The city of Edmonton, Alberta appears to be taking a pro-active effort in reducing noise pollution for its citizens.

Read the entire National Post Article: Edmonton Bylaw Aims to Reduce Motorcycle Noise

“Edmonton’s city council is believed to be the first in North America to pass a bylaw requiring the muffling of motorcycle noise. Riders will be fined $250 if their motorcycles exceed 92 decibels while idling or 96 decibels while engaged.”

Documented hearing loss can start after only an hour and half at 92dB and just under half an hour at 96dB.  Whether or not the proposed bylaw is regulating public conscious seems to be up for debate, however the health effects of lowing noise levels cannot be ignored.

If the noise levels mentioned in the bylaw were found on a workplace, the employer would be obligated under legislation to either provide satisfactory hearing protection to workers or to reduce the noise level to below 85dB.  If such methods are in place for the workplace it seems that perhaps the same restrictions should be put in place for the general public.  After all, employees can choose for whom they work, but pedestrians cannot choose what vehicle is idling beside them at a red light!

For many people noise is not seen as a viable danger or something that needs to be worried about.  In our culture personal hearing is perpetually put in danger and not only with motorcycles think about these other examples:

• Rock Concerts
• Car Stereo Systems
• Hunting
• Mowing the law
• Bars/Nightclubs
• MP3 players that utilize earbuds

For most people recreational activities are not view as dangerous.  Many people are sure to wear all the proper protective equipment when on the job site, but then go home, mow the lawn and head out to concert without giving a second thought to their health and safety.

I am interested to see what effect this newly passed bylaw will have on the rest of the country.  Even if citizens do not agree with the bylaw it will at least raise awareness that noise pollution is a real problem.

To any bikers who may be reading this and are interested in their hearing health, SureHire is offering custom moulded hearing protection.  Custom moulded ear plugs are ideal for recreational activities and offer CSA compliant hearing protection.  Call 1-866-944-4473 for more information.

If you would like more information about the effects of hearing loss and hearing protection, please call 1-866-944-4473.

]]> http://www.surehire.ca/blog/?feed=rss2&p=389 http://www.surehire.ca/blog/?p=385 http://www.surehire.ca/blog/?p=385#comments Mon, 10 May 2010 14:00:05 +0000 Rachel http://www.surehire.ca/blog/?p=385 Please watch this video and pass it along.  After watching this for the first time, I felt nauseous - so many lives have been destroyed by impaired driving.  STAY SAFE.

WARNING: Graphic Images, Drug and Alcohol Use.

TAC Drunk Driving Campaign Video

http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/05/26/addiction-new-research-suggests-its-a-choice/

When I first read the title of the Macleans article, “Addiction: New research suggests it’s a choice”,  I had made up my mind that this article would either be biased, or at the very least on the fringe of modern psychology.  However, after reading the theory of Gene Heyman my thoughts may have shifted.

The premise of this article is that fully functioning individuals who make the choice to engage in drug use and then continue to use the drug are doing so in a completely voluntary manner.  Mr. Heyman suggests that the majority of drug users who exhibit addict like behaviour in their teens and twenties, are clean and sober by the time that they reach 30.

I am leery to completely acknowledge Mr. Heyman’s hypothesis as valid, but as with most theories, there does appear to be a grain of truth.  Drug use does have the tendency to have people acting in a “victim like matter”.  If society has the perception that those who use drugs cannot control their actions, it makes it easy for someone who is caught in the cycle of drug or alcohol abuse to state that they have a physical disease and therefore need not take personal action or have personal accountability.  When you think you’re beyond help, you probably won’t try or if you attempt to receive help with the underlying belief that it will not be effective, it probably won’t be.

I am a firm believer that everyone makes choices in life by free will – at least initially.  I am also a believer in the fact that certain people are more susceptible to certain ways of life, whether it be through genetics or the way in which they were raised.  There are many people who have used cocaine one time, and only one time without developing an “addiction”.  There are also many people who’s addiction began by using cocaine just the one time and it turned into a downhill spiral.  A conscious choice to use cocaine was made the first time, but I tend to think that every time thereafter becomes less and less conscious and more of a reflex.

Whether addiction is a choice or not, it is still a real problem.  Perhaps understanding how addiction works will provide more effective treatment options for those who struggle with substance abuse.  A personal choice to be self-destructive can and should be treated entirely differently than a physical disease.  I would like to see independent research done into Mr. Heyman’s theories.  If additional doctors find the same conclusion, it is time to re-evaluate current rehabilitation methods.  If more specific rehab can be offered, recurring patients may be helped much sooner into the process.

Only time will tell.

Corey Haim

80’s child star Corey Haim was pronounced dead in his mother’s California apartment on March 10^th after a long struggle with substance abuse.

Read the full story here:

http://www.popeater.com/2010/03/10/corey-haim-dies-38/

It continues to concern me that celebrity after celebrity (Jimi Hendrix, Marilyn Monroe, Elvis Presley, Anna Nicole Smith, Heath Ledger, Britney Murphy, DJ AM, Michael Jackson, Corey Haim, etc.) have been dying prematurely due to PRESCRIPTION drug abuse.

Just because a doctor prescribes a drug to you, it does not mean that it is 100% safe. Many prescription drugs have adverse side effects, many of them are addictive and when taken more than the prescribed dosage or combining them with other prescriptions, many of them can be fatal. Prescription drugs, while used for medical purposes can be helpful, but prescriptions continue to move out of the realm of medicine and into the realm of addiction and even street drugs. Currently, some prescription medications (oxycontin for example) are being sold for $20.00 per pill on the street.

Prescription drug abuse is big business. Police, during the investigation of the death of Corey Haim discovered that several of Corey’s prescriptions were tied to an illegal prescription drug ring. A quote from People Magazine states that “The ring orders prescription pads from vendors using stolen doctor identities, the AG’s office said in a statement Friday. The pads are then either sold on the street to addicts or to people who are paid to fill the prescription and then sell the drugs on the underground market.” See the
full article below:

http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20351491,00.html

It appears that the latest celebrity craze of rehab (made even more popular by shows such as Celebrity Rehab and Intervention) is on the rise. My hope is that, like most

celebrity trends, the general public will begin to realize that drugs can destroy lives and that seeking treatment is a positive step.  People are quick to point fingers when someone dies from overdose, labelling them a bad or weak person, but the truth is that most of these people have battled for years on end against an addiction that has taken over their entire life. It is not as easy as saying “Just stop taking pills.” Prescription pills are widely available, publicly accepted, affordable and can be highly addictive. The affect that they can have on the lives of those addicted is profound and tragic.

After this recent string of celebrity deaths, I hope that Hollywood makes the first step to acknowledge that prescription drug abuse is a serious problem rather than vilifying those who struggle with addiction. If Hollywood takes the first step, it may trickle down to the general public admitting that there is a serious prescription drug problem in North America.

Qualifier: I will note that toxicology reports have not yet been released in the death of Corey Haim and the rumors of prescription overdose are conjecture at this point.

A Canadian company, Sober Steering Sensors, is working on technology that makes use of chemical sensors built into steering wheels to detect the gas byproducts of alcohol through the skin of drivers. This transdermal technology, developed in conjunction with California-based Seacoast Science, has been garnering interest.

Sober Steering recently received $1.5 Million from the Ontario government’s Innovation Demonstration Fund to produce prototypes and test them later this year in about 200 fleet vehicles, such as transport trucks and buses.

Ignition interlock systems require drivers to blow into a breathalyzer before starting the car. If the breath test system registers alcohol above the legal limit, the vehicle will not start. Interlock devices have been criticized because they also require drivers to blow into the device after driving for a period of time, so drivers must be able to safely pull over and repeat the test when the machine tells them to. On the other hand, if drivers are tested through the steering wheel, all that would be needed when periodic re-testing is required is to keep their hands on the wheel.

Ignition interlock systems are also expensive, costing up to approximately $2,000 per vehicle, as opposed to an estimated $200 for the Sober Steering solution. Stay tuned for more information on this technology.

If this technology works properly, the impact that this device will have on impaired driving, and DUI convictions will be tremendous.  The current breathalyzer, that essentially “locks down” a vehicle until a sufficient breath alcohol sample is given has several flaws that this technology looks to correct.  The first is that a driver could have anyone blow into the unit for them to start the vehicle, the second, is that typically the unit has no way to detect if a person is drinking while they are driving.  This could mean that the driver would initially be able to pass the breath test to start their ignition, but if they started drinking a beer while driving, they would still be impaired and easily have found a “short cut” to their sober driving limitations.

I hope that this technology is embraced and that the cost is reduced to make this an affordable solution.  The less drunk drivers on the road is a better situation for us all.  The only question that I am left to ponder is . . . . what happens if you are wearing gloves?

An Ohio politician recently introduced a bill that would require random drug testing of Ohio Medicaid recipients.  House Bill 440 proposes that an adult Medicaid recipient would have their Medicaid services terminated for six months each time;

1)      The recipient fails to comply with random drug and alcohol testing;

2)      The recipient fails to complete a treatment program following a determination of a drug and/or alcohol problem or;

3)      The recipient had a second positive drug and or alcohol test.

Medicaid is a state and federally funded health program providing benefits to “low income” and “medically vulnerable” people.

This got me thinking about what would happen if such a bill was proposed in Alberta; every adult Albertan receiving Alberta Health Care would be subject to a random drug and alcohol test.

We could randomly drug test all adult Albertans; “weed out” those people who are taxing the health care system, punish them by taking away their and encourage them to go to rehab.   As a tax paying Albertan, why wouldn’t I be in favour of this? Reward those who are drug free, lighten the load on the already burdened health care system and feel good about offering rehab services to addicts.

Given this line of thinking, should we not then consider taking health care away from cigarette smokers, obese adults…heck… even adults who don’t exercise according to the Canadian Physical Activity guidelines?

While I believe it makes sense to provide rehabilitation services to those people who may have a substance abuse problem, it doesn’t make sense to take away basic health care services.  In essence, this would probably lead to further health problems for these individuals.  Desperate times call for desperate measures; these individuals may resort to stealing in order to have money to care for themselves.

Clearly this bill would not pass in Canada.  I’d like to think that Albertans are a little more liberal than that, or at least are educated enough to realize this isn’t the answer to the problem.  Then again, I wouldn’t put it past a number of people who would probably support the idea in the ever increasingly “me first” climate we live in today.

“various prescriptions were found in the home — written for Brittany Murphy, husband Simon Monjack, and Brittany’s mom. One source says, “There were a lot … a lot of prescriptions in the house. . . . . . .A check of the nightstands revealed large amounts of prescription medication in the decedent’s name. Also noted were numerous empty prescription medication bottles in the decedent’s husband’s name, the decedent’s mother’s name and unidentified third party names.

According to the notes, the medications included Topamax (anti-seizure meds also to prevent migraines), Methylprednisolone (anti-inflammatory), Fluoxetine (depression med), Klonopin (anxiety med), Carbamazepine (treats Diabetic symptoms and is also a bipolar med), Ativan (anxiety med), Vicoprofen (pain reliever), Propranolol (hypertension, used to prevent heart attacks), Biaxin (antibiotic), Hydrocodone (pain med) and miscellaneous vitamins.

The notes say, “No alcohol containers, paraphernalia or illegal drugs were discovered.”

Source: TMZ

Although the coroner’s report has not yet been released, the amount of prescription medications found in the residence is alarming.

There is still a perception that prescription drugs help people and do not harm them.  However, virtually every illegal “street drug” in existence today started out in the medical realm.  Examples of this include Cocaine, “Special K” and Amphetamines.  The reason that these drugs moved away from the medical realm is that there were substantial negative side-effects in utilizing them.  With that being said, just because something is prescribed by a doctor, it does not mean that it cannot hurt you.

Many prescription drugs are highly addictive and their use needs to be monitored by a qualified medical professional.  “Doctor Shopping” (going from doctor to doctor to get your prescriptions filled so that the doctors are  not aware of the volume of prescriptions you re taking) and using other people’s medications (even borrowing one Tylenol 3 because you have a headache) are growing in popularity, with detrimental side effects.  Britney Murphy may be the newest in the growing list of celebrity deaths, including DJ AM, Heath Ledger and Michael Jackson due to prescription drug use.

Whether celebrities set the trend, or simply reflect the trend, the reality is that people are dying from prescription pain killer addiction every day.   Just because a substance is prescribed by a doctor, that does not mean that it is not addictive, or that it cannot be abused.  Cocaine used to be widely prescribed for medical reasons and now it is relegated to the street, perhaps Oxycontin is the next medical drug to be deemed too risky for medical benefit and sold only as an illegal substance.  Any type of drug use and abuse, whether or prescription or not comes with consequences.

I wanted to wish everyone a Merry Christmas this holiday season.

Party season is in full swing and I know that everyone has been told before, but drinking and driving do not mix. There is always an alternative. As an employer, if you have alcohol at work related functions, be sure you practise due diligence. Employers can potentially face civil liability when hosting, organizing or sponsoring events that involve alcohol.

I have mentioned this topic earlier in a newsletter, but with the information as important as it is, I want to re-iterate it here.

Provider Liability

Provider liability occurs when those who provide, serve or make alcohol available to a person who they know or should know is already intoxicated.  Provider liability does not prevent individuals from being hosts and serving alcohol.  The case of Jacobsen vs. Nike Canada Ltd. is one example of legal precedent that has been established in court.  

Supervisors purchased and consumed dinner, soft drinks and 36 beers with Nike employees towards the end of a 16 hour workday.  The plaintiff, a 19 year old, consumed at least eight beers during this time in which he would have been displaying obvious signs of intoxication.

After leaving work, he went to a bar where he consumed at least three more drinks before falling asleep while driving home.  His accident left him a quadriplegic.  While the plaintiff acknowledged his own negligence, the court found Nike Canada liable for 75% of damages for two reasons:

1.  Nike, as an alcohol provider, had a duty to monitor its employees’ consumption and take steps to prevent them from driving when they knew, or should have known that their employees were likely impaired.  This is the same standard applied to a licensed commercial establishment.

2.  Nike had a duty to maintain a safe workplace.  Nike required workers to bring their cars to work and knew they would be driving home.  In effect, drinking and driving was made part of the working conditions that day.

Be safe and enjoy this holiday season. If you would like more information about employer liability feel free to call SureHire at 1-866-944-HIRE (4473). If you would like to read the entire Christmas newsletter for SureHire, that discusses employer liability: SureNews: Alcohol Liability Issue

If I don’t get another blog out before January, Happy New Years and all the best in 2010 to all the readers!

Bottle to Throttle: Was Pilot Flying Drunk?

As suggested in the video, perhaps having a breathalyzer in the cock-pick is the way to go.  It appears as if the honour system is no longer working.

The United States Department of Transportation, enforces a breath alcohol limit of 0.02 for all commercial transportation, including airline pilots.  Although this limit is significantly lower than the legal limit for non-commercial vehicles, alcohol effects are still present.

As a passenger, I would hope that my pilot and all airline personnel are at 0.00.  Commercial drivers and pilots, that transport passengers have the lives of everyone aboard in their hands every time they drive/fly.  Should they not be held to a greater standard?

The federal justice minister is considering a new law that would allow police to conduct random breathalyzer tests on drivers, regardless of whether they suspect motorists have been drinking.

Mothers Against Drunk Driving says the federal government is considering adopting random breathalyzer testing, following the June 2009 recommendation of a House of Commons justice committee. (CBC)

Justice Minister Rob Nicholson raised the prospect recently at a meeting of Mothers Against Drunk Driving, according to MADD chief executive Andrew Murie.

If random testing were to be adopted, it would be a major change to Canada’s 40-year-old breathalyzer legislation, which stipulates that police may only administer a test if they suspect a driver has been drinking.

In June, a House of Commons parliamentary committee recommended changing the legislation to allow for random testing, arguing it is an effective deterrent.

The change would also bring Canada in line with a number of other countries in Europe and countries like Australia, which have adopted similar measures.

Murie said its biggest selling point is that it improves road safety, with drunk driving fatalities dropping 36 per cent in Australia after legislation was introduced, and 23 per cent in Ireland when it made the change.

Tests could infringe on civil liberties

Justice Minister Rob Nicholson introduced legislation in 2008 that compelled drivers stopped by police to take a roadside test, such as walking a straight line. (Adrian Wyld/Canadian Press)

“In the European Union, they demand that their countries, as part of membership for road safety, have sophisticated random breath testing because of the difference it’s made in lives saved,” he told CBC News.

Murie said the change would allow police at roadblocks to conduct about three times as many breathalyzer tests because they would not need to spend time determining whether there is “reasonable” suspicion a driver has been drinking.

The issue for civil libertarians, however, is that changing the law to allow random testing would be a violation of a person’s right to protection against unreasonable search and seizure.

“It has no real place in a democratic society,” said Richard Rosenberg of the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association.

“Giving police power to act on a whim is not something we want in an open democratic society.”

Liberal MP Ujjal Dosanjh, the former attorney general of British Columbia and a member of the House justice committee, said the question of whether any legislation would be allowable under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms would come down to implementation.

Constraints on police power needed: MP

“It remains to be seen what the actual legislation is when the minister brings it forward because we want to make sure that it’s appropriately constrained and it’s not too much of an infringement on civil liberties,” Dosanjh told CBC News.

Dosanjh said the charter does allow for constraints on rights when they are deemed reasonable, but said he would need to see how those constraints are implemented before judging any future legislation.

“For instance… I wouldn’t want the east side of Vancouver monitored more than the west side of Vancouver because there is a clear economic division in the city,” he said.

“We want to make sure that areas are not unnecessarily excessively focused on and that’s why I think that we need to make sure that the legislation is properly drafted with appropriate constraints and guidelines for the police,” he said.

But Dosanjh pointed out that driving is not a right itself, but rather a privilege subject to licences given by government authorities.

Nicholson could not be reached for comment.