In 1381
the Poll tax was introduced throughout the Kingdom of England. Every
adult was over the age of 18 was liable to the tax. Tax inspectors
visited every family in every village through the length and breadth
of the kingdom. If a child looked a bit older than was clammed the
inspectors asked that they removed their trousers or smock. If more
than three pubic hairs were revealed the individual was classified as
being over 18 and was liable for tax. Historical research have
revealed that the committee who set up this method are ancestors of a
certain MP for Monmouth and large sections of Wales UKIP
This all however led to a problem called the Peasanrts revolt of 1381
This all however led to a problem called the Peasanrts revolt of 1381
So does checking teeth actually work?
While
Mr Davies said the tests would be "very accurate", experts
have said dental evidence is said not totally reliable, pointing out
it is possible to wrongly estimate someone's age by up to three years
when making an estimate based on this criteria.
Professor
of medical statistics at the Great Ormond Street Institute of Child
Health, Tim Cole, told the BBC these
tests were “very inaccurate,” saying: “If you test children
around the age of 18, or three years either side, in this way, the
results get one third of the ages wrong.
The
Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health (RCPCH) meanwhile said
the tests are "imprecise" and "inappropriate",
adding that there are health risks involved.
A
spokesperson for RCPCH told The
Independent:
“There is no single reliable method for making precise age
estimates and the most appropriate approach is to use a holistic
evaluation, incorporating narrative accounts, physical assessment of
teeth, puberty and growth, and cognitive behavioural and emotional
assessment.
"The
use of radiological assessment is extremely imprecise and can only
give an estimate of within two years in either direction and the use
of ionising radiation for this purpose is inappropriate. If not done
for medical purposes it can be potentially dangerous for a child to
undergo these X-rays."
No comments:
Post a Comment