A woman from Devon who suffers from acute migraine headaches has begun speaking with a Chinese accent, despite never having been to China.
Sarah Colwill, 35, an IT project consultant from Plymouth in Devon has been diagnosed with the extremely rare condition Foreign Accent Syndrome (FAS). Experts believe FAS is caused by strokes and injuries to the brain. As a result the injuries cause sufferers to lose the ability to speak in their native accent, due to areas in the left side of the brain linked with speech and language being damaged. Since 1941 there have only been sixty reported cases of the condition worldwide. Research into the condition is ongoing due to the complex nature of the disorder. John Coleman, a professor of phonetics at Oxford University, told Sky News: "FAS is extremely diverse, almost certainly not 'one thing', not a well-defined medical phenomenon.It is not the kind of problem that there are any easy generalisations about."
Sarah's ordeal began when she had an extreme migraine which made her call for an ambulance. This was nothing out of the ordinary for Sarah as she has suffered from frequent migraines for decades. It was the bizarre events which followed which have left Sarah sounding like a completely different person. When Sarah woke up at the hospital her speech had changed and instead of her West Country accent she now sounded Chinese.
In an interview with Sky News Sarah said: "I spoke to my stepdaughter on the phone from hospital and she didn't recognise who I was. She said I sounded Chinese. Since then I have had my friends hanging up on me because they think I'm a hoax caller."
Sarah who lives with her husband, has begun speech theory in an attempt to get her native West Country accent back. However shes admits; "I am frustrated to sound like this, I just want my own voice back, but I don't know if I will get it back."
Despite the limited number of cases in the last sixty years, there have been a few reported cases in recent years. In 2007, an speedway rider from the Czech Republic spoke fluent English when he woke from a coma despite the fact he was only able to speak basic English before his accident.
In 2006 in a similar story to that of Sarah Colwill; Linda Walker, a 60 year old woman from Newcastle woke up having suffered a stroke to find that her Geordie accent had transformed into a Jamaican accent.
Friday, 23 April 2010
Sunday, 18 April 2010
Gay Adoption: right or wrong?
Comment piece
A recent survey carried out by children's charity Action For Children, revealed that more than one-third of those surveyed believe that gay couples should not be allowed to adopt children. The findings have been described as 'shocking and disappointing'.
Why should gay couples not be allowed to adopt when there are plenty of parents who abandon or abuse their children? Baby P, Karen Matthews are cases in point, both raised by heterosexual parents. The Baby P incident in particular sent shockwaves through the entire country. A post-mortem revealed he had swallowed a tooth after being punched in the mouth, and also suffered a broken back, broken ribs, having the tips of his fingers sliced off, and his nails pulled out. There have been no reported cases of such disgusting and sickening abuse being carried out on a child in the care of gay parents. There is no evidence to suggest that gay parents will be anymore detrimental to a child’s health or well being than a heterosexual parent. Those who argue that gay couples, and gay men in particular are likely to sexually abuse children have no hard facts to support such claims.
It has recently been revealed that a number of Roman Catholic adoption agencies would rather close than allow gay couples to adopt. The words petty and homophobic spring to mind, such a small minded retaliation would be severely damaging to the children within their care. Not to mention that it is extremely discriminatory and insulting to the gay community as a whole, that an establishment in such a great position of power would rather leave children in serious need of love and homes in the unsatisfactory care system instead of a much more secure environment with caring parents.
Many who oppose the introduction of gay adoption believe that it goes against religion. But why should religion dictate how people live their lives or what they should or should not be allowed to do? Christian’s seem to believe that gay adoption goes against the Fifth Commandment, ‘Honour thy father and mother’, if gay people are such an insult to religion, what about the commandments which are directly aimed at heterosexual couples who clearly break these commandments everyday. Just a brief search on the internet highlights just how many anti-gay groups and campaigns are around, due to the fact that many believe that gay people should not be given the same rights as their heterosexual counterparts. The reasoninf for this; that it goes against the teachings from the Bible. However when searching further on the internet I was unable to find any anti-adultery groups or campaigns despite the fact that adultery goes against the Seventh Commandment. Double standards much?!
Barring gay people from becoming parents is discrimination, based on sexual orientation. This level of discrimination would not be acceptable in any other contexts, for example; in a persons place of work, so why should it be acceptable in any other aspect of their lives. Adoption agencies have so many children who require a stable home, surely a loving home is better than no home at all. There is a major shortage of adoptive parents, and regardless of whether the family, is heterosexual or gay, it is better than the foster care system, not to undermine the foster care system and the terrific job that foster parents do. But surely the fact that the child or children will be offered far more stability than the possibility of having to be moved around different foster families, this can only be a good thing.
A recent survey carried out by children's charity Action For Children, revealed that more than one-third of those surveyed believe that gay couples should not be allowed to adopt children. The findings have been described as 'shocking and disappointing'. Why should gay couples not be allowed to adopt when there are plenty of parents who abandon or abuse their children? Baby P, Karen Matthews are cases in point, both raised by heterosexual parents. The Baby P incident in particular sent shockwaves through the entire country. A post-mortem revealed he had swallowed a tooth after being punched in the mouth, and also suffered a broken back, broken ribs, having the tips of his fingers sliced off, and his nails pulled out. There have been no reported cases of such disgusting and sickening abuse being carried out on a child in the care of gay parents. There is no evidence to suggest that gay parents will be anymore detrimental to a child’s health or well being than a heterosexual parent. Those who argue that gay couples, and gay men in particular are likely to sexually abuse children have no hard facts to support such claims.
It has recently been revealed that a number of Roman Catholic adoption agencies would rather close than allow gay couples to adopt. The words petty and homophobic spring to mind, such a small minded retaliation would be severely damaging to the children within their care. Not to mention that it is extremely discriminatory and insulting to the gay community as a whole, that an establishment in such a great position of power would rather leave children in serious need of love and homes in the unsatisfactory care system instead of a much more secure environment with caring parents.
Many who oppose the introduction of gay adoption believe that it goes against religion. But why should religion dictate how people live their lives or what they should or should not be allowed to do? Christian’s seem to believe that gay adoption goes against the Fifth Commandment, ‘Honour thy father and mother’, if gay people are such an insult to religion, what about the commandments which are directly aimed at heterosexual couples who clearly break these commandments everyday. Just a brief search on the internet highlights just how many anti-gay groups and campaigns are around, due to the fact that many believe that gay people should not be given the same rights as their heterosexual counterparts. The reasoninf for this; that it goes against the teachings from the Bible. However when searching further on the internet I was unable to find any anti-adultery groups or campaigns despite the fact that adultery goes against the Seventh Commandment. Double standards much?!
Barring gay people from becoming parents is discrimination, based on sexual orientation. This level of discrimination would not be acceptable in any other contexts, for example; in a persons place of work, so why should it be acceptable in any other aspect of their lives. Adoption agencies have so many children who require a stable home, surely a loving home is better than no home at all. There is a major shortage of adoptive parents, and regardless of whether the family, is heterosexual or gay, it is better than the foster care system, not to undermine the foster care system and the terrific job that foster parents do. But surely the fact that the child or children will be offered far more stability than the possibility of having to be moved around different foster families, this can only be a good thing.
Wednesday, 7 April 2010
3 dimensionsal thinking...
Comment piece
Everywhere you go right now you can't seem to escape 3D.
And it seems that Hollywood directors are not the only ones cashing in on the popularity of 3D technology. Sky have unveiled plans to launch a 3D sports channel. Sky demonstrated exactly how the technology worked by broadcasting the Barclays Premier League game between Arsenal and Manchester United in 3D in nine selected pubs across the UK and Ireland. As of April the 3D sports channel was launched with over 1,000 pubs across the country broadcasting the match between Manchester United and Chelsea on Saturday 3rd April. Sky have announced the success of the initiative and it seems that other broadcasters may be planning to follow suit with Eurosport planning to transmit matches from The French Open at Roland Garros in 3D.
Sky have also announced that the following matches with be broadcast live in 3D:
Blackburn vs Manchester United on Sunday 11th April
Tottenham vs Arsenal on Wednesday 14th April
Manchester City vs Manchester United on Saturday 17th April
Chelsea vs Stoke on Sunday 25th April
On all of my recent trips to the cinema (taking advantage of my Orange Wednesdays; as cinema prices are shockingly overpriced- £8.40 per ticket- I could buy a brand new DVD and watch it as many times as I like for almost the same price..oh and having to pay an extra £1.50 for the 3D experience!!)I have been to see films available in 3D. Including Clash of the Titans, Alice in Wonderland, Ice Age 3, Avatar and The Final Destination. Out of intrigue I also went to see the same films in 2D and with the exception of Avatar none of the films were any better in 3D. The Final Destination in 3D disappointed me, I had expected to have knifes, fire and other objects to come towards me, but there was only one moment when I moved my head to 'avoid' an object! Being in 3D did not add anything to the film. The same can be said for Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland, which before I go on I think was a very good film, but once again being in 3D added nothing to the film and I left wondering why it had been made in 3D in the first place. Well apart from the fact that it generates higher viewing figures and in turn generates more revenue.
You can't help but think that Hollywood directors are just purely cashing in on the popularity of 3D technology right now. Yes, Avatar was an extraordinary success and shows how fantastic 3D films can be. But Clash of the Titans, which may I add is a great film, was originally filmed in 2D and transformed in 3D. Call me cynical but you can't help but think that the only reason it was changed into 3D was to line the pockets of the director with a few more million.
It seems that 3D films are going to continue to grace cinema screens with Toy Story 3, Shrek Forever There are also plans to release future Batman, Superman and Captain America in 3D.
Toy Story 3 is to be released in cinemas across United Kingdom and Ireland on July 23rd 2010.
Everywhere you go right now you can't seem to escape 3D.
And it seems that Hollywood directors are not the only ones cashing in on the popularity of 3D technology. Sky have unveiled plans to launch a 3D sports channel. Sky demonstrated exactly how the technology worked by broadcasting the Barclays Premier League game between Arsenal and Manchester United in 3D in nine selected pubs across the UK and Ireland. As of April the 3D sports channel was launched with over 1,000 pubs across the country broadcasting the match between Manchester United and Chelsea on Saturday 3rd April. Sky have announced the success of the initiative and it seems that other broadcasters may be planning to follow suit with Eurosport planning to transmit matches from The French Open at Roland Garros in 3D. Sky have also announced that the following matches with be broadcast live in 3D:
Blackburn vs Manchester United on Sunday 11th April
Tottenham vs Arsenal on Wednesday 14th April
Manchester City vs Manchester United on Saturday 17th April
Chelsea vs Stoke on Sunday 25th April
On all of my recent trips to the cinema (taking advantage of my Orange Wednesdays; as cinema prices are shockingly overpriced- £8.40 per ticket- I could buy a brand new DVD and watch it as many times as I like for almost the same price..oh and having to pay an extra £1.50 for the 3D experience!!)I have been to see films available in 3D. Including Clash of the Titans, Alice in Wonderland, Ice Age 3, Avatar and The Final Destination. Out of intrigue I also went to see the same films in 2D and with the exception of Avatar none of the films were any better in 3D. The Final Destination in 3D disappointed me, I had expected to have knifes, fire and other objects to come towards me, but there was only one moment when I moved my head to 'avoid' an object! Being in 3D did not add anything to the film. The same can be said for Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland, which before I go on I think was a very good film, but once again being in 3D added nothing to the film and I left wondering why it had been made in 3D in the first place. Well apart from the fact that it generates higher viewing figures and in turn generates more revenue.
You can't help but think that Hollywood directors are just purely cashing in on the popularity of 3D technology right now. Yes, Avatar was an extraordinary success and shows how fantastic 3D films can be. But Clash of the Titans, which may I add is a great film, was originally filmed in 2D and transformed in 3D. Call me cynical but you can't help but think that the only reason it was changed into 3D was to line the pockets of the director with a few more million.
It seems that 3D films are going to continue to grace cinema screens with Toy Story 3, Shrek Forever There are also plans to release future Batman, Superman and Captain America in 3D.
Toy Story 3 is to be released in cinemas across United Kingdom and Ireland on July 23rd 2010.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
