'Liquid glass: the spray-on scientific revelation'

[Simon C.]

Looks interesting if the reports are accurate. Not sure how it protects against heat though?

glass, a revolutionary invisible non-toxic spray that protects against everything from bacteria to UV radiation, could soon be used on a vast range of products.

By Nick Collins Published: 9:41AM GMT 01 Feb 2010

The spray, which is harmless to the environment, can be used to protect against disease, guard vineyards against fungal threats and coat the nose cones of high-speed trains, it has been claimed.

The versatile spray, which forms an easy-clean coating one millionth of a millimetre thick ? 500 times thinner than a human hair ? can be applied to virtually any surface to protect it against water, dirt, bacteria, heat and UV radiation.

[Owain]

I bet if you spray it on your CDs it makes them sound wonderful too. And with the efficiency of NHS purchasing it will be cheaper to get it from Russ Andrews than buy it on prescription.

Owain

[Falco]

Live in a decent part of the UK as I do - and get your prescriptions free - oh, and free hospital car parking as well!

You couldn't get any cheaper than that!

[Clot]

Diolch yn fawr.

[Falco]

Rydych yn croesawu.

[Clot]

Ble chi?

[dom]

Sounds like a nanoparticle coating.

There are concerns that materials containing nanoparticles could cause as yet unknown health issues - though more so things like cosmetics than surface treatments.

Problem is the regulatory environment hasn't yet caught up with advances in materials science.

See:

[Owain]

Sosej a sglod!

Owain

[Dave Plowman (News)]

Many areas have free car parking at hospitals. Always full. At least when you pay you can usually get a space.

[JP Coetzee]

I wonder what happens if you spray it on your.... never mind

[Mungo "Two Sheds" Toadfoot]

fy hovercraft yn llawn o llysywod

Si

[geoff]

Someone buy them some sheep and a pair of wellies ...

[Clot]

An hour earlier had I read this, I might have been needing to clear a red mist from the monitor!

[Nightjar]

The vast majority of people in England, including me, get their prescriptions free.

Not at Southampton General, which has a two storey pay car park and can have queues that may take nearly an hour to get to the entry barrier.

I suspect charging at hospital car parks may be influenced by the proximity of other facilities. One hospital in my area is remote from shopping areas and even quite difficult to get to without a car. That has free parking. Two others are near enough to their respective towns possibly to be attractive to people not visting the hospital, except that they charge more than the public car parks in the area. In fact, when visting either of those, I usually park in a public car park and walk to the hospital. Of course, that could be a subtle ploy by the hospital to get people to walk more :-)

Colin Bignell

[Dave Plowman (News)]

In article , Nightjar > Many areas have free car parking at hospitals. Always full. At least

Down to the high land costs in certain areas. In most of London say the cost of the land required to provide adequate parking for everyone free at a large hospital would be horrendous - and could you imagine the outcry if the NHS spent their money on this rather than more direct patient care? And why should patients and their visitors get free parking as a right while the staff who might work shifts (so not benefit from any PT working at its best) do not? You could of course operate some form of priority parking where the spaces are limited - but this would be costly to administer. Probably more satisfactory to provide transport to and from hospital for those who can't do it under their own steam for whatever reasons. Where a hospital does charge for the limited parking they have, it's common to have surrounding on street parking at a similar figure. If this wasn't done, the conditions of local on street parking would be even worse than they are now for residents of those streets.

Of course you could build all new hospitals on cheaper out of town sites. But then it would take the majority longer to get there - and of course emergency ambulance services, which could have serious implications. The only answer is to provide adequate PT services to the hospital. Perhaps in the form of a bus service from the local station or centre.

[Tony Bryer]

Yes, I still follow UK news and have seen cynical attempts to get votes by promising to abolish hospital parking charges. The reality - as you rightly say - was that before charging, free parking usually meant no parking - at Kingston and West Middlesex anyway.

[Stuart Noble]

But where would the "centre" be in the case of St.George's? Tooting Bec Common maybe? :-)

[Dave Plowman (News)]

It already has several bus routes that stop outside - and one which goes through the grounds. But many Londoners are strange about using buses - can't be bothered to look up the routes - and the nearest tube is quite a hike away. Takes about a 1/4 hour to walk from it for someone who is fit.

I was more referring to other towns which may well not have as good PT as London.

[Clive George]

My "local" hospital (25 miles away, one of the downsides of living in a rural area) is out of town, and still charges (the railway station car park a mile away doesn't!). There's nothing but the hospital there either. The car parks are always full, and I think the charges are there to encourage use of PT even though the PT ain't great.

I shall ask them what their policy is.

[dennis]

Well they aren't charging enough and should charge more and provide more spaces if they are always full.

My local hospital gets loads of complaints about charges and they always quote the max daily rate despite them selling 10 single use tickets for £10, weekly passes for £10 and 3 month passes for £20