Thanks for your comments, Dickie. I know I digressed, but my health related comments were in response to allegations of unfairly using up Medicare money, or something like that.

I love it when we find common ground and especially when some humour is introduced.

In regard to Sellafield, if you've done some research, then I'm happy for you to start this topic and I'll put my little pieces of info in. Together with a little digressing too, but if you see what I'm inclined to digress about on this, then I'm sure you'll understand.

The problem with topics on the possible/probable consequencies of what ladies choose to wear, or not wear, is this. These topics are usually debated on preconceived ideas of modesty, chastity, morality, legality, alleged effects on men, religion and so on. And actual experience, fairness and plain common sense often come a poor last. And alleged health issues are thrown in when possible opponents really have little else to say. Or maybe just for laughs!

Rex,

My comment was simply to state the following:
1. That "sunbaking" is a voluntary activity (currently, under the Howard Government);

2. It has attendant health risks (depending on a variety of factors e.g. skin type, one's ability to create melanin, time of exposure, intensity etc.);

3. My reluctance to subsidise treatment for possible patients who voluntarily expose themselves to such radiation. As I said: same for smoking - I think people who smoke should pay for their own rehabilitation, should they unfortunately contract cancer. (This is in keeping with the economic rationalist thinking of the Howard Government of the user pays principle). As for those of us who are affected by environmental factors (e.g. your exposure to smokers whilst working - I deeply understand. I have worked in pubs/clubs myself. Not fun if you don't smoke!)

As for exposed mammaries on the beach - my comments still stand. Expect to be oggled or photographed but keep a copyright / distribution contract tucked in your swimming costume !

If someone photographs you on the beach then *they* hold the copyright on the image. If they posted it on the web, and then you copied it, *you* would be in breach of *their* copyright.

Sylvia.

Sylvia,

I'm not a lawyer, but in essence I think you may be right.

I don't know what the law says about consent for photography in a *public* place and whether one has any control over photographers at all (except by specific legislation). Over to the legal boffins here .....