civilservant

I had a quick look at the report (the final version has now been published) and was very surprised to find after all the hoohah in the press that it does NOT recommend that the hospital be closed. From a quick glance, it's not easy to see exactly what the recommendations are, and I haven't had time to read the report carefully. But overall it paints a picture of a poorly performing trust with serious management and clinical deficiencies delivering very poor value for money. I was also struck by the report's characterisation of primary care in SE London as being consistently below the rest of the country both in terms of access and patient experience - whether this was just about Lewisham wasn't clear.

We had the fridge and the washing machine in the sitting room and washed up in the bath for 4 months - that was grim! The cooking was done in a microwave or on an induction hob that sat on top of the washing machine as I didn't want to risk a naked flame or a hot electric element in our very tight living space. You can pay quite a bit for one but we went for this cheap-ish hob http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B004BM749S/ref=pd_lpo_k2_dp_sr_1/278-4129225-4678057?pf_rd_m=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE&pf_rd_s=lpo-top-stripe&pf_rd_r=0VY4SNZQJ6CTBWCRV6VA&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_p=103612307&pf_rd_i=B001TIPRN2 after reading the on-line reviews and were quite pleased with it

I am horrified ...that '50 Shades' is being described as literature. Check out Paloma Faith's hilarious trashing of it on Room 101 http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01q9rxn/Room_101_Series_2_Episode_4/

finally saw Django and thought it was a marvellous return to form - almost as good as Pulp Fiction or Jackie Brown (was the best bit of the latter really BrFo in a bikini? a bit sad, that assessment) Rosie I do hope you kept your eyes open when QT came on with that ludicrous Oz accent or you'd have missed a brilliant bit of the film. Most of the characters he plays himself get offed in inventively nasty ways.

I really rate Jackie Brown (but maybe B Womack, Elmore Leonard et al should get some of the credit for that) and Pulp Fiction and Reservoir Dogs are impressive, but I turned off Kill Bill and the Grindhouse stuff, the cartoon violence is really tedious From Dusk till Dawn remains a hoot every time I watch it, so a bit perplexed as to why it's rarely acknowledged by George Clooney fans!

do you think that you will have time, patience and energy enough to give each child the individual attention that each needs? these are all just as essential as money and living space. having a sibling can be a good thing, but sometimes not, esp if there's not enough parental attention to go around. There are very good reasons why 'middle-child syndrome' has been identified as a problem, and it can exist even if there are only 2 in the family.

JulieP, I wasn't criticising you - I am happy that you've managed things so that rats can't get into your house any more. You are completely right that nobody would want to be bitten by a rat, but if they're living somewhere else, then no reason to bother them. I fear that there are people who would kill every rat or grey squirrel in the country, simply because they don't like them. I'm terrified of snakes myself, but wouldn't want them extinct just because of that. Rats exhibit a moderate fear of people, but they are also curious (like foxes, or even people; curiosity is a trait associated with intelligence) and can hang around to watch what happens unlike a more timid creature, like a mouse, which will have rushed for the exit.

Rats are not a threat unless they are harbouring disease! If they aren't in the house, I'd leave them be. And why should they be scared of people? They're at the same level of the food chain as foxes or cats and probably much more intelligent than either.

I've stayed out of this as I didn't want to duplicate LM's posts. I'd add intensive cultivation and mono-cultures, whether organic, GM, or resource intensive to the list of problems. Super-efficient cultivation methods are a key contributor to wast, simply by guaranteeing a surplus year after year. And the costs of generating the surplus are externalised, so there is no incentive to manufacturers to rein back on production so that it just meets demand

Agree - rats are clever social animals, and I doubt that in normal circumstances they'd do silly things like attack babies. See this http://www.sciencemag.org/content/334/6061/1427.short for an account of altruistic behaviour in rats. They are bright enough to learn how to release a fellow rat from a cage and altruistic enough to use this knowledge to help each other and share treats.

Voyageur Wrote: > I wouldn't expect others to share my views though. I seem to share your views exactly, on all counts!

I'd say it's more like saying that someday we won't be able to afford as many pairs of shoes as we currently splurge on. I differ from ajm because in my view, people will always need shoes, just as people will always eat (need?) meat or milk or fish. But I agree with him that people need to accept responsibility for consuming these things. This means cutting down on waste and paying the right price i.e. factoring in the environmental costs, including the cost of ethical treatment of the animals involved. Cheap chicken is cheap because we don't pay the full costs of production i.e. it is imported, so another country bears the environmental cost of poor farming practice, the chickens are intensively farmed, so they themselves bear the cost of un-ethical methods of production etc. This is not just Guardianista sloganising, see even the Daily Wail - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1278495/The-unappetising-truth-McDonalds-chicken-meals.html. And before you remind me (again!), this doesn't cover foie gras,unless it is intensively produced - for which the argument against seems to be almost entirely moral and ethical.

Point taken, H - but I think it's worth moving this debate off its current waffly judgemental stance to think more coherently about the actual environmental cost of meat-eating. I followed the links in the article to the FAO stats website, and the figures (trillions!) of animals annually killed for meat each year are very sobering, as are the figures on the environmental costs of rearing them (and as we know, these figures invariably underestimate the true numbers.)

Chucks this morsel from today's Observer into the Forum : "Eating real meat in 2035 could be as morally questionable as eating foie gras ? and about as expensive. As Dr Mark Post says: "A meat-eater with a bicycle is much more environmentally unfriendly than a vegetarian with a Hummer." http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2013/jan/05/the-future-of-food Then stands well back to watch the feeding frenzy!

*Bob* Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I think it's something called 'fashion', Huge. > Some of it may be a touch ridiculous, but - on > balance - it's makes for brighter world than one > populated solely by pot-bellied thirtysomething's > in chinos and one-size-fits-all pastel-coloured > tees from Uniclo. Oh, I don't know - does this look really involve much effort? It looks like it's about fagging up to Gap instead and chucking away the razor, non - but happy to be educated otherwise

Sue Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ED - NAGAIUTB Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > >> > > civilservant - what a sanctimonious s**t you > are. > > xxxxxx > > And that post says rather more about you than it > says about civilservant ..... Thanks, Sue! ED-whateverthingy, is that an example of your fluency in 'Chinese'? Having taken a look at your forum archive, I now realise that I couldn't ever have been any help to you as you're burdened not just with a kitbag, but also a stonking great chip on your shoulder. Not even a Bugaboo can cope with that! Back on topic, what Huguenot said.

I suppose a bit of abuse and public posturing is the price we pay for having an active forum. Unfortunately people like aquarius moon get an unfairly large bit of the stick simply because they are too nice to retaliate in kind. I do hope that they'll keep on reminding us how we can do better, in spite of all the petty nastiness that's sent their way.

Isla Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Im intrigued as to why the end two particularly > impress you, why not the first two? Yes, why? Is it something to do with hats? Myself I think the first one is rather fine.

malumbu Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I put bugger all salt in my food, and try to use > little oil. Me too. But you're right, even stuff like dhal needs a bit of salt - and everything tastes better with ghee in!

hmm, I've been to the India Club and it's ok - the same generic 'Indian' food as one would get in the Y I am puzzled by your reference to 'curry' and the need for extra salt/oil. Do you mean a generic meat curry of the kind served up in 'Indian' restaurants? My own experience of South Indian cooking is that very little of either salt or oil is needed to make a curry palatable and 'authentic', unless the recipe demands it - it's all about appropriate ingredients and spicing.

ED - NAGAIUTB Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- On the days I commute into town I > have a heavy kit bag with me that I don't fancy > lugging down the Lane. Would you suggest the same > to all the mum's with buggies? OK, maybe it might take more than 20 mins with a heavy kitbag - poor you. For the unburdened, my suggested timing of 20 mins from the Plough pub to ED station is generous compared to the 18 mins that Walkit.com suggests. I would suggest exactly the same to a mum with a buggy. When I was one myself, I found that pushing a light pushchair (not one of the heavy Bugaboos) speeded up my walking no end, so I'd probably have covered the distance in something like 15 mins on foot. And it would well have been a lot easier to walk than to wait until a bus was prepared to let me+buggy on, then get on, park the buggy, put up with all the commuters who think the buggy is taking up 'their' space, entertain baby fed-up with stuffy uncomfortable bus ride, and then disembark with the buggy.

Here is some info on the production of foie gras, from Compassion in World Farming http://www.ciwf.org.uk/resources/publications/poultry_ducks_geese_turkeys/default.aspx THE FORCE-FEEDING PROCEDURE A feeding tube is inserted into the oesophagus (gullet) and boiled maize mixed with fat is delivered by an auger (a screw which is operated by hand or an electric motor) or a pneumatic or hydraulic system. Mechanised systems may deliver the feed in just 2-3 seconds, allowing one person to forcefeed up to 400 caged ducks in an hour. Ducks are typically force-fed twice a day for 12 to 15 days and geese three times a day for 15 to 21 days. The amount of feed in each meal is considerably greater than normal intake and is increased over the force-feeding period. If force-feeding is stopped, the birds greatly reduce their feed intake for several days HOUSING During the force-feeding period, the birds are confined in pens or group cages or, for ducks, individual cages may be used which are so small that the birds cannot turn around, stand erect or stretch their wings. The slatted or wire mesh floors can cause foot injuries. Birds may be kept in near darkness during the force-feeding period, except when being fed. HEALTH AND WELFARE PROBLEMS CAUSED BY FORCE-FEEDING The enlarged liver ... forces the legs outwards so that the birds have difficulty standing and their natural gait and ability to walk can be severely impaired. Force-fed birds develop increasingly liquid faeces, are less active and are more likely to suffer from bone fractures, liver lesions, respiratory disorders and ?wet neck? ? a condition where the neck feathers become curved and sticky. ALTERNATIVES TO FORCE-FEEDING (...) Some farmers produce smaller and less fatty livers from ducks and geese without force-feeding. These are offered as a substitute for foie gras (such as ?Faux Gras?), sometimes called ?ethical foie gras? or ?humane foie gras?. The Pateria de Sousa ?self-gorging? foie gras produced in Spain comes from geese kept in very extensive free range conditions. The geese have enlarged livers but only about half the minimum size of conventional goose foie gras. This is a premium product, costing several times more than conventional foie gras.

Absolutely, maxxi - once you start thinking about it, it becomes very difficult to justify a lot of what passes for normal farming practice and to remain sanguine about how animals become food. I'd add long-distance transportation to your list. A lot of sniping on here about cheap chicken - generally people who think about the subject turn vegetarian, or at least spend a little bit extra for ethically produced meat (and compensate for the extra cost by eating less of it).

You've got the option of walking to the station instead. It shouldn't take more than 20 minutes from the Plough as its downhill pretty much all the way

Marmora Man Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > CS: "Animals do, of course, but then we're not > animals..." Oh yes we are - we're just another > animal species - the "human ape". Quite right biologically, but I was speaking metaphorically!