Urgent warning to parents after kids seen ‘eating toxic plant' at Scots country park
WEED WARNING Urgent warning to parents after kids seen 'eating toxic plant' at Scots country park
Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window)
Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
AN URGENT warning has been issued to parents after youngsters were reportedly seen eating a toxic plant.
The alarming reports came in at the Palacerigg Country Park in Cumbernauld, Lanarkshire.
Sign up for Scottish Sun
newsletter
Sign up
4
The warning was issued at Palacerigg Country Park
Credit: The Sun
4
Kids were seen picking up ragwort
Credit: Alamy
4
The plant is toxic and can be harmful
Credit: Alamy
A member of the public raised the alarm after seeing youngsters picking up Ragwort.
They even reportedly saw one child eating it.
The toxic yellow weed is found in the park and can be harmful if ingested.
It can be mildly harmful to humans but can kill livestock such as horses if they swallow it.
Some people can also have allergic reactions to it and end up with irritated skin.
A post from the Palacerigg Community Trust initially warned parents about the situation.
They then followed up with a second post issuing advice about the Countryside Code and how to stay safe in the park.
It read: "We were attempting to educate as we had received a phone call from a concerned member of the public regarding young children picking and on one occasion eating Ragwort, which is toxic when ingested.
"This was never meant as a Ragwort is a "bad plant" post. We have tried our best to rephrase this post in a positive light, so as still to educate people who are not as countryside savvy, but are out enjoying Palacerigg and who may require the guidance to avoid situations such as that reported."
Part of the advice they issued urged people not to pick wildflowers.
What does hogweed look like?
They warned people could unknowingly pick up a poisonous plant.
Their post continued: "It might seem harmless to pick a few blooms, but it can damage fragile ecosystems.
"Many wildflowers are vital for pollinators like bees and butterflies, and some are even protected species.
"Removing them can reduce biodiversity and affect the balance of nature.
"Some plants have natural defences including thorns and being toxic when ingested, so can also be harmful to humans and animals."
People visiting the park have also been urged not to wander of the footpaths to protect wildlife.
They also were told to keep dogs on a lead which could stress or injure animals.
Punters visiting the park were also told not to light any fires amid the horrific wildfires which have broken out across the country.
We told in April how a horrific wildfire broke out at Palacerigg Country Park which was visible for miles.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scottish Sun
7 hours ago
- Scottish Sun
Bizarre decision by hospital could PROVE killer nurse Lucy Letby was being used as scapegoat for failings, claims expert
A BIZARRE hospital decision could prove baby killer nurse Lucy Letby was being used as a scapegoat for overall failings, an expert has told The Sun. The neonatal ward at Countess of Chester Hospital (COCH) was experiencing a major spike in premature infant deaths in 2015, which tailed off dramatically when it was stopped from receiving the highest risk patients the following summer. 9 Lucy Letby was convicted of the murder of seven babies and the attempted murder of seven more Credit: PA 9 A grab from footage of the serial baby killer's arrest Credit: PA 9 The deaths occurred between 2015 and 2016 Credit: Getty Monster Letby, 35, is serving a whole life order in prison for the murder of seven infants and the attempted murder of seven more at COCH between June 2015 and June 2016. Professor Richard Gill, a statistical misrepresentation consultant who has helped overturn the murder convictions of two other nurses, is convinced convicted murderer Letby was an unlucky scapegoat. He is among an increasing number of supporters who believe Letby to be innocent, and has been pushing for a retrial - although many others, including the victims' families, have blasted the campaign to free her. He believes the failure to move such patients to more suitable hospitals could prove vital in any potentially successful appeal against her convictions. And thinks clinical audits being undertaken could be a reason why Liverpool Women's Hospital did not take them, despite its neonatal unit being graded much higher. COCH's Neonatal Intensive Care Unit was graded at level 2 at the time. Guidelines generally advise any such facility treating the most seriously ill babies should be at level 3. In fact, COCH's neonatal unit was downgraded again to level 1 by hospital management in July 2016, 'due to concerns about increasing neonatal mortality', ahead of an inquiry by the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health (RCPCH). The unit's lead neonatologist, Dr Stephen Brearey, had asked management to remove killer Letby from clinical duties the previous month, pending an investigation into her conduct. She wouldn't be arrested until 2018. Dr Breary was suspicious of the nurse in 2015 and accused the hospital of negligence for ignoring his concerns, according to reports in 2023. The downgrade limited the premature babies that it took into its care to those born at 32 weeks' gestation or over, an age where the medical complications and risks were much lower. How Dutch Lucy Letby who was CLEARED over murder of seven patients, including babies, is 'key to freeing jailed nurse' And, as a result, the spike in baby deaths also tailed off - pointing to overall inability to provide complex care properly being a reason for deaths and not a single nurse, claims Prof Gill. Seven of the babies Letby was convicted of murdering or attempting to murder were either a twin or a triplet, all extremely ill and at higher risk of complications, and so ideally in need of complex level 3 care. Speaking to The Sun, Prof Gill said the babies should have been 'transferred immediately' to a more specialised environment, including that at Liverpool Women's Hospital (LWH), where some had initially been monitored during pregnancy. 'It was hopeless,' he said. 'Chester was receiving babies that should have been born at a level 3 hospital. The doctors there did not have the experience.' Prof Gill said it is not clear why the babies were admitted to or remained at COCH. Two of the seven babies Letby was convicted of murdering - Child O and Child P - were from a brood of extremely rare identical triplets whose mum had received at least some antenatal care at LWH before giving birth at COCH. According to medical summaries, released post-trial as part of an independent expert review, some appeared to be developing issues that only multiple babies sharing a single placenta experience, in that the blood was not being shared evenly to each sibling during the pregnancy, called twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome (TTTS). 'It puts them at incredibly high risk,' said Prof Gill. He described LWH as 'one of the best places in the world to have twins and triplets', adding: 'Why did the doctors allow that mother to have those babies at Chester? They should not have been born there.' Last year, the Thirlwall Inquiry investigated issues at the hospital during the period of Letby's spree to determine if management could have done more to stop her crimes. In the lead up to the probe, reports of concerns about the alarming shortcomings at COCH included unusually high death rates on the neonatal unit, as well as understaffed and under skilled staff, and a unit "out of its depth", The Guardian reported as part of its own investigation. In a transcript from the Thirlwall Inquiry, led by senior court of appeal judge Lady Justice Thirlwall, a witness statement from the mum of triplets O and P, as well surviving brother R, said she was only told she was having triplets in the 12th week of her pregnancy. 9 Letby tried to get an inquiry into the circumstances around the baby deaths suspended 9 The killer nurse has twice failed to appeal her convictions Credit: SWNS 9 A court sketch of Letby during her trial at Manchester Crown Court last year Credit: PA She was scanned at COCH as it was "more convenient" for her, but was then referred to LWH by her consultant for a second scan - though they were happy to care for her at COCH long-term, adding: "They could refer back to LWH if there were any problems along the way." The mum went on say: "At LWH I was told that one of the triplets was a little smaller than the other two, and as all three triplets were sharing one placenta. "I was given the option of having the smaller triplet's heartbeat stopped to give the two others a better chance of survival. We decided against this and to let things be." She added: "I did not actually expect our babies to be born at COCH, I was explicitly told throughout my pregnancy that they would be born there only if there was a nurse and a bed for each baby. "I was told that for this reason, it was very unlikely that I would actually have them at the COCH. I was warned by consultants that it was likely that we would have to travel to another hospital. "We were told that this could be Birmingham or London, but we had to be ready to go anywhere." However, the mum said it was only when she went into labour that she was told she would be giving birth at COCH, being assured "there were enough nurses and beds" to deliver her babies. She said consultant obstetrician and gynaecologist Jim McCormack assured her she would be able to look around the hospital's neonatal unit, but "in the event" this was "put off and I was not given the opportunity to look around and see the unit". "We were told that the probability of us being there would be low. "That said, we had not experienced a Neonatal Unit before so we had nothing to compare it with anyway. The charges Letby has been convicted of in full Child A, allegation of murder. The Crown said Letby injected air intravenously into the bloodstream of the baby boy. COUNT 1 GUILTY. Child B, allegation of attempted murder. The Crown said Letby attempted to murder the baby girl, the twin sister of Child A, by injecting air into her bloodstream. COUNT 2 GUILTY. Child C, allegation of murder. Prosecutors said Letby forced air down a feeding tube and into the stomach of the baby boy. COUNT 3 GUILTY. Child D, allegation of murder. The Crown said air was injected intravenously into the baby girl. COUNT 4 GUILTY. Child E, allegation of murder. The Crown said Letby murdered the twin baby boy with an injection of air into the bloodstream and also deliberately caused bleeding to the infant. COUNT 5 GUILTY. Child F, allegation of attempted murder. Letby was said by prosecutors to have poisoned the twin brother of Child E with insulin. COUNT 6 GUILTY. Child I, allegation of murder. The prosecution said Letby killed the baby girl at the fourth attempt and had given her air and overfed her with milk. COUNT 12 GUILTY. Child K, allegation of attempted murder. The prosecution said Letby compromised the baby girl as she deliberately dislodged a breathing tube. COUNT 14 JURY COULD NOT REACH VERDICT AT ORIGINAL TRIAL, NOW GUILTY AFTER RETRIAL Child L, allegation of attempted murder. The Crown said the nurse poisoned the twin baby boy with insulin. COUNT 15 GUILTY. Child M, allegation of attempted murder. Prosecutors said Letby injected air into the bloodstream of Child L's twin brother. COUNT 16 GUILTY. Child N, three allegations of attempted murder. The Crown said Letby inflicted trauma in the baby boy's throat and also injected him with air in the bloodstream. COUNT 17 GUILTY, COUNT 18 JURY COULD NOT REACH VERDICT, COUNT 19 JURY COULD NOT REACH VERDICT. Child O, allegation of murder. Prosecutors say Letby attacked the triplet boy by injecting him with air, overfeeding him with milk and inflicting trauma to his liver with "severe force". COUNT 20 GUILTY. Child P, allegation of murder. Prosecutors said the nurse targeted the triplet brother of Child O by overfeeding him with milk, injecting air and dislodging his breathing tube. COUNT 21 GUILTY. Child Q, allegation of attempted murder. The Crown said Letby injected the baby boy with liquid, and possibly air, down his feeding tube. COUNT 22 JURY COULD NOT REACH VERDICT "I was given to understand throughout my pregnancy that on delivery the babies would need to go to the Neonatal Unit as a precaution due to the risk factors that come with a triplet pregnancy and them having to be born at 34 weeks." When she started having contractions at home she was rushed to COCH but described how, despite her condition, she had to walk from the observation room to the labour ward to theatre to undergo a cesarean section - even asked to climb into bed herself. The mum added it was "very disappointing" that Dr McCormack, who had performed all of her scans, was on holiday and unable to deliver her babies. She was awake during the delivery, which she described as feeling "very rushed", and at one stage, after being cut open, she could feel pain. She described how "blood and fluid splattered up" onto the screen, the wall behind her and "onto my face". At one stage, she said it was hurting but was told "I don't think that is hurting, it's pulling". Later in her statement, the mum described doctors initially had "no concerns" about the babies, despite being so premature, and recalls Letby looking after two of them and showing her partner how to feed all three triplets. "She told us how lucky we were and that their weights were great," she added. Letby also showed the mum how to "express milk", and added her babies were separated as there was a shortage of beds in the neonatal unit. While staying in the maternity ward, the mum was told by a doctor Child O needed breathing support and she was taken to neonatal unit to see him. "We were confronted with a scene of complete chaos. It was madness," she said. "Nurses were running around left and right grabbing medicines and IVs. 9 Lady Justice Thirlwall, who led an inquiry into possible failings at Countess of Chester last year Credit: PA 9 Letby during her police interview in 2018 Credit: Derbyshire Constabulary 9 Prof Richard Gill is convinced Letby is innocent "As soon as I went in, I knew it was an issue with one of the boys. When Doctor U saw what was going on, it was obvious he didn't have any idea what was happening and I could see in his face that he was panicked and shocked." She added: "It was clear Child O's collapse was a complete shock to them." The mum said Letby was on the ward at the time and was handing doctors medicine. Child O died later that evening, and his brother Child P, died the following afternoon. During Letby's trial, it was heard the father of the triplets "begged" doctors to transfer his surviving son to LWH and they eventually agreed, and his health quickly recovered. Earlier this year, an international panel of neonatologists and paediatric specialists said Letby's convictions were "unsafe" and told reporters bad medical care and natural causes were the reasons for the collapses and deaths. Their evidence has been passed to the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC), which investigates potential miscarriages of justice, and Letby's legal team hopes her case will be referred back to the Court of Appeal. Neena Modi, Professor of neonatal medicine at Imperial College London, was part of the panel and told The Guardian in February Chester's neonatal unit was 'not staffed or equipped to deal with the most seriously ill babies'. She went on to say: 'What transpired was that the consultants and other neonatal staff were faced with having to provide care for complex neonatal cases outside their experience. I watched arrogant Lucy Letby as she simmered in the dock & saw chilling evidence that proves she IS an evil baby killer By Nigel Bunyan IN the eyes of the law she's a cold-blooded serial killer who murdered seven babies and tried to kill seven others at the hospital where she worked during a year-long reign of terror. But doubts over Lucy Letby's guilt have been slowly gaining traction, with her supporters - who include prominent politicians - expressing growing fears she was the victim of a miscarriage of justice. The killer nurse, 35, is serving 15 whole-life orders in prison for the murder of seven babies between 2015 and 2016 at Countess of Chester hospital. She was also found guilty in 2023 of trying to kill seven others, but has always maintained her innocence. Last week Reform leader Nigel Farage said there were 'serious questions' about the case which have left him with a 'horrible feeling' Letby might have been a 'very convenient scapegoat' and should be retried. Meanwhile Conservative MP David Davis is convinced her conviction is a 'clear miscarriage of justice'. But earlier this month it emerged Letby could be facing more charges over the deaths of babies at hospitals she worked in. Nigel Bunyan has been a journalist for more than four decades and covered the trials of GP Harold Shipman, the child killers of James Bulger, and the Rochdale grooming gang. He attended Lucy Letby's main trial and the retrial that followed. As her case attracts more scrutiny than ever before, here Nigel details why he believes "beyond doubt" that she IS guilty, and that justice prevailed... IN the make-believe, boxset world of Netflix, Disney+ and the like, Lucy Letby just HAS to be innocent! A prominent Tory MP has said so. So too has Letby's shiny new defence barrister and a group of international experts who've rallied, unbidden, to her cause, without having been anywhere near either trial. The only catch is that in the real world – the one not liberally sprinkled with fairy dust theories of perceived innocence – Letby is the real deal. She actually IS a nailed-on serial killer of tiny, defenceless babies. After attending her trial - and the retrial that followed it - I have no doubt whatsoever of her guilt. She is serving a whole life term for seven murders and seven attempted murders after being found guilty not just by one jury – but by TWO. Sadly, serial killers don't come with an identifying mark on their foreheads. And they don't always confess. But I watched every moment of her evidence at Manchester Crown Court, looking for some spark of authenticity, of humanity; something to make me doubt the prosecution case. I looked in vain. All I could see was a defendant standing behind a blank, unyielding wall of denials. She was a woman shielding herself with simmering resentment, sullen in the dock and equally so when giving evidence. Dr Harold Shipman had something of the same aura – arrogant to the end, content to simply deny all charges. By the time Letby was called to give evidence we'd already seen the now-infamous Post-it notes she scribbled in the bedroom of her house around the corner from the Countess of Chester hospital where she committed her crimes. 'I am evil. I did this,' she'd written. 'I killed them on purpose because I'm not good enough to care for them (and) I am a horrible person.' Her supporters looked to other lines that could be interpreted as indicators of innocence. 'I haven't done anything wrong,' for example. And, 'Why me?' For all that the evidence against Letby was largely – and inevitably - circumstantial, taken as a whole it was totally convincing on all but a few of the charges. It's one thing to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, but in her case that happened far too many times. Her colleagues who saw her as a friend didn't want to 'think the unthinkable' - that she was the enemy within - but eventually they had no option. It wasn't just the statistical oddities about her presence; it was an innate feeling of unease among those who had once trusted her without question. Far too many babies were collapsing on the unit for there to be any other explanation than sabotage by a member of staff. And there were no other suspects. For me, the case finally fell into place as I spent long nights compiling a 17,000-word timeline. Suddenly, for all the woolliness of the case as it unfolded in court, I could see how Letby had moved so deftly in the shadows, aided by her colleagues' understandable reluctance to believe ill of her. Many of them counted her as a friend, and when she broke down in apparent distress over the infants dying on her watch, they instinctively reached out in support. Letby's cynical manipulation is typified by the very first of her killings: one day volunteering to take group selfies during a colleague's hen-do in York, the next injecting Baby A with air 90 minutes after coming back on duty in Chester. Before the jury reached their verdict I knew what it should be. And the court of social media who protest her innocence may have taken a different view if they had seen all the evidence, as I have. During the trial a chilling image was shown to the jury: the X-ray of one of the dead babies, showing a line of what could only be air running parallel to his spine. And the only explanation for that air was for it to have been forced into the infant's system. Which is how Lucy Letby achieved something that the reviewing paediatrician Sandie Bohin had never previously seen in neonates – she made some of them scream. Had the prosecution found the courage to release that image some doubters may be silenced. But the CPS refused, saying it formed part of an individual's medical records. Medical expertise Much has been made of the international panel of medical experts drawn together by Letby's new barrister, Mark McDonald. But it is hugely significant that Ben Myers, the lawyer who led her defence in both trials, made the very deliberate decision NOT to call ANY of the medical experts he had briefed on the case. In fact, the only defence witness aside from Letby was Lorenzo Mansutti, a plumber, who spoke briefly about drainage problems at the Countess. Myers' reasoning was clearly tactical, perhaps made because he doubted the ability of those potential witnesses to counter the allegations that Letby harmed babies mostly with injections of air or insulin. Any future appeal is likely to fall short unless McDonald can come up with a satisfactory answer to Myers' decision. Ultimately the jury was swayed by the assertion of Nick Johnson KC, the lead prosecutor, that Letby had been caught out by 'a constellation of coincidences' that had no other plausible explanation. For all the protests to the contrary, I don't believe for one second that Letby was set up as a scapegoat. She was simply found out by colleagues who finally realised she was the killer in their midst. Almost two years on, we now have the prospect of Letby facing a third trial. On top of that three members of the leadership team at the Countess were arrested last week on suspicion of gross negligence manslaughter and may yet face trial themselves. And then there is the Thirlwall Inquiry into the killer's activities and the conduct of NHS personnel at the time. It's due to report next year. So all in all, overwhelmingly bad news for those wearing yellow butterfly emblems in support of their fake heroine. Genuine miscarriages of justice do occur. Of course they do. But they're extremely rare. Years ago, for example, I wrote about Stefan Kiszko, who was exonerated over a murder he couldn't possibly have committed. But Letby? I just don't see it. More than that, I abhor the white noise repeatedly being drummed up in her name - often by people who should know better - while Letby herself remains silent; brooding in HMP Prison Bronzefield, Surrey. For me, as for the families, hers is a name that speaks only of sickening cruelty and betrayal. As one of the mums said recently: 'You don't want to see her face, you don't want to hear her name, you don't want to hear people shouting that she's innocent. "She's not innocent, she was found guilty in a court of law." 'Their contemporaneous notes in the babies' case records reveal errors in the recognition of problems and their management.' Around the time of the Letby crimes, Prof Gill told The Sun some mothers going through high-risk pregnancies would have also been part of clinical audits and trials at various hospitals, including testing the now-standard usage of laser treatment 'to fix the blood flow' in a uterus carrying multiple babies at risk of TTTS. In LWH's Quality Report 2015-2016, it states: "During 2015-16 Liverpool Women's NHS Foundation Trust participated in 100% of national clinical audits and 100% of national confidential enquiries of the national clinical audits and national confidential enquiries which it was eligible to participate in." It added: 'The total monetary value of the income in 2015-16 conditional upon achieving quality improvement and innovation goals was £1,977,598. The monetary total for the associated payment in 2014-15 was £1,955,007.' It is unclear if any of the triplets, or Letby's other victims, saw their treatment directly impacted due to any kind of clinical audit or procedures, which would include the much-publicised National Maternity and Perinatal Audit. But it's possible that, any one of these may have impacted how many high risk pregnancies were dealt with at Liverpool, claims Prof Gill. In June 2015, the same month as the first deaths in Letby's rampage, MBRRACE-UK, the national body which collects data on perinatal mortality, showed LWH had made significant strides in reducing stillbirth and neonatal mortality rates. Specifically, their stillbirth rate was rated 10% below the national average. Prof Gill went on to say: 'If you have twins or triplets who have a very poor outlook then you might prefer that they died somewhere else. 'Now that's a very serious allegation, I don't think that. I mention it, and one might think that. 'I would rather think that out of some rules in their protocol that they were reserving beds for patients they could treat because that would give them good results. 'As a consequence, more babies got treated elsewhere than usual. I'm sure there is an honest explanation for that. But it is really weird.' He added: 'My feeling is this would all need to be looked into if Lucy Letby is ever exonerated and there is an inquiry into what went wrong.' A spokesperson at the Countess of Chester Hospital NHS Foundation Trust said: 'Due to the Thirlwall Inquiry and the ongoing police investigations, it would not be appropriate to comment further at this time.' NHS England did not wish to comment when approached. The Sun has also contacted Liverpool Womens NHS Foundation Trust but had not received a response before publication. Do you know more? Email
Scottish Sun
9 hours ago
- Scottish Sun
Does the Pill harm fertility and do spicy foods actually induce labour? Expert busts 13 myths you probably believe
Including a common hair dye misconception and how long you should really wait to have sex after childbirth MAYBE BABY? Does the Pill harm fertility and do spicy foods actually induce labour? Expert busts 13 myths you probably believe Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) MOST of us know not to believe everything we read on the internet. But somehow, many old wives' tales manage to stick. Sign up for Scottish Sun newsletter Sign up 6 Many of us believe pregnancy and fertility myths Credit: Getty 6 NCT expert Katherine Walker separates fact from fiction Credit: Katherine Walker/National Childbirth Trust This is especially true when it comes to fertility and pregnancy. It's naturally an exciting but worrying time, and parents-to-be are often desperate to do everything 'right'. But should you really eat a spicy curry to induce labour? And will sleeping on your back while pregnant actually harm your baby? Here, Katherine Walker, service development manager and practitioner at the National Childbirth Trust, separates fact from fiction. 1. The pill harms your fertility - FALSE NO matter which one you use or how long you've been taking it, contraceptive pills do not harm fertility. It can take several months for your periods to return to normal, but there is no long-term impact. In fact, research by Wolkite University found 83 per cent of women get pregnant within 12 months of coming off the pill. Katherine tells Sun Health: 'The pill is an effective contraceptive if used correctly. It does not cause infertility.' 2. Pregnant women should avoid all fish - FALSE BRIE, salami, pâté and certain mushrooms - the list of foods to avoid while pregnant can seem endless. But there are still plenty of options, including fish. Dancing on Ice star shocked as she discovers bizarre reason for her 'unexplained infertility' Many women assume they need to cut all seafood from their diet once they realise they're expecting, however that's not true. 'It is actually recommended that pregnant women eat two portions of fish a week, including oily fish such as salmon, sardines or mackerel,' Katherine says. Cooked shellfish, such as mussels, lobster, crab, prawns, scallops and clams are also fine. However, certain fish should be avoided. 'This includes shark, swordfish and marlin due to concentrations of mercury,' Katherine says. 'Cold-smoked or cured fish such as smoked salmon or gravlax, including sushi, should also be avoided unless it has been cooked until steaming hot because of the risk of bacteria or parasites.' 3. Sleeping on your back can harm your baby - TRUE WE all have our preferred sleeping positions. But where possible, mums-to-be should avoid sleeping on their backs. Katherine says: 'From 28 weeks onwards, the safer position to go to sleep in is on your side. 'Sleeping on your back after this time slightly elevates the chance of a stillbirth.' Scientists at Auckland University found the weight of the uterus when back-sleeping could restrict blood flow to the baby and 'add extra stress'. While unlikely, it is possible to become pregnant if you have sex during your period Katherine Walker Separate research by the University of Huddersfield estimated that going to sleep lying on your back from 28 weeks increased the risk of stillbirth by 2.6 times. And a study published in the Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology warned expectant mums who lie on their back rather than their side during their third trimester were three times more likely to have a baby with a low birth weight. 'Pillows can help support you to get comfortable side sleeping,' Katherine says. 'If you have a night waking and find yourself on your back, just return to a side-lying position.' 6 Taking the contraceptive pill does not harm your fertility Credit: Getty 4. Stress causes infertility - FALSE 'STRESS causes an increase in hormones like cortisol and adrenaline, which may in turn affect the hormones related to fertility,' Katherine says. 'However, plenty of people still become pregnant during stressful times, and it is unlikely to be stress alone causing fertility problems.' Feeling stressed can also impact your sex drive, perhaps reducing your chances of conception. But again, stress isn't directly impacting your physiology - rather your behaviour. 5. You can't dye your hair during pregnancy - FALSE DESPITE most research showing it is safe to do so, content regularly appears online warning women not to dye their hair during pregnancy. 'Although the chemicals in permanent and semi-permanent hair dyes may cause harm, this is only in very high doses,' the NHS says. 'When you use hair dye, you are only exposed to very low amounts.' Katherine adds: 'It is possible that these could be absorbed via the skin on your hands or head, or breathed in, but this would be at a very low level. 'Risks can be minimised by using gloves or only having highlights as these don't touch the scalp, as well as being in a well-ventilated room.' 6 Despite popular belief, you can dye your hair while pregnant Credit: Getty 6. You can get pregnant on your period - TRUE MOST women have periods around every 28 days. 'The most fertile time of the menstrual cycle is during ovulation, which usually occurs around 14 days after the start of the last period,' Katherine says. This is when an egg is released from the ovaries. And it can be fertilised when it meets a man's sperm. Theoretically, there is only a short window when you can fall pregnant, and it's around this time. However, it's difficult to pinpoint exactly when this happens, and it varies between people. Fertility facts you probably didn't know Around one in seven couples may have difficulty conceiving About 30 per cent of fertility problems are due to a man, 30 per cent due to a woman, and 30 to 40 per cent to both or unknown causes More than eight out of 10 couples, where the woman is under 40, will conceive naturally within a year if they have regular unprotected sex (every two or three days) For couples who have been trying to conceive for more than three years without success, the likelihood of getting pregnant naturally within the next year is one in four, or less A woman's caffeine intake can impact how long it takes to get pregnant A man's weight can affect a couple's ability to have a baby A 30-year-old woman with a normal reproductive system has about a 20 per cent chance of conceiving in any given month. This drops to five per cent over the age of 40 A woman is born with all the eggs she will ever have Freezing eggs before the age of 30 will probably provide the highest number of healthy eggs Around 52,500 patients had IVF and 3,000 had donor insemination (DI) treatment at licensed centres in the UK in 2022 The average age of first-time IVF patients is just over 35 One cycle of IVF can take three to six weeks Between 1991 and 2021, there were more than 390,000 births as a result of fertility treatment More than 70,000 donor-conceived children were born between 1991 and 2020 Source: NHS, British Fertility Society, Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority Sperm can also survive in the fallopian tubes for up to seven days after sex. 'Menstrual cycles vary in length, so some people ovulate earlier in their cycle, and some women experience a period which lasts for several days,' Katherine says. 'Sperm can live in the woman or birthing person's body after ejaculation for several days after sex, so conception is possible over a window of around a week and doesn't necessarily happen on the day of sex but can happen a few days later. 'While unlikely, it is possible to become pregnant if you have sex during your period.' 7. Pregnant women should always eat for two people - FALSE YOU often hear expectant mums talking about 'eating for two'. While the body is working hard and many women will feel hungrier than normal, you don't need to double all your portions or force yourself to eat. 'Pregnant women do not need to eat for two people, but having a healthy, balanced diet with a wide variety of food is important,' Katherine says. 'Those in early pregnancy should also consider taking a vitamin D and folic acid supplement to help reduce the risk of the baby having a neural tube defect, such as spina bifida. 'To support the baby's growth during the final three months of pregnancy, most people may need an extra 200 calories a day.' 6 Unfortunately, spicy food does not induce labour Credit: Getty Images - Getty 8. Eating spicy foods induces labour - FALSE JENNIFER Aniston tries it while playing a significantly overdue Rachel Green in Friends. 'But no, spicy food does not induce labour,' Katherine says. 'It used to be a bit of an urban myth that perhaps this would stimulate the cervix, but there is no evidence that this is the case. 'It can also cause diarrhoea which irritates the intestines.' 9. You can't have sex for a long time after you give birth - FALSE DESPITE popular belief, there is no required waiting period before you can have sex after childbirth. However, waiting until after your six-week postnatal checkup - and when you feel physically and emotionally ready - is a good starting point. 'It is up to the people involved when to have sex again after birth,' Katherine says. 'Most women will feel sore and need time to recover from the birth, however, there are other ways to remain intimate during this time. 'You can become pregnant again just three weeks after giving birth, so people might want to consider which contraception to use.' How to increase your chances of getting pregnant Have sex every two to three days without using contraception, making sure sperm enters the vagina Try to have sex around the time you are ovulating – this is usually 12 to 16 days before your period starts Maintain a healthy weight Stop drinking alcohol Do not smoke Take folic acid every day Eat a healthy diet Stay physically active Stop using any illegal substances Cut down on caffeine if you drink a lot Source: NHS 10. Pregnancy will make you gain weight - TRUE IT is normal and expected to gain weight during pregnancy. 'Everyone is different, but most people will gain 22 to 28lbs (10 to 12.5kg) over the course of the pregnancy – mainly from 20 weeks onwards,' Katherine says. 'As well as the baby, this is extra fat to help breastmilk production, a larger uterus, the placenta, and the increased blood volume needed to keep everything healthy.' Putting on too much or too little weight can lead to health problems for you or your unborn baby. If you're concerned about your weight or any other aspect of your health while pregnant, ask your midwife or GP for advice. 11. You will have pregnancy complications if you have a baby over 35 - FALSE ALTHOUGH no longer officially used by the NHS, many people still refer to any pregnancy over the age of 35 as 'geriatric'. It is therefore easy to assume that fertility falls off a cliff past this point, and if you do fall pregnant, you're likely to experience complications. But that's not necessarily true, Katherine says. While they can produce sperm throughout their lives, once men are 40 or older, the quantity and quality of sperm tends to decrease Katherine Walker 'Some complications may be more likely over the age of 35 but this doesn't mean they will definitely occur,' she adds. Conditions associated with a higher maternal age include chronic hypertension (high blood pressure that exists within the first 20 weeks), gestational diabetes (high blood sugar that develops during pregnancy) and placenta praevia (where the placenta blocks the cervix). But these are not a given. 'Every pregnancy is unique, and your midwife or healthcare provider will be able to talk to you about your circumstances,' Katherine says. 12. Age only affects women's fertility - FALSE WOMEN often talk about their 'female biological clock' - the decline in fertility as they age. And it's true that women have a finite number of eggs which slowly diminishes over time. But getting older also affects men's fertility. 'While they can produce sperm throughout their lives, once men are 40 or older, the quantity and quality of sperm tends to decrease,' Katherine says. A study by the University of Bristol found that conception is 30 per cent less likely for men older than 40 than it is for men under 30. Scientists blame declining testosterone levels, decreased blood supply to the pelvic area, shrinking or softening testicles, enlarged prostates and narrowing of the tubes that move sperm from inside the testicles. 6 Men's fertility also declines with age - though in a different way to women Credit: Getty 13. If you have a miscarriage you will struggle to get pregnant again - FALSE ONE in eight known pregnancies will end in miscarriage (loss during the first 23 weeks), NHS figures show. This can have a profound emotional impact on you, your partner, and your friends and family. It's natural to want to know why a miscarriage happened, but many are thought to be one-off problems with the development of the foetus. And it's reassuring to know that most people who experience a miscarriage go on to have successful pregnancies. Katherine says: 'For most people this is a one-off event, and they will go on to have a healthy pregnancy if they decide to try again.' Losing three or more pregnancies in a row (recurrent miscarriages) is uncommon and only affects around one in 100 women. 'Anyone who has experienced three or more miscarriages should be offered tests to try to find out why this has happened,' Katherine adds.
Scottish Sun
9 hours ago
- Scottish Sun
Cancer devastated me – but I started shaking when I realised my 20-year-old TATTOO could be to blame
Melanie got four tattoos between 2005 and 2016. After discovering research to suggest that body art can increase your risk of cancer by 170 per cent, she now wonders: "Have I done this to myself?" INK FEARS Cancer devastated me – but I started shaking when I realised my 20-year-old TATTOO could be to blame Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) THE row of hearts tattooed around Melanie Rushforth's left arm symbolises her love for her family. Her mum Margaret, whose middle name was Rose, is remembered by a flower on her right shoulder. Melanie, 58, has been getting inked for 20 years - but regrets it all, knowing what she does now. Sign up for Scottish Sun newsletter Sign up 8 Melanie Rushforth is terrified her 20-year-old tattoo could have caused her cancer Credit: Melanie Rushforth 8 The 58-year-old was diagnosed with lymphoma - a type of blood cancer Credit: Melanie Rushforth The administrator is midway through treatment for lymphoma – a type of blood cancer. In March, a study by the University of Southern Denmark found a link between tattoos and an increased risk of developing blood cancers, including lymphoma. In fact, the increased risk could be as much as 170 per cent, something Melanie wasn't aware of during her various tatts between 2005 and 2016. It was only after being diagnosed in April that she became aware of the connection. 'In February I noticed a lump on my neck,' Melanie, who is married to Ian, 62, an HGV driver, tells Sun Health. 'At first, I didn't think much of it. But I have an underactive thyroid, so I decided to get it checked just in case. 'The doctor didn't seem too concerned. He ordered some blood tests and told me to come back in four weeks if the lump didn't go down. 'The blood tests were fine; he thought it might have been glandular fever, but that came back negative. 'By the time the four weeks were up, the lump had gone, so I didn't go back.' But two weeks later, Melanie's lump returned - much bigger and more painful than before - so she made another appointment with her GP. People with tattoos have a 21% higher risk of lymphoma blood cancer - even if they're tiny, study suggests 'I thankfully saw the same doctor, and that's when he first mentioned the possibility of cancer,' she says. 'He said it might be nothing but sent me for an ultrasound and possibly a biopsy.' The scans showed Melanie had lymphoma, a type of blood cancer that originates in the lymphatic system. 'I was diagnosed with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma – DLBCL,' she says. One of the main symptoms of Melanie's condition is swollen lymph nodes, but others include pain in the tummy, chest or bone, night sweats, a high temperature and unexplained weight loss. Melanie, who works at the University of Lincoln, says: 'It's in one spot on my neck and classified as stage one. 'Thankfully, it was caught early so I'm on a chemotherapy regimen called R-CHOP which is six sessions, one every three weeks. 'I had my third session on June 30 and treatment should finish by late August or early September, when I might switch to radiotherapy depending on how things go.' I was shaking when I came across articles linking tattoos to blood cancers. I started to wonder, 'Have I done this to myself?' Melanie Rushforth While Melanie's consultant told her not to turn to Google to check her diagnosis, it was while researching the condition she found the link between tattoos and cancer. The latest study, published in BMC Public Health, analysed the health data of 5,900 twins born between 1960 and 1996 up until 2017. Over the course of several decades, the risk of lymphoma - a type of blood cancer that affects the immune system - was found to be three times higher for those with large tatts. 'For larger tattoos – those bigger than the palm of a hand, the hazard was 140 per cent,' study author assistant professor Signe Bedsted Clemmensen said. 'We found that people with tattoos had a 60 per cent higher hazard – a measure of 'immediate risk' – of developing skin cancer compared to those without tattoos.' Prof Clemmensen says the study findings are a long time overdue. 'Our study found evidence of associations between having tattoos and development of lymphoma and skin cancer,' she says. 'While this doesn't prove causation, it highlights a potential health concern that warrants further investigation. 'It has long been known that tattoo ink doesn't just stay in the skin. It also accumulates in nearby lymph nodes.' 8 Melanie wasn't aware that studies show tattoos can increase your risk of cancer by as much as 170 per cent Credit: Melanie Rushforth 8 She got her various inkings between 2005 and 2016 Credit: Melanie Rushforth 8 'I started to wonder, 'Have I done this to myself?'' she says Credit: Melanie Rushforth She explains that this is one of the potential mechanisms that could explain why tattoos might lead to cancer. 'Firstly, there are carcinogenic properties of substances used in tattoo ink,' Prof Clemmensen says. 'Secondly, we suspect that tattoo ink as a foreign substance can cause chronic inflammation in the lymph nodes, which over time can lead to abnormal cell growth and an increased risk of cancer. 'Despite repeated calls from health authorities for research into the potential long-term health effects of tattooing, there were no scientific studies addressing this issue when we began planning our study. 'That gap in knowledge is what prompted us to take a closer look.' What are the signs of lymphoma? LYMPHOMA is a term for cancer that starts in the lymph system - a network of vessels and glands that spans your body. There are two main kinds of lymphoma – Hodgkin Lymphoma and Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma. Lymphoma can cause many different symptoms, depending on which type of lymphoma it is and where it develops in the body. The most typical signs are: Swollen lymph nodes, such as in the neck, armpit or groin area Night sweats Extreme tiredness Itching Unexplained weight loss Fever Excessive bleeding, such as nosebleeds, heavy periods and spots of blood under the skin Other signs of lymphoma in a more localised area include: Swelling of the stomach, loss of appetite and other abdominal symptoms Coughing, shortness of breath, or chest pain Dr Rachel Orritt, health information manager at Cancer Research UK, said: 'There isn't enough evidence to say that tattoos increase people's cancer risk, and more research is needed. 'This is a difficult area to study, because there are lots of different possible ingredients in tattoo ink, making it tricky to understand the effects. 'If people are concerned about their cancer risk, there are proven steps they can take to reduce it. 'These include not smoking, keeping a healthy weight, and enjoying the sun safely.' For Melanie though, the realisations that her tattoos could have caused or contributed to her condition has been incredibly difficult to deal with. She says: 'My husband and I were searching everything, and I came across a couple of articles linking tattoos to lymphoma or blood cancers. It understandably really worried me. 'I have four tattoos and I'd planned to get another this year to cover a scar on my leg. 'I was shaking when I read those articles though. I started to wonder, 'Have I done this to myself?' 'It added a whole new layer of stress.' 'Like a phoenix rising from the ashes' While Melanie's diagnosis could be entirely coincidental, Prof Clemmensen suggests the research is too hard to ignore. She says more education is needed so people can make informed choices. 'Ultimately, it's a personal decision,' she says. 'Each individual must consider whether they're comfortable with the potential health risks associated with tattooing. 'As with smoking, alcohol consumption, or highly processed foods, it's important that people have access to reliable information. 'Our role as researchers is to provide that evidence so individuals – and policymakers – can make informed decisions.' Melanie had planned to get a post-cancer tattoo, which she is now scrapping. 'It was of a phoenix rising from the ashes,' she says. 'It felt symbolic - about survival, rebirth, and strength - but I won't get anything done for the foreseeable future – not after reading the study. 'I love body art. It's a personal expression, but I won't get any more tattoos.' 8 Melanie is halfway through treatment for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma Credit: Melanie Rushforth 8 Her tattoos symbolise her love for her family Credit: Melanie Rushforth
