civilservant

I like what Huguenot says (although I do like foie gras, and it's on principle that I avoid it.) My thinking is that animals should be treated with kindness while they live and that their deaths should be as painless (and dignified) as possible - so this automatically excludes the production of foie gras. I also believe in nose to tail eating, so stuffed pigs' trotters, liver and kidneys are right up my street too - so I salute MM's desire to give his sons the benefit of a rounded food experience. But recently in Tesco, I was quite disturbed at the quantity of dead flesh on display for Christmas - it seemed almost pornographic. Maybe it's just me getting old, but I find it increasingly hard to justify killing an animal just to eat it. Animals do, of course, but then we're not animals...

Some statistics to put the US in perspective relative to the UK Total annual firearm related death-rate in US = 10.2 (UK = 0.25 i.e. US rate is over 40 times higher) Annual firearm-related homicides = 3.7 (UK = 0.04 i.e. US rate is over 90 times higher)) Annual firearm-related suicides = 6.1 (UK = 0.07 i.e. US rate is almost 90 times higher) (All figures are per 100,000 population.) If anyone has an argument in favour of their approach to guns versus ours, I'd like to hear it. As for the sacredness of the Second Amendment and the right to bear arms, it's only an amendment, which means that it can be amended, and so can the US Constitution itself (which it has been 27 times in less than 250 years!).

Chinese supermarkets sell something called mock duck, which is a processed form of gluten. It's a traditional Chinese meat substitute, allegedly invented by Buddhist monks, that attempts to replicate the texture of meat. And Chinese mushrooms are pretty good meat substitutes too

malumbu Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It was OK, cheap, slightly disappointing. > It's a cafeteria for Indians visiting London and staying in the Y above. So the food is generic, rather than based on regional specialties. Saying it's 'authentic Indian' is a bit like saying that fish and chips is 'authentic British' - not strictly accurate but not wrong either IMO the food in the Hare Krishna places is disgusting - a poor Western imitation of Indian vegetarian food. The most 'authentic' veggie Indian meal I've eaten in London was at Rasa in that little street opposite John Lewis.

I too agree with Alan M and PD although I'm not a vegetarian either But I do hope that MMan enjoyed his "caramalised" apples and foie gras as I'd hate to think that the goose died in vain. I suggest that we also extend our sympathies beyond the goose and worry about the foie-grassification of MMan's own liver as a result of over-indulgence in foie gras and Sauternes and that sort of thing. Also that we worry that he's trying to turn his own sprogs onto it, a bit like those fathers who used to insist on manning up their sons by teaching them to smoke.

LondonMix Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I get what you are saying Otta and agree that US gun laws are weak on a number of fronts. I just > am surprised there is so little thought being paid to the victims in this thread from the outset. Understatement of the year about US gun laws, LM! As for your other point, it is necessary for us to identify victims as individuals before we can properly empathise. There is very little info at the moment apart from that about the shooter and the school principal who tried to restrain him. So we have no way of really understanding the scale of the catastrophe. The sympathy that people expressed for the hoaxed nurse started to flow only after they knew who she was and what the circumstances were. I do hope that you cast your net of sympathy for small children facing disaster more widely e.g. the hundreds of children who died in places like China or Afghanistan as a result of natural disaster or military action.

The DJs now become the news and are cast in their turn as victims... Very post-modern Support what MPalaeo said

ratty Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > No one is to blame. It is a sad, sad sad incident > that was sparked by some 21st century media > arseholeness, designed to amuse and titillate the > lowest common denominator; but that does not make > the DJs to blame. Pranking is all about public humiliation. Just because it's the staple of cheap telly and everyone laughs at it doesn't make it alright. There wouldn't be arseholeness if the media didn't think that we weren't all going to say 'good on yer mate' or whatever for their attempts to debunk a sacred cow like the royal family. It's a lot like everyone getting on their high horse about phone-hacking when the whole reason for hacking was to give us our daily dose of salacious gossip. Of course we all laughed when we first heard about this prank. Did any of us think about the collateral damage? Doubtful. So, if even the kind of slebs who make sex tapes claim to feel violated when these get passed around, how much more difficult for this nurse, by all accounts a quiet and dedicated young woman from a more reticent culture, to cope with 21st century norms of shamelessness?

pebbles Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > We can keep dreaming :) x :-)x

Now Max Clifford too There are only two or three charges in each case - but what that suggests is that there's already been a lot of filtering of the allegations to identify those which might hold up in court, rather than that these chaps are being held to account for a bit of poor judgement on a couple of occasions. And what ElP said

and see here http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-20511602 where the Beeb ;-) says "People in England - and across the rest of the UK for that matter - have some of the worst lifestyles in Europe, particularly in terms of drinking habits and obesity levels." Socio-economics have some impact - "those from poorer backgrounds are more likely to lead unhealthy lives. Smoking - the leading cause of avoidable deaths - is now twice as common among lower socio-economic groups" - but "the largest rises in alcohol consumption have been seen in the higher income groups in recent years." We knew all that already of course, but the report also quotes a public health expert speculating that the universal safety net provided by the NHS might have a lot to do with our propensity to indulge in bad health behaviours - because we'll be treated for free, unlike just about anyone anywhere else in the world.

Gidget Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Is Godiva the equivalent of Cadbury over there? yes, alas. and Leonidas is even lower in the hierarchy

AJM, you are right. I did use the last para to focus attention on our very own LL and the vociferous campaign to replace an Iceland, which is at least affordable to the many, with a store which only a few can afford to shop in. We have many of the latter on LL and environs. Do we really need another one? I too found it was a very thoughtful article (as per Ian Jack's usual contribution, and of course he doesn't write exclusively for the Guardian). However, I thought I'd have a bit of fun with the knee-jerk reactions I knew my post would trigger - and I wasn't wrong! Eating well is a relatively new concept, just like the dangers of smoking. Here is the link to the Eatwell plate http://www.nhs.uk/Livewell/Goodfood/Pages/eatwell-plate.aspx and other stuff put out by Change4Life http://www.nhs.uk/Change4Life/Pages/change-for-life.aspx One reason for the low visibility of this sort of thing is probably that it's put out by the state and therefore not seen to be sexy in the way that private sector enterprises such as alcohol, tobacco and other drugs are.

PaulK Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Well Sue, it gives you something else to moan > about PaulK, Annette's post was ill-advised - but at least she treats everyone with the same irreverence. You on the other hand seem to have got into a situation where you're targeting Sue. Not nice. BTW I do know Sue, and she does a lot of good work in ED

See Ian Jack's excellent piece in last Saturday's Guardian: "The 'nutrition gap' between Britain's rich and poor is vast ? and wicked. The gulf between people's diets is worse today than it was when George Orwell wrote The Road to Wigan Pier in 1936. However complex the reasons, the fact is shocking" http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/nov/23/rich-poor-food-nutrition-gap-ian-jack He ends with this paragraph: "My neighbourhood has some fine food shops: a cheese emporium, a greengrocer's, a well regarded butcher's and a recently opened fishmonger's. Walking past them the other day, I was suddenly struck by how much this Toytown high street depends not on old traditions but on money ? the City money that has come to settle here. Visit any of these shops to buy something healthy, your weekly Eatwell Plate allowance of ?16.70 will very soon be gone. A halibut fillet, a tiny pyramid of goats' cheese, a bunch of grapes ? pfft! In the end, how can you describe this gulf between the rich and the poor, more extreme than in Orwell's day, other than to say it's wicked?"

???? Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Jessie Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > I'm far more interested in what the hospitals > and > > children's homes have to say for themselves. > BBC > > is a v easy target for right wing press and its > > followers. > > > Mmmmm. Another sacred cow which can,t be > criticised without rasing the normal defensive > hogwash? Rubbish, it failed miserably and almost > systematically for years on the abuse and more > recently by , at best, ignoring it. Not the only > guilt party but so what. Cyril Smith - another 'Sir' (although Jimmy S wasn't a 'proper' one). Nothing to do with the Beeb this time. Accusers were boys, not girls. 'Everyone' knew in Rochdale and elsewhere, but found it convenient to turn a blind eye. The only commonality is that both exploited very young people, counting on their victims' powerlessness to keep themselves safe from public exposure. How many others?

If you're on Sablon, try Pierre Marcolini for chocolate and Wittamer across the way for cake and deli. If choco-slumming is your thing, though, there's a Godiva at the bottom of the Sablon as well. Down a way from Sablon are the Rue Haute and the rue Blaes for 'antique' shops and the Sunday morning street market on the Place du Jeu de Balles

typical x pages of forum twitter about some manky bottles (which I've never seen in spite of living around the corner from the alleged spot) and then when someone actually proposes doing something about it, people start calling him out good luck, Nathan W, if you manage to catch the witch bottler, you will go down as a piece of ED history

I had a similar brush-off experience when looking to carpet our stairs and daughter's bedroom. So much for spending money locally. We went to John Lewis in the end.

love his California Dreaming my OH went to his gig Sunday night and reported that a good time was had by all (while I tried to pretend that I was cool about not being able to go) Stones? pah

Agree that the roots of the problem may well be systemic and long-term, and linked to poverty of education and aspiration. However there needs to be a safety net for people suffering in the short term. And if children are deprived as a result of feckless parenting or some other cause, then they are facing an additional handicap. That's why I'd support the work of charities that try to plug the gap.

Thanks AJM. I asked 'is anyone actually starving' in the UK and a bit of research shows that hunger IS still a problem. According to Action for Children, "68% of Action for Children family support services are seeing children who are hungry... Many children (...) don't eat regular hot meals. Their families are often facing some impossible choices like whether to pay their rent or heating bills, or pay for their weekly food shop. They can't do both. ... A gift of just ?10 could pay for a week of hot meals for a hungry child, or help us to run breakfast clubs so children can get a healthy start to their day." http://www.actionforchildren.org.uk/meal ?10 sounds like a bargain to me if it can buy a whole week's healthy hot meals for someone who needs them. A chance to practice what we preach on healthy eating instead of taking to the EDF to denounce others' poor nutritional choices... Any takers?

I can't resist re-posting the great Ms Curtain's desires as expressed on another thread Annette Curtain Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > A bike warden, with clout. > > You know those ride-along-dressed-in-black-with-no-lights-on type of cyclists. Yeah you do, ?500+ bike, all the > garb, no lights. > > Well, this warden would leap out, ram a broomstick through their spokes, and then motorists would be > given the chance to crumple the stupid bike under the wheels of their cars. > > The warden would then crack the offending cyclist in the nethers, with said stick. > > And pedesterians could mock them from the safety of the pavement. > > Oh and, I want a cannon on my car, for that idiot who breaks through the light, the rugger shorts > guy, wearing long sock, no helmet and all sweaty. > As his wazzocky face looks round, i'd like to fire a soggy loaf filled with English mustard right > into it. Again, running his silly suspension mountain bike over, until it was flat. > > Any chances ?

Julia is very knowing indeed. As far as I can see, she knows (know's?) in Croydon http://www.allinlondon.co.uk/directory/1170/118601.php, in Sheffield http://www.citikey.co.uk/display/julia-knows-TGD15 and in Manchester http://www.thomsonlocal.com/Julia%20Knows%20Beauty/0241491205800703000/companyinfo.html, and also on-line http://juliacosmetics.com/contactus.php

Depends on what you mean by expensive and the amount of time, effort and money people are prepared to spend on feeding themselves. I've heard that at the start of the 20th century, a working class family spent about two-thirds of its income on food; by mid-century, expenditure on food had halved to a third of income. But by the end of the 20th century, it had halved again to around a sixth of income. Of course it means eating rubbish bread and pizza and imported battery chicken, but food has become less important to people precisely because it is so cheap. Why go out and grow your own veg, or trudge from greengrocer to baker to fishmonger looking for bargains when it can all be ready almost instantly at the touch of a microwave button. Poorer folk go to Iceland for a packet of burgers for a pound, the better-off go to M&S for ready-chopped carrots, but essentially, food is now about instant gratification... (so that we have more time to watch The Great British Bake-Off or Come Dine with Me?) At one level, I'd be concerned about Austerity Britain, but that's because I'm a middle-class Guardian reader and would like everyone to eat their five a day and cut down on cheap meat and unhealthy grease. But is anyone actually starving?