It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Aborted babies incinerated to heat UK hospitals

page: 1
18
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+5 more 
posted on Mar, 24 2014 @ 02:59 PM
link   

The bodies of thousands of aborted and miscarried babies were incinerated as clinical waste, with some even used to heat hospitals, an investigation has found. Ten NHS trusts have admitted burning foetal remains alongside other rubbish while two others used the bodies in ‘waste-to-energy’ plants which generate power for heat. Last night the Department of Health issued an instant ban on the practice which health minister Dr Dan Poulter branded ‘totally unacceptable.’ At least 15,500 foetal remains were incinerated by 27 NHS trusts over the last two years alone, Channel 4’s Dispatches discovered.



This is just disgusting. I know we want to save energy, but this is going way to far.

what do you guys think?

ref- telegraph.co.uk




edit on 24-3-2014 by Blundo because: forgot link




posted on Mar, 24 2014 @ 03:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Blundo
 


I can only imagine what people will post.



posted on Mar, 24 2014 @ 03:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Blundo
 


The new biofuel that is renewable.
At least I guess that will be the reasoning for this.



posted on Mar, 24 2014 @ 03:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Blundo
 


I was looking for a link.
Do you have one?


+3 more 
posted on Mar, 24 2014 @ 03:02 PM
link   

Blundo


The bodies of thousands of aborted and miscarried babies were incinerated as clinical waste, with some even used to heat hospitals, an investigation has found. Ten NHS trusts have admitted burning foetal remains alongside other rubbish while two others used the bodies in ‘waste-to-energy’ plants which generate power for heat. Last night the Department of Health issued an instant ban on the practice which health minister Dr Dan Poulter branded ‘totally unacceptable.’ At least 15,500 foetal remains were incinerated by 27 NHS trusts over the last two years alone, Channel 4’s Dispatches discovered.



This is just disgusting. I know we want to save energy, but this is going way to far.

what do you guys think?


Sure it is disgusting to think about, but not really sure what else they would do with them. Burying them would be a hefty expense that would be either on the hospital or the tax payers and would take up a lot of land. I can only imagine the fuss if they were buried in a mass grave.

I would think cremation/incineration is a good choice, though maybe not doing it for heating a building and adding in other "rubbish" to burn with them. Kinda mixed on this one.

Here is the link to the source. OP's isn't working.... Source
edit on 3/24/14 by Vasa Croe because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 24 2014 @ 03:03 PM
link   
I thought this was common practice - disgusting or not. I know all of the hospitals in my area incinerate genetic material (amputated limbs, bodily tissues, etc) and I wouldn't be surprised at all to know that those incinerators are connected in some way to the heating systems - but I am no expert on any of that business.



posted on Mar, 24 2014 @ 03:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Blundo
 




Crazy but unsurprising.
Do you have a link?
I watched something about a dog shelter in the US turning dogs into fertilizer but humans?
What next?

When will we get the Soylent Green story, any day now I bet.



posted on Mar, 24 2014 @ 03:04 PM
link   
Sounds good to me. It beats the cost of a funeral or cremation and heats the hospital at the same time. Waste not want not.

It does sound a little gross at first but I bet the furnace is set up especially for this practice. I wish they would offer free cremations here at the hospital if you died there. They would probably just recycle people here though, sort of like a scrap yard does.



posted on Mar, 24 2014 @ 03:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Blundo
 


Did you really need to post this?



posted on Mar, 24 2014 @ 03:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Blundo
 


This is the same as the coroner in NYC taking the brains and spines out of every cadaver. He just wanted to do it and it didn't bother him in the least.



posted on Mar, 24 2014 @ 03:05 PM
link   
link up now


+1 more 
posted on Mar, 24 2014 @ 03:06 PM
link   
If this is true, then it is absolutely vile. The use of aborted babies as fuel to heat a hospital? I think it is proof positive that the people of this planet have lost their damned minds...

Whatever bureaucrat came up with this one needs to be lobotomized...



posted on Mar, 24 2014 @ 03:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Blundo
 


Soylent Green is another energy source.



PS. Your link doesn't work but this one does.



posted on Mar, 24 2014 @ 03:08 PM
link   

Blundo
what doyou guys think?

I think It's extremely disrespectful to the dead. And it's a big fat lie to those women who miscarried and were told that their dead children were 'cremated'. Reminds me of that book ... Brave New World ... I think that was it. The dead were cremated and the living would fly their little planes over the crematoriums and play in the updrafts from them. I know some will say that it makes sense not to 'waste' the 'resource' .. but I can't see it that way.



posted on Mar, 24 2014 @ 03:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Vasa Croe
 


Thing is that the report found that even those couples who wanted to be pregnant and lost the baby early were often not given much in the way of options after losing the child. So, basically, they're just kind of keeping and burning miscarried babies, not just babies who got aborted. Now, what if the parents wanted to have some kind of funeral or ceremony to help them get over the grief of losing a child they were excited about and wanted?

Nah, we'll just burn them all.

Soylent Green Energy IS PEOPLE!!!!!



posted on Mar, 24 2014 @ 03:11 PM
link   

rickymouse
Sounds good to me. It beats the cost of a funeral or cremation and heats the hospital at the same time. Waste not want not.

It does sound a little gross at first but I bet the furnace is set up especially for this practice. I wish they would offer free cremations here at the hospital if you died there. They would probably just recycle people here though, sort of like a scrap yard does.


So, how long do you think it will be before they're putting your loved one on the Liverpool Care Pathway and then telling you they'll take care of the cremation so they can burn her and heat the hospital?



posted on Mar, 24 2014 @ 03:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Blundo
 


As the babies where "aborted" i would say that in most cases the mother didn't want the child. So would the mother really give the child a decent burial? I think not, after taking it's life away. So what alternative is there?



posted on Mar, 24 2014 @ 03:13 PM
link   
Burning meat would consume more energy than it created or would you say that old people that die in Hospital are also being burned on site to reduce energy bills too.

Have your say on Abortion if you like but lets keep it real.



posted on Mar, 24 2014 @ 03:13 PM
link   
I miscarried two children at 8 weeks and 14 weeks. I was not given any choice in what to do with their bodies - in fact I wasn't even asked. How are you supposed to feel whenever you find out that those two babies and countless others were used for firewood? I'm shocked, saddened and angered and I will never go into a hospital again, unless I am unconscious on a street somewhere and they have no choice.





posted on Mar, 24 2014 @ 03:13 PM
link   
This is preferable to stem cell research? smh.



new topics

top topics



 
18
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join