Rotherham widower continues wife's epilepsy fundraising legacy

A widower from Rotherham has said he is determined to continue his wife's legacy raising awareness about the dangers of epilepsy, a year on from her death.Jo Scott died in May 2024 of sudden death in epilepsy syndrome, a rare disorder affecting about one in 1,000 people with epilepsy.Craig Scott said that before her death, his wife had campaigned for the charity Epilepsy Action, but often found people did not take the illness seriously, something he said "must change".Mr Scott said: "I want to get the message out there that this isn't trivial. This is serious."
He said his wife had "fought to give epilepsy a fair hearing, but I don't think people really appreciated it"."After what's happened, it's now very difficult to argue with," he added.
Ms Scott suffered her first epileptic seizure at school at the age of 12 while she was in front of a computer screen. She was later diagnosed with photosensitive epilepsy, also known as visually sensitive epilepsy, a condition where seizures are triggered by flashing or flickering lights.At 16, she also developed juvenile myoclonic epilepsy, a common form of epilepsy characterised by sudden muscle jerks.According to Ms Scott's mum, Cairon Turner, it was a "frightening experience" for her daughter, but it never stopped her."She was a whirlwind and did everything she wanted to. She went on music tours abroad with school, she even went with her friend to Spain after GCSEs," she said.Ms Turner said the prospect that epilepsy could end her daughter's life was something that she had considered, but refused to dwell upon."It's always at the back of your mind," she explained."Each time she had a seizure it was there, but we never spoke about it."A number of times we had the call and came tearing down here to her home and I wondered what we would find."
Mr Scott, who works on the railways, said that since his wife's death he had been forced to take on the role of sole parent for his three-year-old son. He admitted that the "responsibility can weigh heavily" at times."It can be relentless. I still have to work full time and you can never switch off. Others can help but the buck stops here: he's my son," he said."I'm very aware he's already gone through such a lot, and making sure his life is the best it can be is now the most important thing to me."Mr Scott said he had gone on his own fitness journey in a bid to raise money for Epilepsy Action, losing four stone (25kg) in the process.He said he also regularly ran 10 miles (16km) and swam three times a week, and planned to take part in The Great North Run to raise money for the charity in September."I'd rather I wasn't in this position," he said."But I feel a responsibility to carry on Jo's work and to try and get that message out there that this isn't trivial, this is serious, and it needs to be better understood."He added: "What I am trying to do is to do all I can to stop other families going through this."
Epilepsy Action primarily supports people with epilepsy with a helpline and also offers a befriending and counselling service.Rebekah Smith, the charity's CEO, admitted that "raising awareness without scaring people unnecessarily" was important."People can die from epilepsy, but it is still rare," she said."About 600,000 in the UK have epilepsy and every day three people die from sudden unexpected death in epilepsy - so that is something people need to be aware of."However, Ms Smith acknowledged epilepsy was still a mystery condition for many people."Because it's actually a range of conditions, people don't always take it as seriously as they should," she said."People know about flashing lights, but that's really only one small percentage."
Listen to highlights from South Yorkshire on BBC Sounds, catch up with the latest episode of Look North

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

BBC News

22 minutes ago

• BBC News

Is an apple a day really good for your health?

We're told an apple a day keeps the doctor away, but does this humble fruit really have an outsized positive effect on our health? The world loves apples. Every year, almost 100 million tonnes of apples are produced globally. These fruits, which comes in a wide range of colours and flavours, have long had a reputation for helping us stay healthy. The popular phrase "an apple a day keeps the doctor away" originates from a slightly wordier Welsh proverb written in 1866: "Eat an apple on going to bed and you'll keep the doctor from earning his bread." But is there any truth at the core of this longstanding maxim? And are apples especially healthy compared to other fruit? First, let's think about the nutrients that apples contain. For one thing, they are a rich source of phytochemicals, including flavanols. These compounds have been linked to numerous health benefits, such as maintaining a healthy weight and lowering your heart disease risk. Why apples are so healthy Apples also contain various polyphenols, including anthocyanins, which help give some apple peel its red colour and are associated with improved heart health. Another polyphenol you'll find in apples is phloridzin. It has been found to help control blood glucose. There's also lots of fibre in apples, largely pectin, which reduces the amount of low-density lipoproteins (LDLs) – the unhealthy form of cholesterol – in our blood. Pectin also lowers the amount of sugar and fat we absorb from food, helping to stabilise our blood sugar levels. These nutrients in apples do seem to offer health benefits. A 2017 review of five studies reported that eating apples is associated with an 18% reduction in the risk of developing type 2 diabetes. Another review from 2022, which analysed 18 studies, found that eating more apples, or apple-derived foods such as apple juice, can reduce cholesterol, if you sustain the habit for more than one week. Having a healthy diet in general can lower your risk of cancer by up to 40%, largely thanks to bioactive compounds, phytochemicals, that are common in apples. Some studies have even linked apple consumption to having a lower risk of developing certain cancers. Regularly eating apples appears to be associated with various health benefits – and we know they're packed with healthy compounds. But are apples, specifically, any more effective than other plant-based foods at keeping the doctor away? "Apples don't have much vitamin C, and they have no iron or calcium, but they have so many other ingredients that promote health and do wonderful things for the body," says Janet Colson, professor of nutrition and food science at Middle Tennessee State University in the US. Apples contain compounds that are common to many fruits and vegetables, including those helpful polyphenols, says Flavia Guzzo, associate professor of plant biology at the University of Verona in Italy. Polyphenols are strong antioxidant molecules. They help to balance the ratio of antioxidants to free radicals in our bodies – free radicals are highly reactive, potentially cell-damaging oxygen molecules. By keeping free radicals in check, we reduce our risk of developing diseases including cancer and heart disease through long-term inflammation. Some researchers say apples have the "second highest level of antioxidant power among all fruits". Apples also contain the polyphenol phloridzin, which is much less common within the other fruits in your fruit bowl. Like pectin, phloridzin appears to lessen the amount of sugar we absorb into our blood from food. Apples are also a good source of phenolic compounds, which are another form of phytochemical. We get one study found that people living in the US get around one fifth of their total phenolic intake from apples. Research suggests that apple phenolic compounds are associated with a lower risk of heart disease, cancer, asthma, diabetes and obesity. But it isn't just the powerful polyphenols and antioxidant punch that has led some scientists to recommend apples over other fruit. In several papers, scientists recommend regular apple-eating because the fruits are simply so widely available. That means that eating them regularly is something that is relatively achievable for many people. It's clear that apples have the potential to improve our health. But it's quite a big claim to say that eating one every day will prevent us from having to go to the GP. Thankfully, one 2015 study took on this exact question. Researchers analysed a survey of nearly 9,000 people, which the participants stated what they ate during one 24-hour period, which they said was indicative of their typical daily diet. They found that apple-eaters were more likely than apple-avoiders to keep the doctor away, however, this result wasn't statistically significant when taking into account that apple-eaters are more likely to be more educated and were less likely to smoke. "The main finding, that there isn't much of an association between people who regularly consume an apple a day and the likelihood of visiting a physician, is because it's complex," says lead researcher Matthew Davis, adjunct associate professor of epidemiology at Dartmouth Geisel School of Medicine in New Hampshire, US. "People who consume apples, based on our analyses, are healthier in general." But they also found that daily apple-eaters were less likely to be reliant on prescription medication – and this was still a significant finding when adjusting for socioeconomic differences between participants who ate one apple per day and those who didn't. Therefore, the paper concludes, a more pertinent saying might be: "An apple a day keeps the pharmacist away." But Davis has issues with the apple-a-day phrase, and says there may be another reason why he and colleagues didn't find a connection between daily apple consumption and going to the doctor. "The underlying assumption is that you only visit the doctor when you're sick, but people visit the doctor for annual check-ups and other prevention-type things," he says. This is why Davis also analysed the data around the likelihood of using prescription medication, too. "This implies that apples reduce the likelihood of having a chronic illness," he says. But ultimately, he says, apples alone aren't enough to stop you having to visit the GP, and that the most impactful thing is having a healthy diet overall. "Which, really, is what the saying is getting at," he says. Colson agrees that the apple-a-day phrase alludes to regularly eating plant-based foods. Apples are a good example because they're so readily available, affordable, have a long shelf-life. "Before fridges, you could put apples in the cellar and they would last a long time, and they don't attract mould," she says. Other studies have found health benefits relating to daily apple-eating – but only when people consume more than one per day. In one study published in 2020, researchers split 40 participants (who all had mildly elevated cholesterol levels) into two groups. One of those groups ate two apples per day while the other had an apple drink with similar calories. The experiment lasted eight weeks and, apart from the apple products, the participants didn't make any other changes to their diets. The researchers found that the apple-eaters had a clinically significant lower level of cholesterol, at the end of the study. However, one weakness of this study it its small size; 40 participants is a relatively low sample size from which to draw any big conclusions. Another study found that eating three apples daily stimulated statistically significant weight loss and improved blood glucose levels (which wasn't statistically significant when followed up) in 40 overweight women. As for how best to eat apples to get the greatest benefit from them, Guzzo advises against removing the skin first. "We should eat the peel of apples, as this is where most of the apple's polyphenols can be found," she says. More like this:• Can chicken soup really fight off a cold?• Do spices really benefit our health?• Are fermented foods actually good for us? And ancient varieties are preferable to new varieties of apple, says Guzzo. In 2021, she and colleagues published a paper looking at the nutritional value of the Pom Prussian apple, an ancient apple from northern Italy, which she found was richer in polyphenols than more modern apple varieties. "When breeders select new varieties, they look to other traits, including size and taste and robustness of the trees," she says. "And when they select these traits, rather than polyphenol content, the variety becomes poorer [from a health point of view]." She says some polyphenols can produce a bitter taste, and that sweeter varieties probably contain a lower proportion of these compounds. As for colour, Guzzo says this doesn't matter so much. Both the polyphenols that cause apple skin to be red or green are both good for us. Ultimately, while eating an apple a day may not mean you visit the doctor less often, it could impact your overall health or your reliance on long-term medication. But, as is always the case, the bigger picture is complicated. Eating an apple a day is great, says Guzzo – but only if that is part of a diet rich in various other plant-based foods, since that is a key driver of good health. --

BBC News

33 minutes ago

• BBC News

National investigation into maternity care announced

Health Secretary Wes Streeting has announced a national investigation into maternity care in "rapid" inquiry will urgently look at the worst-performing maternity and neonatal services in the country, including Leeds, Sussex, Gloucester, and Mid and South has met parents who have lost babies in a series of maternity scandals at some NHS trusts and said the investigation would "make sure these families get the truth and the accountability they deserve". It will begin this summer and report back by December 2025. The review will look across the entire maternity system, bringing together the findings of past reviews into a clear national set of actions to ensure every woman and baby receives safe, high-quality and compassionate the announcement on Monday, Streeting apologised on behalf of the NHS to those families who had suffered avoidable comes after a series of maternity scandals, including in Morecambe Bay, East Kent, Shrewsbury and Telford and said the review would be co-produced with the victims of maternity scandals, giving families a voice into how the inquiry is said he wants to ensure "no parent or baby is ever let down again".

Daily Mail​

36 minutes ago

• Daily Mail​

BREAKING NEWS England's DEADLIEST maternity units to be investigated as Streeting launches urgent review into scandal-hit NHS services

Wes Streeting has today announced a 'rapid national investigation' into England's maternity units following a litany of scandals that have rocked the NHS. The new investigation is intended to provide truth to families suffering harm, as well as driving urgent improvements to care and safety. It comes after Mr Streeting met families who have lost babies and amid the ongoing investigations at some NHS trusts into poor maternity care. Announcing the move at the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, he said the 10 most at risk units will be investigated. It will also look at the maternity and neo-natal system as a whole. The review will be based on the similar investigation taken into the overall review of the NHS carried out by Lord Darzi. It follows a series of maternity failures including Shrewsbury and Telford and East Kent NHS Trusts, with a record number of services now failing to meet safety standards. Last year, the maternity regulator also found two-thirds of services either 'require improvement' or are 'inadequate' for safety. In a statement, Mr Streeting said: 'Over the last year, I've been wrestling with how we tackle problems in maternity and neonatal units, and I've come to the realisation that while there is action we can take now, we have to acknowledge that this has become systemic. 'It's not just a few bad units. Up and down the country, maternity units are failing, hospitals are failing, trusts are failing, regulators are failing. 'There's too much obfuscation; too much passing the buck and giving lip service.' He added: 'I have been meeting bereaved families from across the country who have lost babies or suffered serious harm during what should have been the most joyful time in their lives. 'What they have experienced is devastating—deeply painful stories of trauma, loss, and a lack of basic compassion—caused by failures in NHS maternity care that should never have happened. 'Their bravery in speaking out has made it clear. We must act and we must act now. 'I know nobody wants better for women and babies than the thousands of NHS midwives, obstetricians, maternity and neonatal staff, and that the vast majority of births are safe and without incident, but it's clear something is going wrong. 'That's why I've ordered a rapid national investigation to make sure these families get the truth and the accountability they deserve, and ensure no parent or baby is ever let down again. I want staff to come with us on this, to improve things for everyone. 'We're also taking immediate steps to hold failing services to account and give staff the tools they need to deliver the kind, safe, respectful care every family deserves. 'Maternity care should be the litmus test by which this Government is judged on patient safety, and I will do everything in my power to ensure no family has to suffer like this again.' Frontline midwives have previously warned working in the NHS is like playing a 'warped game of Russian roulette ', as there was a risk of harm or death at any time, partly due to 'dangerously' low staffing levels. The Royal College of Midwives (RCM) suggests staff shortages and lack of funding is making it harder for midwives to deliver better quality services. The RCM's latest calculation is that England is short of 2,500 midwives. It also comes as another report into the 'postcode lottery' of NHS maternity care last May also ruled good care is 'the exception rather than the rule'. A hugely-anticipated parliamentary inquiry into birth trauma, which heard evidence from more than 1,300 women, found pregnant women are being treated like a 'slab of meat'. At the time, Health Secretary Victoria Atkins labelled testimonies heard in the report 'harrowing' and vowed to improve maternity care for 'women throughout pregnancy, birth and the critical months that follow'.