Slashdot Mirror

Stanton A Glantz, author of your link, is a hack who is in it for the grant money and has made a career with the anti-smoking schtick. He just switched it up to anti-vaporizers when he realized that is where the money is.

Here is a link that goes into great detail about what a hack Glantz is

Can you explain to me why both the US NIH and UK NHS have both stated that vaping is 95% safer than smoking cigarettes?

What's wrong with that? Belgium (and the EU in general, though this is Belgium only for now) believes loot boxes are detrimental to their population, especially the young people targeted by that business model. It's a model that can have massive (negative) financial impacts on the individual, and fosters addiction. Now, you may not believe that about loot boxes, and that's your right, but the Belgian government does, and as a self-respecting government thinking about doing the best for its population, it decided to act.

Gambling addiction is interesting, and apparently has a genetic component. https://www.nhs.uk/news/geneti... The study notes that almost half of all gambling addicts are women - so what the hell - is this pandering for money because once you invoke the W word, people get sympathetic and shower their largess upon it?? If you weren't, you'd write that gambling addiction is fairly consistent between the sexes. But I digress.

Anyhow, the brains of addicts get the same sort of endorphin buzz over almost winning as they do actually winning. Whereas normal people get mostly discouraged by losing, and almost winning tends more to piss them off. I personally get zero joy from almost winning, and the very few times I have gambled, found the idea of investing much better while I was gambling.

But my point is that normal children will not become addicts.

I also believe there is no future in banning everything that someone might become addicted to.

Lessee Belgium.... I enjoy a nice Belgium ale a few times a year - but people can become alcoholics. Should we ban alcoholic beverages?

Or the biggie - Sexual addiction. Ban sex some folks get addicted to it. .

Many of their employees have these conditions. Some people do get messed up at birth genetically, hormonally and psychologically.

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/...

Except that the other products have been shown to have effectiveness in treating smoking which has not been shown with vaping.

You could try posting some links to studies that have not shown it. The "other products" effectiveness really isn't very good - in fact it's very close to the cold turkey method.

According to the NHS, lots of people have used vaping to quit smoking. Where are your studies?

What's a balanced meal? I just Googled it and got a bazillion results.

That's what a balanced meal is. a varied mix of things. No need to go vegan, or paleo, or keto, or any other bullshit. Just mix your mains with veges. Eat some fruits. If you're not intollerant get a bit of dairy in you.

Don't eat every meal with a maxi-sized fries. Don't only eat your protien and shun the greens. The idea of a balanced meal really hasn't changed in many years. It's still the same thing your grandma used to put on your table.

Also you got a bazillion results, I got 459 million. But let's look at them sequentially:
https://www.alimentarium.org/e... - Quarter carb, quarter protien and half veg/fruit
https://www.nhs.uk/live-well/e... - this one has a slightly larger carb portion at 2/5th
https://www.verywellfit.com/an... - this one discusses in a different context but mentions you should balance fats, fibres and protiens
https://www.health.com/nutriti... - same story, don't forget your veges in every meal and don't be afriad of fats
https://www.birdseye.co.uk/nut... - what's a balanced meal? Protien, carbs, and veges
https://www.gousto.co.uk/blog/... - quarter protien, quarter carb, half veg
https://www.chicken.ca/health/... - this one says you should have a mix of protien carbs and veges but doesn't give you ratios.
https://www.realsimple.com/foo... - google tossed a few recepies into the results too but you'll see they fit the above advice.

So even with so many results they are quite consistent. A lot of them repeat advice that has been standing for a long time: veges are important, carbs and protiens should be mixed in smaller portions. Even the sites which don't directly deal with these core parts of food will make recommendations that fit in there too.

But really the best advice you can probably get is go get your grandma to cook for you, but then resist the desire to eat the entire plate (because we all love grandma's cooking so much, and she knows it and will heap it on). Yeah shitty advice I know. I always put on weight when I go for a visit, but not because the food is unhealthy.

Why?

There are plenty of existing studies on that, and they are only kind-of useful. There's an effect but it's probably not worth worrying about:

https://www.nhs.uk/news/food-a...

(P.S. Thank the UK taxpayer for that information, won't you, as they have NO INCENTIVE to mislead you as regards trying to sell you something).

I'm not sure what you're getting at here. OK, they're from the UK (but we're pretty similar to the US in outlook), but here are a couple of sites.

Firstly one mentioning a difference between the sexes:

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/osteoporosis/causes/

And a couple making specific references to ethnic groups (and differences between them):

https://www.blood.co.uk/why-give-blood/the-need-for-blood/black-asian-and-minority-ethnic-communities/
https://www.blood.co.uk/why-give-blood/the-need-for-blood/rare-blood-types//

Would something like this be controversial in the States? Or did you have something else in mind perhaps?

in case anyone thinks you are serious...

Abortions aren't done by the NHS, the doctor simply refers you to Marie Stopes and pays the bill - your abortion is booked on a time table set by Marie Stopes local clinics.

Yes, they are done at NHS facilities - although they can also be done at Marie Stopes, typically funded by the NHS.

Abortions can only be carried out in an NHS hospital or a licensed clinic, and are usually available free of charge on the NHS.

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/...

Following the link
from: https://www.nhs.uk/NHSEngland/...
to here: https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/p...

It appears that spending has continued to go up. So if there have been cuts, where's the difference going?

You are just wrong. It is categorically the fact that countries with single payer health care systems have done exactly that study suggested and found that they would get massive health benefits and health care cost reductions, and found absolutely that E-cigarettes are "95% less toxic". You then attribute this not existing, regardless of that fact that it totally does exist, to lobbying etc, which is moot because, you're wrong.

https://www.nhs.uk/news/heart-...
NHS is the national health service in the UK. This study was from two years ago.

You make an interesting point which has only two tiny flaws:

1. It's bollocks - http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/A...

2. It's bollocks - https://lifestyle.walsallhealt...

snake

https://www.nhs.uk/news/mental...

Yesterday it was 54. I wish you trolls would make up your collective minds (or lack thereof) about this stuff. Am I a fat virgin or fat fuck today?

You're making the category error of assuming that all of the people who are AC's are trolls, who have a collective will & mind, and are coordinating in some way. I've never called you a names - I don't care where you dick has been (or hasn't been), and I don't see the point in calling someone names based on their being fat. If I'm going to insult you, it'll be because you act like an ignoramus, not because you're fat.

Feel free to carry the discussion on my blog.

Again, I have no interest in creating content for your blog and lining your pockets. I won't produce a long, well-written post for your blog so that you can reap the financial rewards.

Which I've been hearing about for the last 48 years of my life. If it wasn't ten, it was 20. If it wasn't 20, it was 30. If it wasn't 30, it was 40. If it wasn't 40, it was 54 or 57.

Just because you haven't ended your life yet doesn't mean you are not shortening it with your existing lifestyle. And those warnings are silly and untrue, until they're serious and true - which you usually realize right about the time you keel over from a massive coronary.

It is indisputable fact that being dramatically obese shortens your life span. A 5'10 man weighing 357 has a BMI of 51.2, which falls into the "Class III Obesity" category in the NIH article above - this means an average reduction in lifespan of up to 14 years, according to their results. The number varies, but they generally range from 10-20 years lower life expectancy. Average lifespan for a man in the US is 78 years today. Knock 10-20 years off that, and you're dead at 58-68 years of age. Yeah, being fat at 20 won't usually kill you. Being fat from a young age into your late 40's means you've probably already knocked off a significant chunk of your lifespan.

Don't want to believe an AC? How about the NIH?

Or, how about the UK's NHS?

Or, how about the CDC?

Yes, you've claimed to be losing a pound a week - that's great if it's true, keep it up. But the fact that you suddenly had a story to tell about how you really were losing weight makes the entire claim suspect. You claim to be doing the "same thing" you've been doing for the last 5 years, but suddenly, in the last 13 weeks, it's turned into dramatic weight loss that matches exactly what the CDC is telling you to shoot for. If nothing changed, why haven't you been losing weight at a pound a week for the last 5 years? It doesn't add up.

And, in the meantime, your high blood pressure, high blood sugar, high triglycerides & cholesterol are all putting undue stress on your body, making it harder to get the rest and exercise you need. Imagine what you could do with your weight loss if you actually took good, medically sound advice, and worked at it without inventing a million reasons why the advice is just another "troll" attempt?

My chiropractor works with a GP, a physical therapist, and an RN.

Chiropractic medicine is at least as effective as mainstream medicine at treating lower back pain.

This doesn't mean that it works for treating cancer or whatever else the quacks peddle.

Look at what the research says:

http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/c...

This page is pretty helpful to decipher how much people were actually drinking. There's a little figure at the bottom with normal sized drinks and their units and a handy shorthand calculation: ABV (percent) * Vol (mL) / 1000 = units. http://www.nhs.uk/Livewell/alc...

That's pretty rich, given that government guidelines have been saying for years that saturated fat is bad:

Saturated fat can increase the risk of developing cardiovascular disease.

The worst part isn't even that they falsely identified saturated fats as bad, but that for years governments told people to eat a low-fat, high-carb diet, which is pretty much a prescription for weight gain and diabetes.

This is another confirmation that the standard American diet puts most people in a situation of not being able to lose stored body fat due to insulin levels being too high in a chronic fashion for large scale fat metabolism to occur. This is why there is an obesity problem and a type 2 diabetes problem in this country.

This is due to the fact that Ancel Keys cherry picked his research data and gave the government the conclusion that saturated fat causes heart disease and to avoid heart disease you need to eat a high carb low fat diet. This advice in retrospect is upside down and backwards to what a heart healthy diet or weight loss actually requires to achieve, that is without excessive exercise (anyone can lose weight by burning 10,000 calories per day, but most people are not physically conditioned to do that and to do that much caloric burn on a daily basis is not practical.)

This is not a big revelation to those of us who have been practicing ketogenic diets, but it is a nice confidence click that we have been doing the right thing all this time despite being criticized for it by the big sugar shills or the clueless doctors who don't know about ketogenic diets.

Who's Balanced diet?
USDA HTML Images All of the USDA postings are from special interests, many by food marketing people.
UK NHS Eating a balanced diet
wikipedia HTML Images
JapanDietary guidelines for Japanese (Japanese: ), Basic Law on Shokuiku
or traditional japan dietJapanese Traditional 5 color diet
Or do you follow the latest fad - seems like a personal choice. I prefer to vary my diet and not over do highly processed foods,

That's pretty rich, given that government guidelines have been saying for years that saturated fat is bad:

Saturated fat can increase the risk of developing cardiovascular disease.

The worst part isn't even that they falsely identified saturated fats as bad, but that for years governments told people to eat a low-fat, high-carb diet, which is pretty much a prescription for weight gain and diabetes.

Considering this new research (not by experts, but singular, one controversial expert shill) is complete bunk, it might have been good thing to advise people to do what is good for them.

That's pretty rich, given that government guidelines have been saying for years that saturated fat is bad:

Saturated fat can increase the risk of developing cardiovascular disease.

The worst part isn't even that they falsely identified saturated fats as bad, but that for years governments told people to eat a low-fat, high-carb diet, which is pretty much a prescription for weight gain and diabetes.

>

If you want to know the risks of aspartame (spoiler alert: there are none unless you've been diagnosed with phenylketonuria), consult legitimate scientific bodies, like the NHS or Health Canada.

Links supporting that statement: Health Canada, UK NHS or UK Food Standards Agency, FDA.

If you have something like the NHS, it also prevents you from having straight teeth. Or so I am told.

Actually, orthodontic braces are part of the NHS care at no cost up to age 18. After that you have to pay. http://www.nhs.uk/Livewell/den...

If it's "purely cosmetic", adult braces have to be paid for privately. But that doesn't "prevent" you from having straight teeth, any more than the U.S. healthcare "prevents" you from having straight teeth. If you want your teeth straightened, you have to pay for it, just exactly the same as you do in the U.S.

And, even there, turns out the cost of braces from a private dentist is slightly less in the UK than in the US,

The UK has had big problems with homeopathy well before the US had its vaccine denying issue and has its vaccine deniers as well. In some semblance of transparency, the US has had some homeopathy believers, but it has nowhere near the traction as in the UK. http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/h...

Actually the dictionary does not disagree with him:
http://www.webdictionary.co.uk...

The people that have a track record of actually curing people in the UK also do not disagree with him:
http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/h...

You seem be deluded. Educate yourself.

Welcome to about 10 years ago:

http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/h...

(That's the official UK health service site, by the way... the free NHS service open to all...)

Have you started warning about tarot reader, psychics and other frauds yet? We've been doing that for years too.

Thanks for posting these studies. I hadn't seen them before. Also keep in mind that not everything is about CO2. Particulate matter also has disastrous effects on cognitive function.

There are not many studies yet, and a lot of health professionals seem to be unaware of this fact. Here is a quote from a recent publication by UK's National Health Service: "Air pollution particles linked to Alzheimer's found in human brain. [...] new research found tiny particles of magnetite – a potentially toxic by-product of traffic pollution – in samples of brain tissue. [...]" (September 2016).

Another quote from a study published in Am J Epidemiol, 2014: "[...] report analyses of data from 14,000 older adults living across the United States, indicating an inverse association between exposure to PM and cognitive function, an outcome related to AD [Alzheimer's disease] by virtue of the long period of cognitive decline that precedes clinical disease."

Good job using a vastly inferior health system, probably the absolute worst one in western Europe, to support your well undoubtedly thought-out and definitely not at all idiotic argument, buddy.

Yep, it's really easy to cut "overhead" if you're ok with people waiting months for basic and simple procedures. You'd be screeching like mad if you got told that a MRI or a biopsy to confirm or deny your suspected cancer treatment had a waiting time of "up to" 18 weeks officially, and up to half a year in common practice. http://www.nhs.uk/choiceintheN...

NYT spends as many inches on name dropping the researchers as it does explaining the research. The NHS has released an article that's a little better IMO.

tl;dr Research paper shows correlation between nail biting in childhood and incidence of allergies in later life, does not elaborate on causal relationship. Results hailed as "common sense" by the usual crowd.

>> Yes, I've already taken cover

Why? You're actually correct in that female brains have less mass than male brains.

http://www.nhs.uk/news/2014/02...

I was interested to read in the article, "Medicare does not pay for them, nor do most insurers".

How is this even possible? You have overpriced healthcare in the USA, and then even if you have insurance, it won't pay for the treatment you need?!

Just for those people that think the NHS is a terrible thing, I'll just leave this here - hearing diagnosis, treatment, and aids are free on the NHS in the UK for people that need them...

-- Pete.

How about the opposite extreme: skinny third grade girls being called obese by their school. More special snowflakes?

Oh I see, schools being morons is apparently the fault of BMI. On every other thread, schools are such idiots. But on this thread, it's the BMI, not schools.

Firstly, BMI is well known to be less accurate for kids. However, there are very, very few kids posting to this thread. Secondly, I plugged that girl's numbers into the NHS BMI calculator and it gave her as "healthy weight".

http://www.nhs.uk/Tools/Pages/...

So, try again bucko!

I just had a baby here in the UK, and she's been vaccinated for a wide number of things before she's six months. Does that qualify as an infant?

There are shots at 8 weeks, 12 weeks, 16 weeks, then at one year and beyond.

NHS Vaccination Schedule.

It all depends on how ill you are (or think you are...)

Here are the options.

In short, if it's urgent, go to a walk in centre or A&E who will see you pretty-much immediately (as a triage), do whatever scans and tests are required, and if necessary admit you to hospital.

Otherwise for seemingly less urgent stuff, you can go and see your GP (you might need to make an appointment),

The GP may deal with the issue directly, or they might refer you to a consultant (in which case there may be a delay as you move up their list.) Or they might tell you to go straight to A&E.

But here's the thing - it'll be exactly the same consultant, and quite probably in the same hospital, as you would have seen if you had gone to A&E in the first place (if you were ill enough.)

In short, delays, when they occur, are mainly due to the triage process.

And there's always the option of going private (either paying directly or through insurance); you still have to go via your GP (for non-A&E issues) but you can jump the consultant's list. (Yes, the same consultant, but this time in a private hospital for a day or two a week.)

There's no benefit to be gained from private health insurance for genuine emergencies; if you had a heart attack in a private hospital they would take you to the NHS A&E. But you might have a nicer room, and better food.

And that his/her experience of the US health care system suggests that it is broken. When the cost of common drugs is inflated 10 fold there is an issue. Other places with national health care systems can control the price of some drugs. Is that advantageous? That depends on if you need them. In the UK the NHS has massive purchasing power so aspirin does not cost $10. Prescription drugs are limited to £8.20 probably about $10 or $12 dollars. http://www.nhs.uk/NHSEngland/H....
Yep that is paid for by all of us as a tax. Not all drugs cost that much. Some cost far more. But nothing like the seriously odd amounts you seem to fork out in the US.

http://www.nhs.uk/news/2010/05...

Though the reviewers did find that six or less hours of sleep was associated with a 12% increased risk of death, they also found a 30% increase linked with nine or more hours. It is unclear why the newspapers all focused on the risks of less sleep.

And there are causality and correlation risks with the data tho-- you may not be sleeping much because you are sick already. You may be sleeping too much because you are sick already.

Urine has ammonia. And ammonia does have some medicinal properties according to western science. There is actually nothing weird about that.

Urgh. That's the worst yoghurt I've ever had.

Pro-tip. That other bad yoghurt you tried - the one your flatmate left in the fridge but didn't seem to eat. The one that left you with a sore throat.

Maybe she didn't buy it to eat.

Triggers are things that can cause schizophrenia to develop in people who are at risk. These include:

Stress

The main psychological triggers of schizophrenia are stressful life events, such as a bereavement, losing your job or home, a divorce or the end of a relationship, or physical, sexual, emotional or racial abuse. These kinds of experiences, though stressful, do not cause schizophrenia, but can trigger its development in someone already vulnerable to it.

Drug abuse

Drugs do not directly cause schizophrenia, but studies have shown drug misuse increases the risk of developing schizophrenia or a similar illness.

Certain drugs, particularly cannabis, cocaine, LSD or amphetamines, may trigger symptoms of schizophrenia in people who are susceptible. Using amphetamines or cocaine can lead to psychosis and can cause a relapse in people recovering from an earlier episode.

Three major studies have shown teenagers under 15 who use cannabis regularly, especially ‘skunk’ and other more potent forms of the drug, are up to four times more likely to develop schizophrenia by the age of 26.

Bereavement, losing your job or home, a divorce or the end of a relationship, or physical, sexual, emotional or racial abuse have all been around long before meth, and so has schizophrenia.

5 vaccines in Europe? Lies, dear AC. Here's the schedule of vaccination for the United Kingdom:
http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/v...

Same for Portugal:
http://www.vacinas.com.pt/cale...

Same for Spain (click on each part of the map for regional rules)
http://vacunasaep.org/profesio...

Hare's a handy comparison/search tool for vaccines for all of Europe:
http://vaccine-schedule.ecdc.e...

That's a meaningless anecdote.

It's also worth noting that treatment on the UK's NHS is not free to foreign visitors. (Certain treaties notwithstanding)

http://www.nhs.uk/NHSEngland/A...

its all good fun to make fun of americans waistlines, however the UK is catching up http://www.nhs.uk/news/2013/02... - note this is a year old article

That's as maybe but we have Healthcare that is FREE at the point of delivery.

That's not quite true for dental work, but the price is capped, so you'll typically pay £18.50 to see a dentist, £50.50 if you need something done, or £219 if you need something serious. It's only free if you qualify for extra assistance, which is automatic if you are under 18, under 19 (25 in Wales) and in full-time education, on income support or similar.

.... said the Spider to the Fly.

Seriously - once this genie is out of the bottle there is no way to bottle it back up. The fear of employment repercussions, insurance, etc all become a concern.

“For me, I’m so excited about the possibilities to improve things for people, my worry would be the opposite," he told the New York Times's Farhad Manjoo. "We get so worried about these things that we don’t get the benefits Right now we don’t data-mine healthcare data. If we did we’d probably save 100,000 lives next year."

Eeesh.. I heard this same logic, earlier this year, being applied to the pooling of all NHS records for pharmacons and researches to peel through in the UK. "Think of all the causality linking and better and better benefits".. Eeep! What?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...
http://www.nhs.uk/nhsengland/t...

This isn't my field, but I'll give an answer a shot. The more peripheral nervous system has a reputation for being better able to re-grow following damage than the more central nervous system. This fact has become contentious, though, and stem cells have more recently been found in the central brain (e.g. the hippocampus). The sensory neurons from the olfactory bulb re-grow constantly. The macular degeneration trials are encouraging. There is a good lay review here. I don't know to what degree central vision is restored or how well the original circuitry is repaired. The retina, whilst complex, has relatively simple organisation. With the exception of the optic nerve cells that go to the central brain, the connections are fairly short. These facts may contribute to it being a good target for this sort of therapy. If you have an injured spine then you will have damaged cells whose axons could be two feet long. These are the neurons that send motor information down from the brain and sensory information back up. The distance itself may be a big re-wiring challenge. Injecting stem cells into the central brain is currently bleeding edge pure research.

BS - You pay unless your a college student, a citizen from another European Union country that signed an agreement with the NHS, or other select cases

From the NHS - http://www.nhs.uk/chq/pages/10...

The citation you mention did not have anything to do with the statistics I mentioned, but something to read regarding the industry as a whole. Unless you meant a citation outside of what you replied to. That source mentions released information from CDC which you can go read for yourself.

Like most of life, vaccination vs. anti-vaccination is not a clear black and white issue. If you are educated you may change your opinion and that is your right. I'm not claiming vaccines should be outlawed as you seem to be implying, I'm claiming that people should have a freedom of choice to make educated decisions.

Lets go back to Gardasil. First, there are many potential permant side effects with the vaccine. Chronic permanent migraine headaches are one, sterilization is another, and chronic fatigue syndrome is another. A complete list is here. When you separate them out the numbers look pretty low. However if you have a 1 in 10,000 chance of getting any one of these things the risk from the vaccine is really 3/10,000 and not 1/10,000. Extrapolate that out further, and suddenly it's not a 1 in a million chance of something happening. This is basic mathematics and should not provide any challenge to you.

To go a bit further, the vaccine only prevents certain types of cervical cancer and not all cervical cancer. Claiming any number of saved lives due to the vaccine is simply fallacy.

Sure, numbers can be skewed in either direction to try to make "my way" should be the rule. I have not argued that "my way" should be the rule, I have advocated educated choice. You on the other hand are advocating no choice and no education.

Again, that does not mean vaccines are evil and should be banned. That means that people should be aware of the risks and be able to choose whether or not they want to get the vaccine. Let me extract that same advocacy and question from a different source here.

The HPV vaccine is at least as safe, if not safer, than the other recommended vaccines in use today in the U.S. Is it 100% safe? Of course not. No medical intervention is. And anybody demanding (or offering) absolute guarantees doesn't understand medicine. Because like it or not, all medical interventions have risks. There will always be someone who is allergic to something or doesn't respond properly or who has something going on that we don't know about. Medicine is not one-fits-all, and so there will be risks for some people. The big question is: do the benefits outweigh those risks?

Since those risks are not _yours_ why not drop the "do it my way" nonsense and let people choose?

...and here's the link to the article on NHS.

Looks like the NHS link was missing a dash: http://www.nhs.uk/news/2014/02...

How does that work?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/hea...

The government has already turned the corner, due to the previous recommendation against peanuts apparently "backfiring".

http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/p...

Peanuts are safe in pregnancy

Go ahead and eat peanuts or food containing peanuts (such as peanut butter) during pregnancy, unless you are allergic to them or a health professional advises you not to.

You may have heard that peanuts should be avoided during pregnancy. This is because the government previously advised women that they may want to avoid eating peanuts if there was a history of allergy (such as asthma, eczema, hay fever, food allergy or other types of allergy) in their child's immediate family.

This advice has now been changed because the latest research has shown that there is no clear evidence showing that eating peanuts during pregnancy affects the chances of your baby developing a peanut allergy.

Nobody ever mentioned there was an age "too young" to expose them to it,

No idea how old your son is, but there was a decade or so where "No peanuts" to babies, and even to pregnant / breastfeeding mothers was a real thing.

It was going on full volume when our kids were born 10 years ago, and we get notices every year about there being kids with major severe peanut allergies in their classes.

1) Fuck that. I can grow more of those cells, as long as I don't get a fatal infection.
2) The Mayo Clinic disagrees with you. https://www.mayoclinic.com/health/first-aid-cuts/FA00042
https://www.mayoclinic.com/health/first-aid-puncture-wounds/FA00014
The NHS somewhat agrees though. http://www.nhs.uk/chq/Pages/1054.aspx?CategoryID=72&SubCategoryID=721
So let's see your citation.

Anyway, in a world without "modern" antibiotics, I'd clean the wound of debris (quick as possible), then "Nuke the area" - alcohol (or diluted alcohol - 100% might be overkill), seal/coat it with something to reduce reinfection (I figure olive oil would be a good candidate if you're out of those creams), Then apply compression if necessary.

That's roughly it, for non-emergency citizen's treatment basically you either call a NHS helpline for basic advice or go to your GP (General Practitioner/local doctor) and they give you a referral to an NHS specialist or your insurance company for anything they can't handle. For non-residents the full details are...

http://www.nhs.uk/chq/Pages/1086.aspx ..TL;DR...

"
Am I entitled to NHS treatment when I visit England?
When you visit England, you’ll normally have to pay for all NHS treatment unless you’re exempt from charges. ...
Emergency treatment

Regardless of how long you’re staying or your nationality, you’re entitled to free emergency NHS treatment from:
a primary care practice, such as a GP surgery
an A&E department
an NHS walk-in centre

However, unless you’re exempt from charges, you’ll have to pay NHS charges if you’re:
admitted to hospital as an in-patient (this includes high dependency units and other emergency treatment, such as operations), or
registered at an outpatient clinic
" ...the skinny version is you get a high level of patching-up, sticking back together services and/or made stable for free. If you have to be admitted for a long duration recovery or on-going treatment then you have to start paying unless your government has a prior agreement (probably all of Europe and the commonwealth, plus a few random others I'd guess).

As far as I can tell our A&E units can treat basically any injuries and issues that arise from an accident or initial infection etc..