Posted on 03/24/2014 8:47:05 AM PDT by LowTaxesEqualsProsperity
The bodies of thousands of aborted and miscarried babies were incinerated as clinical waste, with some even used to heat hospitals, an investigation has found. Ten NHS trusts have admitted burning foetal remains alongside other rubbish while two others used the bodies in ‘waste-to-energy’ plants which generate power for heat. Last night the Department of Health issued an instant ban on the practice which health minister Dr Dan Poulter branded ‘totally unacceptable.’ The remains of more than 15,000 babies were incinerated as 'clinical waste' by hospitals in Britain with some used in 'waste to energy' plants At least 15,500 foetal remains were incinerated by 27 NHS trusts over the last two years alone, Channel 4’s Dispatches discovered. The programme, which will air tonight, found that parents who lose children in early pregnancy were often treated without compassion and were not consulted about what they wanted to happen to the remains. One of the country’s leading hospitals, Addenbrooke’s in Cambridge, incinerated 797 babies below 13 weeks gestation at their own ‘waste to energy’ plant. The mothers were told the remains had been ‘cremated.’ Another ‘waste to energy’ facility at Ipswich Hospital, operated by a private contractor, incinerated 1,101 foetal remains between 2011 and 2013. They were brought in from another hospital before being burned, generating energy for the hospital site. Ipswich Hospital itself disposes of remains by cremation. “This practice is totally unacceptable,” said Dr Poulter. “While the vast majority of hospitals are acting in the appropriate way, that must be the case for all hospitals and the Human Tissue Authority has now been asked to ensure that it acts on this issue without delay.” Sir Bruce Keogh, NHS Medical Director, has written to all NHS trusts to tell them the practice must stop.
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
Burning babies for fuel is evil. Hitler would be proud.
I suppose if the hospitals are prevented from burning them, we’ll hear that they are being processed into soap.
What accusation? Ten of the NHS Trusts admit to burning aborted and still birth "along with other rubbish". And two admit to using same for "waste to energy incinerators"
Are you wandering down some side street?
My point is purely technical, and you may consider it irrelevant.
The bodies do not contribute to the heating of the hospitals, since their combustion requires more energy than they contribute.
Your first and third statements are demonstrably false. (Your second statement is a little garbled - did you mean to say that it takes more fuel? - so I won't comment upon it.)
The combustion of human remains is without question exothermic, i.e., it yields a net plus of calories (energy).
To be sure, some initial input of energy is necessary to get the process started - and, in fact, because of the high water content of human bodies, the process may not even be self-sustaining (depending upon how well-designed the combustion chamber is; as little heat as possible should be allowed to escape through the chimney - rather, the flue should be equipped for heat recovery, this recovered heat then being returned to the combustion chamber), but it still has a net energy yield.
Consider: Carnivores eat animal cadavers, and "burn" them in their digestive tracts (in a very inefficient process that doesn't even yield ash as a final product, but rather feces which themselves still have a relatively high caloric content) - yet still don't starve, which they would if it were an endothermic ("energy-consuming") reaction.
Regards,
“Cameron is a sick, twisted and derange God-hating scumbag.”
There is no evidence at all that Cameron knew anything about this practice. And steps are being taken by his gov’t department to stop the practice. Your statement is over the top and without warrant. Attack what was being done, but save your vitriol for the act, not a personal attack on the Prime Minister. It’s unfair, in particular the God-hating part of your comment. You don’t know his personal beliefs from an Adam’s apple.
“Last night the Department of Health issued an instant ban on the practice which health minister Dr Dan Poulter branded ‘totally unacceptable.’”
I would also like to point out the obvious.
The sin and crime is the killing of innocents, not the method by which they dispose of the body.
Just as with the outcry over using fetal tissue in scientific experiments. While it may be disturbing, it is by comparison just not an issue.
Murder is the most serious of all crimes in most jurisdictions, but in many states improper disposal of a body is only a misdemeanor.
“You don’t know his personal beliefs”
oh, yeah. Pro-homo David is such an enigma. I just can’t figure his stance on God out!
When are people going to stop fooling themselves? I thought it might end when it was uncovered that leading members of the British parliament were involved with child molester-advocacy groups, but apparently not.
I’m sure Mr. Poulter finds it ‘totally unacceptable’ now they’ve been caught. These scumbags put no value on human life. Zero. Palin talked about death panels, well this isn’t even a panel. It’s a machine for mass murder. All this scandal tells them is they need more brainwashing in the schools and colleges so they can do this in the future without any stink. As already stated, I can’t imagine Anjem Choudary’s vision for the future of the UK is any worse than this. Totally depraved and below any semblance of human dignity.
“Tophet is Moloch, which was made of brass; and they heated him from his lower parts; and his hands being stretched out, and made hot, they put the child between his hands, and it was burnt; when it vehemently cried out; but the priests beat a drum, that the father might not hear the voice of his son, and his heart might not be moved.”
(Moloch is sometimes known as Baal-Moloch, Cronus, Kronos, Saturn, and other pagan names.)
Lampshades.
Hitler had the skins of Jews used to make lampshades.
The old world returns as we sacrifice our children to molech and baal.
With western civilizations utter depravity, vulgar and evil behavior thanks to the liberal left. Soon humanity will owe Sodom and Gomorrah apologies for ever linking their names with pure evil and perversion as they look like civilizations of skittles and unicorns compared to our slide into the abyss.
Good points.
100 pound person, 60 pounds of water, 1150 btus per pound to vaporize the water = 69,000 btus.
40 pounds of dry matter left. Let us assume, possibly inaccurately but no doubt conservatively, that one pound of dry human matter produces as much heat as dry wood when burned, about 8600 btus. Therefore, the 40 pounds of dry matter should produce about 344,000 btus, leaving about 275,000 after vaporization of the water to contribute to the heating of the building, assuming all heat is captured, which of course it isn’t.
So I appear to have been in error. Human bodies can be used as a source of fuel. I think I jumped to this conclusion because of the very large amounts of fuel used in cremation. But of course the purpose of cremation is not to provide energy, it’s to reduce the body to as small an amount of ash as possible, so they pour on the fuel well beyond what is needed just to burn the body.
Mea culpa for jumping to conclusions. In my partial defense, I think it is logical to expect that the actual contribution of baby corpses to heating of the facility is minimal.
S.L. #1. Probably because the accusation isn’t true.
S.L. #2. My point is purely technical, and you may consider it irrelevant.
The bodies do not contribute to the heating of the hospitals, since their combustion requires more energy than they contribute.
_______________________________________
Ahhh, I understand now. You make a pedantic retort to a reader’s reaction to the horror to the NHS admitted and we’re off to tricycle races about the technical aspects of crematoria efficiency and how poorly the human corpse burns. Rather beside the main point though. The question asked was, “what accusation?”
Simple two words. Unanswered.
Almost amusing. Don’t get caught watering down the sherry in the faculty lounge. Ta-ta
My real point, as expressed in several posts of this thread, is that the horror is the killing, not the method of disposal of the body, or whether the waste heat of cremation/incineration is used for some other useful purpose.
I suppose we get (understandably) wearied with trying to cut through the wall of euphemism erected around abortion. So we react with "horror" to what is by any reasonable standard no big deal. But it's a new revelation, and not "old news." Maybe it will cut through the wall for somebody somewhere.
But the horror of the Holocaust was the mass killing, not the fact that some of the bodies were somewhat inefficiently cremated. Had the SS used waste heat from the crematoria to heat their barracks, I fail to see why we should consider this adding much to the horror with which we should view the process.
LOL! And still you evade the simple question, “What accusation?”
Two words. Count ‘em up.
Whole lot easier than calculating BTUs per unit of body mass.
You really need to get a GPS for that tricycle of yours.
Aborted Babies Incinerated to Heat UK Hospitals
That headline is a factual inaccuracy. The babies are incinerated to dispose of them, along with other medical waste.
Some of the waste heat is captured and used to heat hospitals, according to the text.
But the purpose of the incineration is not to heat hospitals, it is to safely dispose of hazardous waste.
I don't approve of the process, but the headline implies strongly that babies are being used as cordwood, and that is factually incorrect.
I understand it is hyperbole used to make a point, but I stand behind my original claim that the accusation is inaccurate.
A baby is not hazardous waste, it’s a dead human being worthy of burial. Very sad story.
You know Sherman, I thought you were a fully socialized intelligent adult, aware that headline writers and copy writers were two distinct job categories and that it was unnecessary to belabor the point that hyperbole sells papers or garners web clicks. The body of the copy seemed to make it clear that the waste to energy incinerators were a means of disposing of the bodies, not that the bodies were a primary source of fuel. You must have been the dead zone at every dinner party you’ve ever attended. Try charting the frequency of those and see if you can spot a trend.
Incidentally, modern boilers with flue gas condensation systems can recover so much of the condensation heat of all of the water vapor contained (or chemically produced, by combustion) in the fuel that the temperature of the waste gas is lowered to about 45 °C. Thus, roughly the same amount of energy is released and recovered as would be when burning totally dehydrated fuel.
I would guess that, pound for pound, human bodies contain even more chemical energy than wood.
Regards,
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.