Another Fatality Massive Delays 11/2/2010

[whole diary]

[grahame]

Some figures ... depending on sources, there are between 70 ("suicides at stations") and 200 ("deaths on the track") per year in Great Britain.   The average for each one is 1489 delay minutes - so if there are 100 people on each train that's an annual delay of 56 years.  I'm not looking to draw any conclusion from that - just to apply an element of scale.   It's a huge and sensitive problem in all directions. 

Please bear in mind as you discuss this that we're all on a public forum.  Remember that on previous very different occassions when we reported / had reports on a death ....friends, family and colleagues of the person who passed away have found us. Everyone posting on this thread should do so in the knowledge that it's likely to be read by those who are far more closely involved than our posting members.

[moonrakerz]

I can answer that as a biologist.  True there are some diseases that can infect both humans and other animals, but you would be very unlikley to catch most of them from a dead animal.  Live animals are a low risk and dead animals even lower.  Whether it is TB or swineflu, a live animal sneezing on you is a slight risk, shovelling roadkill into a bag is not. 

Humans are different in that their blood can contain many pathogens that can infect other people.  HIV and Hepatitis are the main ones people worry about neither of which you could get from a badger.   No need to don body suits or cordon areas off, but wearing gloves before touching a body and safety specs/masks if any risk of splashing fluids getting into nose/mouth are sensible precautions not health and safety gone mad.  The same precautions apply after a road accident or indeed a nose-bleed in a public place.  Back at the depot trains may need to be presure washed with disinfectant by specialists before the regular maintainance guys can get to work.   

No need for biohazard precautions to slow recovery down but they can't just be ignored.   

In a rescue operation where there are survivors you might decide to dispense with some precautions and take some risk in order to save lives.  But if the victim is already dead there isn't any excuse to ignore the precautions. 

I wouldn't dream of questioning your expertise as a biologist ! But that isn't really the point I was trying to make.
Take HIV: Latest figures give 83,000 HIV sufferers in UK^▸ (United Kingdom), with a population of 62,000,000 - risk of meeting someone with HIV, pretty slim.

The problem is that the culture nowadays make the people at the "trackside" act as though there is a 100% of catching HIV. Risk analysis is something I have dealt with and it annoys me intensely when people quote "H & S" and "risk" when it is obvious that they do not have a clue what they are talking about - they just quote "soundbites" from the last Powerpoint show they saw !  This is what causes the delays - not the sensible precautions.

Much of it is rather like the person who is worried sick about dying in a 'plane crash but quite happily drives up the M4 to Heathrow without their seatbelt on ! They have read in the Daily Mail that flying is dangerous - so it must be !

[inspector_blakey]

From another scientist...

Don't forget it's not just HIV - although that's one of the more serious blood-borne illnesses, it's a very, very long way from being the only one. Sensible biohazard precautions when dealing with human blood and tissue are quite simply not over-zealous health and safety, or "political correctness gone mad". The danger of cross-infection is real, tangible but relatively easy to avoid by taking simple precautions.

[moonrakerz]

From another scientist...

Don't forget it's not just HIV

Hepatitis B (most common one) less than 1 in a thousand.................

[inspector_blakey]

Yes, hilarious isn't it?

Hepatitis B is a nasty illness. Given a 1:1000 chance of contracting it that could be avoided by wearing gloves and face protection, I'd take the protective equipment absolutely every time. And are you seriously suggesting that it's the most common blood-borne illness?

[IndustryInsider]

Not to mention that if you're a member of the emergency services dealing with these types of incidents on a regular basis, over your career all these 1 in 1000 chances suddenly shorten quite dramatically!

That being said, H&S^▸ (Health and Safety) rules are indeed bandied around unnecessarily in many areas of the way we live, but as Tim has given us all an eye-opener in the biological risks, I'm quite happy to concede that in this specific area the precautions are necessary.

[moonrakerz]

Yes, hilarious isn't it?

Hepatitis B is a nasty illness. Given a 1:1000 chance of contracting it that could be avoided by wearing gloves and face protection, I'd take the protective equipment absolutely every time. And are you seriously suggesting that it's the most common blood-borne illness?

Oh dear ! we do seem to have a lot of po faced people around at present.

The smiley face was merely to represent a semi humorous quick reply to the previous comment - not to insinuate that HIV or Hepatitis was "hilarious" - as you wrongly imply !
I did not suggest that Hepatitis B was the most common blood borne disease - just that variant B is the most common form of Hepatitis.
Perhaps you should read what I put, not what your own narrow view thought I might have put:     ( Smiley indicates that no ill-will meant ! - in case that is misunderstood too !)

Again, my main point is being mis-interpreted/ignored, I did not say anywhere that sensible precautions should not be taken, merely that rigid, dogmatic adherence to a plethora of mis-guided rules/regulations causes many more problems than an incident deserves.
I referred earlier in this thread to the car in the River Avon incident:  IF it really was the case that police officers stood on a river bank a few feet from a submerged car doing nothing for over 90 minutes because safety rules prevented them attempting to rescue a child in the vehicle............... do I have to say any more ?

[inspector_blakey]

IF it really was the case that police officers stood on a river bank a few feet from a submerged car doing nothing for over 90 minutes because safety rules prevented them attempting to rescue a child in the vehicle............... do I have to say any more ?

If that is indeed the case, then no you don't.

However, it's a completely different kettle of fish if that same event occurred because sensible safety guidelines were misinterpreted, misunderstood or just wrongly applied by the people involved. I know almost nothing about the incident you're describing so can't really make a relevant comment.

[johoare]

There was a further report, and a request for any information anyone might know, on the Maidenhead advertiser's website on Wednesday

http://www.maidenhead-advertiser.co.uk/news/article-14965-woman-killed-at-burnham-station-is-named/

[Henry]

 Sometimes it is not just ' a body on the line'.

[Chris from Nailsea]

I referred earlier in this thread to the car in the River Avon incident:  IF it really was the case that police officers stood on a river bank a few feet from a submerged car doing nothing for over 90 minutes because safety rules prevented them attempting to rescue a child in the vehicle............... do I have to say any more ?

At the risk of seeming 'po-faced' myself, I think such comments about the police officers involved are unfair. From the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page):

River Avon rescue police faced 'awful' conditions

Two police officers who pulled a six-year-old boy to safety from the River Avon in Worcestershire faced "atrocious" conditions, police said.
The officers rescued Ryan Grady from the river after a car with his father and sister inside went into the water.
They were unable to reach Gabrielle Grady, who later died in hospital, and they are "deeply traumatised" by this, West Mercia Police said.
Christopher Grady, 41, has been charged with two counts of attempted murder.
The incident took place during the morning of Thursday, 11 February, near Evesham.
The two officers used ropes to try to reach the man and boy who had got out of the sunken car, police said.
Ryan was out of reach, so one of the officer swam out to him. The other waded in to help him get back to the bank.
Assistant Chief Constable Simon Chesterman said the river conditions were "atrocious" and the submerged car was about 12m (39ft) from the bank in 3.6m (12ft) of freezing water.
Visibility was zero, he added.
"Sadly, because of the conditions they were unable to reach Ryan's sister Gabrielle and they are deeply traumatised by this," he said.
A diving team from neighbouring Avon and Somerset Police were brought in to reach Gabrielle.
ACC Chesterman said few forces had their own diving teams.
"Because of the geography of West Mercia, even if we had our own team there is no guarantee it would have reached the scene any quicker than the Avon and Somerset team who were fully kitted-up and deployed in Gloucestershire."
Gabrielle was trapped underwater for almost two hours on Thursday and died in hospital on Sunday.
Ryan was discharged from hospital on Sunday.
Mr Grady appeared before magistrates on Saturday and is next due to appear at Worcester Crown Court on Thursday.

Chris. 

[Toiletdriver]

But Why!

Is the cause of death of one person worth the inconvenience of 100s of others - if not 1000s of others!  Really human life is important but at the end of the day - we are just mammals with an over inflated sense of our own importance in life

And we've let you gawp as we go past, and you sue the railway for flashbacks, drink drug problems caused by nightmare from seeing a body in 20 pieces etc

PS I've killed, it ain't nice!!!!!!!!!!!!