVC coalition government has termed the lawlessness as a "black chapter of Himachal Pradesh politics". The Himachal Pradesh Cabinet has expectedly accepted the report and decided to proceed against Mr Virbhadra Singh and others "in accordance with law". But that is perhaps the only development that unfolded on expected lines. The rest of the events were highly unusual, to say the least. For one thing, the report was released to the Press not by any bureaucrat but by four Cabinet ministers. Moreover, the Cabinet did not agree with the recommendation of the one-man commission to exonerate the police officials whose role had come under a cloud during the incidents. CLP leader Virbhadra Singh has lashed out at the report calling it "concocted, baseless, malicious and politically motivated". The government indeed will have to provide an answer as to how it had proceeded on the report when a writ petition challenging the appointment of the commission is pending before the Supreme Court. Mr Virbhadra Singh is, of course, an interested party. But even some neutral observers have expressed surprise over the harsh comments made in the report which go beyond the scope of the enquiry. The slapping of enquiries and cases on politicians when they are out of power is nothing new. Mr Virbhadra Singh has become a veteran fighter of sorts in such matters. Earlier, the CBI rejected a similar enquiry against him and so did the enforcement department. But this time, the charges have been made to stick. He can be counted upon to fight this case as an extreme example of political vendetta. The failure of earlier enquiries will come in handy to him. In such matters public perception also plays a key role. If the man on the street feels that a particular person is being hounded, his sympathies undergo a sea change. Remember what happened to Indira Gandhi when she was out on a limb after her electoral defeat? If the Dhumal government goes hammers and tongs against Mr Virbhadra Singh, it might do him more good than harm. |
Tony Blair’s mission and after Both the SAARC summit in Kathmandu and British Prime Minister Tony Blair’s “calming down” mission to the subcontinent are behind us. The key question is whether they have achieved anything. The honest answer would be just a little. One must add, however, that Mr Blair’s hot-paced diplomacy has attained more than the shadowy handshake diplomacy of Pakistan and India at the SAARC gathering. There is little doubt that the Prime Minister, Mr Atal Behari Vajpayee, was taken by surprise when the Pakistani military ruler and self-appointed President, General Musharraf, walked up to him at the SAARC podium and extended to him his hand of “genuine and sincere friendship”. But he responded remarkably well. He shook hands graciously but delivered a firm message that such gestures were not enough. Until Pakistan radically changed its attitude towards its terrorism in Kashmir and other parts of India there could be neither friendship nor dialogue nor any let-up in the current tension between the two countries. Even so, some diplomatic exchanges between the two sides did take place. The two Foreign Ministers, Mr Jaswant Singh and Mr Abdul Sattar, held a meeting that can only be described as surreptitious. Though it was an encounter of an informal kind, the Pakistani side played it up as a prelude to the “de-escalation” of the military standoff between the two countries. Regrettably, the Indian delegation first denied that any such meeting had taken place. Later, it diluted the denial and claimed that “no separate or substantive” meeting was held. For his part, General Musharraf contrived an “informal interaction” with Mr Vajpayee. While the Prime Minister said that this was no more than an exchange of courtesies, the Pakistani media made bigger claims. That there could be something in Islamabad’s claims became obvious when the wide world saw on its TV screens the Prime Minister’s National Security Adviser, Mr Brajesh Mishra, exchange some pieces of paper with Mr Sattar. New Delhi has refrained from disclosing the contents of the notes exchanged. But Pakistani newspapers, quoting highly placed diplomatic sources, have contended that Mr Mishra had given the “Indian version of the Jaswant-Sattar meeting”. However, all this came to naught even before the British Prime Minister, after his talks with Mr Vajpayee, left for Pakistan. For, by then, a meeting of the Cabinet Committee on Security had taken place and Mr Jaswant Singh had announced that a dialogue with Pakistan was “ruled out” because Pakistan’s attitude to cross-border terrorism had remained unchanged. The scene then shifted to Islamabad where Mr Blair seems to have lived up to his promise of bluntly telling General Musharraf that nothing short of a total abandonment of terrorism by Pakistan would do. The result was a shift of nuances on General Musharraf’s part at the joint press conference held by the guest and the host. Even at Kathmandu the Pakistani President had drawn a distinction between terrorism in Afghanistan and the “fight for freedom” in Kashmir. At the joint press conference he conspicuously refrained from drawing this red herring across the trail when he committed himself to oppose terrorism in “all its forms and manifestation”. More significant was what he said about the Indian demand for the extradition of the 20 “most wanted” persons being harboured by Pakistan. Until the joint press conference, General Musharraf had been rejecting the Indian demand out of hand, declaring that he could consider it only after New Delhi had furnished credible and convincing proof against the accused persons. Now he announced that he was busy “analysing” the “cases” of the 20 men and a decision would be taken after the analysis was completed. And then came his announcement that he would be making a comprehensive statement of Pakistan’s crackdown on terrorist outfits in an address to the nation, obviously after consulting the Corps Commanders and others. Whether the change of tack by the Pakistani military ruler is worth anything will be known only after he makes the promised address to the nation within the next few days. And on that would depend whether Mr Blair can deliver on his promise to Pakistan that an abandonment of terrorism would be followed by “meaningful talks” with India on Kashmir so that this issue can be settled through political talks as also an end to the present tensions. Indeed, the British Prime Minister stated publicly that Mr Vajpayee had committed himself to these talks provided the cross-border terrorism was ended. However, while Mr Blair reaffirmed that the Kashmir issue must be solved, he disappointed the Pakistanis by refusing to “mediate” between the two countries over this issue which “only India and Pakistan can solve”. Pakistani media has predictably given a different spin to the outcome of the Blair mission. According to it, his focus was on the need for talks on Kashmir and on de-escalation of the current Indo-Pakistani tensions. It is the New York Times that has come up with the most accurate summing up. For, it says that General Musharraf is “in a bind” and must find a way to “avoid war without humiliation”. Herein perhaps lies a clue to possible future developments. It seems that the USA that had been urging “restraint” on India and advising it to “give more time to General Musharraf” has at least realised the fundamental contradiction between its own interests and General Musharraf’s policy of duplicity not only in relation to Kashmir but also vis-a-vis Afghanistan. After all, Osama bin Laden, Mullah Omar and countless Al Qaeda terrorists have taken shelter in Pakistan. What is more, not all of the Pakistani official agencies are cooperating in America’s search for these outlaws. Americans are particularly angry about the killing of a US soldier on the Pakistan-Afghan border. Peshawar’s Frontier Post has even reported that on January 7, Pakistani security agencies aborted a suicide attack on the Jacobabad air base with a large presence of US troops. This should explain President George Bush’s statement immediately after Mr Blair’s departure from Islamabad. This emphatically demanded stronger Pakistani action against terrorism. Earlier, the British Prime Minister had taken care to announce to the world at large that before talking to General Musharraf he had spoken to the US President on the telephone. The most serious development from the point of view of Pakistan that has always drawn the greatest support in the USA from the Pentagon is a speech by the Deputy Secretary for Defence, Mr Wolfowitz. He has minced no words in declaring that his country would watch carefully its “allies of convenience” in the coalition against terrorism. It would judge which of them are “real allies in the long term” and which are “transitory”. The message to Pakistan is loud and clear. The USA cannot defend its interests in the tribal lands straddling the Afghan-Pakistan border, such as it is, if terrorist groups continue to flourish within Pakistan itself in the name of keeping up the jehad in Kashmir. Equally injurious is the continuance of thousands of madarsas which keep
chumming out tens of thousands of fanatics and potential terrorists every year. Finally, a brief word about SAARC’s Kathmandu summit. Its final declaration has given some comfort to South Block because it has vowed to fight terrorism “comprehensively and holistically”. It has appealed to all member-countries to adhere to the 1987 SAARC convention against terrorism and to bring their laws in line with the UN Security Council’s famous Resolution 1373 on the subject. Pakistan, needless to add, is a party to this declaration. The proof of this apparently appetising pudding, however, would lie in the eating of it. SAARC so far has been very long on brave and inspiring words but, alas, woefully short of their implementation. |
A threatened Taj Whether it is genuine or fake, the threat e-mailed in the name of the Pakistan-based terrorist outfit Lashkar-e-Toiba to destroy Agra's Taj Mahal, one of the seven wonders of the world, is quite alarming. It has come at a time when the nation is yet to fully recover from the jolt it received on December 13 when Parliament House, the most prominent symbol of Indian democracy, was attacked. The Taj is the most preferred destination for millions of tourists every year even when the country is one of the top targets of terrorists. India earns millions of rupees from international tourism annually and the Taj contributes to it considerably, directly and indirectly. The unique monument has a great propaganda value, the prime motive of any terrorist outfit. Yet security remains the most neglected aspect of its upkeep. Mughal emperor Shahjahan, who built the Taj in the seventeenth century as a tribute to the memory of his second wife, Mumtaz Mahal, who died in childbirth, must be turning in his grave. The security personnel at the Taj admit that they are handicapped to do their job because there are no alarm systems, light towers and close circuit monitoring cameras. The PAC (Provincial Armed Constabulary) jawans posted behind the Taj walls reportedly take their duty of night patrolling in boats very casually. They mostly skip this duty on the pretext that the Yamuna, the river that cradles the Taj, does not have enough water for months every year. The Archaeological Survey of India must take the matter seriously as it is ultimately the responsibility of this organisation to protect the architectural marvel from all angles. According to one report, a full PAC company posted in front of the western gate of the Taj was removed some time ago. The police authorities, however, assure that an exercise is on for "redesigning" the security at the monument. One hopes the scheme is finalised quickly for its implementation before any serious damage is done to the Taj. Greatest Briton
of all time Sir Winston Churchill’s selection as the “Greatest Briton of all time” by the people in a poll conducted by the BBC is an eloquent tribute to an outstanding statesman. His remarkable leadership and political acumen, particularly demonstrated during the World War II, have helped Churchill to top the poll, defeating such veterans as William Shakespeare (second greatest Briton), Lord Nelson (third greatest Briton), Sir Issac Newton, Michael Faraday, Alexander Fleming, Charles Darwin and Florence Nightingale. Churchill’s face with his trademark hat and cigar, spotted bow tie and a watch chain slung across his black waistcoat, is instantly recognisable to every generation. His very name carries a spark that can be felt by everyone. Interestingly, Churchill was no born genius or leader. At Harrow, he showed no scholastic ability. At best, he could learn poetry by heart. He couldn’t master Latin and never rose above the Junior School. However, he suddenly matured and showed sparks of brilliance after he was taught by a coach at Sandhurst. He did well in military studies and evinced keen interest in his father Lord Radolph’s political career, his schemes of social reform and efforts to turn the Tories into a progressive party. Born at Blenheim Palace on November 30, 1874, Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill had an eventful career. His assumption of office as Prime Minister of Great Britain during 1940-45 (he had another stint during 1951-55) was the climax to his 40 long years of service in the House of Commons, during which time he changed his views and his support to the Conservatives and Liberals. It was during the years of the World War II that his steadfast and courageous leadership in the hour of Great Britain’s “greatest peril” captured the imagination of the people, giving him a unique place in world history. Like any other leader, Churchill too had his ups and downs. Yet war was his “native air”. In 1940, when there was a massive German thrust across the Ardennes, the British and French forces advanced to the aid of the Belgians and Dutch, followed by the surrender of Holland and Belgium, Churchill declared in the House of Commons: “I have nothing to offer but blood, tears, toil and sweat”. He spoke to the heart of the nation, which welcomed his tone of unyielding defiance. The supreme moment in Churchill’s career was when enthusiastic crowds cheered him as the “Hero leader” of the conflict after German armies surrendered one after the other and the war in Europe was over on May 8, 1945. King George VI proposed to honour him by conferring a knighthood, but Churchill declined as he thought it could mark an end to his political aspirations. He became Prime Minister for the second time in 1951. In 1953, Queen Elizabeth II honoured him as the Knight of the Garter. He resigned office in 1955 as he felt that the stress of the war years and the political struggle which followed had taken their toll of his health. He, of course, bid farewell to Parliament only in 1964. Churchill was a brilliant orator, prolific writer and master craftsman. He received the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1953, the year before his sixth and final volume of “The Second World War” appeared. His four-volume “A history of the English-speaking people” was published during the years of his retirement. Churchill died in January,1965. But he is continued to be remembered as a “soldier-citizen” whose courage and eloquence sustained and inspired Britons in their darkest hour. |
Footprints on sands of time When we say “life sublime”, we mean elevation of life to the highest point through thought, conduct and character. For life to be sublime, it is necessary that there should also be a “wretched life”. The spring season is so called because we contrast it with the preceding autumn and the following summer. We can distinguish good from bad only by contrasting the two. There are two categories of men. One is God-conscious and the other is God-ignorant. The God-conscious strive to serve society and set examples for others. The God-ignorant create difficulties for society. The former act selflessly and the latter selfishly. The attitude of the former is constructive and that of the latter destructive. God is one, God is indivisible. He dwells in every living cell and every particle of the universe. He does not discriminate between his creations. Yet different men adopt different ways of life. Man is the best creation of God. He blessed man with the standing posture, free use of his limbs, power of thinking, speech, memory etc. To activate and enable him to take advantage of these faculties, God granted man another faculty, intellect, the power of judgement. Man was fascinated by the beauty of nature and became curious to know who created this world, who manages and maintains it. He observed that everything was governed by time, space and matter and was mortal. The creator of the universe could not be mortal. Man recognised God and realised that he should also act like God for the benefit of his fellow beings without any reward. Thus man became God-conscious and acted for the advantage of mankind, to identify himself with God. The God-conscious man produced saints who gave us the scriptures, poetry, language and literature. The same God-conscious man produced great men like the Buddha, Christ, Mohammad and Guru Nanak who gave us different religions and taught us to be kind to others, to help everyone, and to come out of ignorance into the light of knowledge. Lives of such great men are sublime because they have left their footprints on the sands of time in the form of institutions that guide us in our day-to-day life. There have been reformers like Martin Luther, Raja Ram Mohan Roy, Swami Dayanand Saraswati and Swami Vivekananda who pulled the masses out of ignorance and made them God-conscious. There have been philosophers, scientists, artists, educationists who have helped society to progress. On the other hand, the God-ignorant man failed to recognise God and was lost in the lust and comfort offered by worldly things. Due to excessive indulgence in lust, he was overtaken by anger and malevolence which destroyed his intelligence and wisdom and he became bestial. The God-ignorant man produced savages like Chengez Khan and Timur, conquerers like Alexander and Napoleon and dictators like Hitler. They are not liked by the masses because whatever they did was not for the betterment of society but was an attempt to dominate society. They too have left their footprints on the sands of time but only the God-ignorant attempt to follow in their footsteps. In our times, we have the terrorists, smugglers, blackmarketeers, and others who fall in the God-ignorant category. Such people are detested, condemned and hated, yet society endures them. Making life sublime is not the monopoly of a few. Everyone can make an effort to make his life sublime. It is a kind of a marathon in which all scramble to reach the highest point. Some reach the goal and establish institutions. Others drop at various points. Lives of all such persons are sublime. They leave behind their footprints on the sands of time for the masses to take advantage of. Society persists because God-conscious man exists and leads others by virtue of his life sublime. |
|
A view of war from border The cost of a war may be calculated, but the ravages it wreaks in terms of human loss and dislocation are immeasurable and last long. By suspending the rail and bus services to Lahore,
recalling the High Commissioner to Islamabad and carrying out a military buildup on the border, India might have conveyed to Pakistan in particular and the world in general the seriousness with which it viewed the December 13 attack on Parliament, but it has imposed a heavy economic cost on the people in the border belt. Why should they alone bear the burden of the Vajpayee government’s attempts to shed its soft image, especially when it is widely believed that war is not on its agenda. Having suffered two wars with Pakistan, the border area residents, taking no chances, have abandoned their home, picking whatever belongings they could afford to carry in extreme winter to live with their relatives in safer places or in gurdwaras and temples. They have left males behind to look after cattle and do routine agricultural chores. There are reports that the Army has asked the farmers not to irrigate the fields on the border, which means letting the wheat crop wither in the absence of any rain, and cut down the standing sugarcane crop. What support they will be left with and what compensation, if any, will reach them can be well imagined. Among the serious casualities will be children’s education, never a priority even in peace time. Few realise the life-long handicap that lack of education inflicts on children. For record, the Punjab Government has set up a few camps and arranged foodgrains for the “refugee families” (feel the pain of the words) in
the border districts. But all know how helpful government employees can be. Besides, it is not in the proud Punjabi’s character to extend his hands for food; he would prefer to die of starvation or go to a nearby gurdwara to eat, but not to an arrogant and usually corrupt employee. The cruellest of all, but hardly surprising, is the conduct of Punjab politicians. All of them are engaged in political manoeuvers, lobbying for the party ticket or convassing. None has time for the unfortunate homeless. No leader of the Badal government has uttered a word against the war hysteria or expressed sympathy for the victims of a pre-war situation, leave alone visit them. Mr S.S. Mann is the only Akali leader perhaps who has come out openly against war. Others’ silence is baffling. If youths flock in large numbers to Army recruitment camps, as they did in Jalandhar recently and the event was highlighted on TV, it is not because they are more patriotic than others, but because of unemployment and poverty. War dogs who talk of teaching Pakistan a lesson themselves need a lesson on horrors of war. It is a folly to assume that war will be confined to the border. Pakistani missiles can reach up to 1,500 miles and their military ruler would be the first to press the N-button, if pushed to a corner. Not many will survive to tell first-hand experiences of a nuclear war. It does not require more than common sense to realise that war cannot end terrorism, for which attacks have to be targeted. In the political rhetoric after the attack on Parliament what has got buried is the chilling message given out, albeit unwittingly, by the political leadership. That is, if terrorists keep killing innocent Kashmiris, Indian soldiers and securitymen, it is bad but not bad enough; but if politicians, much less respected, are targeted, a war could follow. The immediate economic consequences of a war or a prolonged war-like situation will be ; FDI will either slow down or stop, existing investments will be jeopardised, the defence budget will shoot up, development work will halt. For more details, look at Afghanistan, reduced to a stone age with a crippled population. |
The use of honey can heal wounds: study Age-old honey is capable of healing various kinds of wounds, a 10-year detailed clinical study has concluded. A clinical study carried out on 345-patients at “Bannerji Bio-medical Research Centre” in West Bengal using honey on different and complicated wounds had given excellent results in healing them, Dr Probhas Banerjee of the foundation said at the Indian Science Congress. The studies had earlier been highly successful on animals, he said. Honey was used among patients suffering from burns, wounds, abscess, bedsores, diabetic ulcers and traumatic ulcers, he said, adding that the results were highly encouraging. Controlled clinical trials were conducted in a fixed operation theatre with the same group of workers using the same type and brand of sutures and bandages. The patients were divided into two groups and while in one of them normal saline washing without any topical agent was used, in the other group honey was applied topically, he said. It was discovered that physical characteristics of the wounds including “collagen synthesis” and “tensile strength” improved in the second group and both clinical and radical cure was noticed. The use of honey on a large surface also resulted in a good terrain for grafting, the expert said. Having round head may trigger snoring Researchers say people with round heads are at greater risk of sleep apnoea and chronic snoring than those without. They have found those with thinner faces face less risk of suffering from apnoea, an interruption of breathing during sleep that causes loud snoring. The orthodontics team in Cleveland, US, compared head shapes of 60 snorers and 60 people with no history of snoring. Using X-ray, they measured the distance from teeth to esophagus, nose to nasal passage and cheek to jaw to create a “craniofacial risk index”. A researcher with no knowledge of the patients’ snoring history was then able to predict sleep aponea problems three out of four times using the index. “As the head gets relatively wider, the airway becomes relatively narrower from front to back,” said Dr Mark Hans, Chairman of Orthodontics at Case Western Reserve University School of Dentistry. Apnoea causes daytime sleepiness and can lead to high blood pressure and cardiovascular problems. The index may eventually be used to screen people to determine if they should undergo testing for sleep apnoea, says Dr Steven Feinsilver, a sleep specialist at North Shore University Hospital in Manhasset, New York State. He said fewer than 10 per cent of people with sleep apnoea are being treated.
Agencies |
|
It is good neither to eat flesh, not to drink wine, nor anything whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended or is made weak. — Roman, 14.21 *** I will have mercy and not sacrifice. — Mathew, 9.13 *** Gaining inner balance has much to do with controlling anger. Anger is a disabling emotion that produces measurable physical sensations, such as an increase in pulse rate and a rise in blood pressure. An explosion of anger may make you feel better briefly but it will disguise the real problem by becoming an issue in itself. If you explode unreasonable at a person or in a situation question the root of it. *** You have the right to make genuine mistakes without feeling guilty. *** A positive outlook and the ability to remain calm under pressure are likely to produce positive responses in your colleagues, which in turn will reduce the presence of stress in your team or workplace. — Tim Hindle, Reducing Stress *** Each soul is potentially divine. The goal is to manifest this divinity within by controlling nature, external and internal. Do this either by work or worship or psychic control, or philosophy — by one or more or all these — and be free. This is the whole of religion. Doctrines or dogmas or rituals or books or temples or forms are but secondary details. — Swami Vivekananda. Prolegomena to Raja Yoga *** Remember, no one is your enemy. Your wanton senses, your subdued mind and your perverted reason alone are your enemies. *** Convert a foe into a friend by your goodwill. — Hanumanprasad Poddar, How to Attain Eternal Happiness, 25 |
 |
| Punjab | Haryana | Jammu & Kashmir | Himachal Pradesh | Regional Briefs | Nation | Editorial | | Business | Sport | World | Mailbag | In Spotlight | Chandigarh Tribune | Ludhiana Tribune 50 years of Independence | Tercentenary Celebrations | | 121 Years of Trust | Calendar | Weather | Archive | Subscribe | Suggestion | E-mail | |
