SLad

I think we should all have a pact not to disabuse north Londoners of their views on the south. They'll only start moving here if we do.

We just used handy for the first time (it's an app) and we had the lovely Joan. It was great and we're going to stick with them. There's no long term commitment. All paid through bank transfers and they have an introductory offer of 2 hours for ?15 with promo code ESTATE.

You could get an apartment on paxos, gorgeous secluded and quiet island near Corfu. You'd probably want to hire as well though. Its worth it as the place is magical.

Tulse Hill Hotel. Rosendale Pub. Florence or Commercial at Herne Hill. The Herne.

Crumbs this is going to be a massive distraction from the current trend of this thread but I have been to Peckham Plex a fair bit since moving into the area in 2008. It is a little gem of a cinema for those occasions when you're feeling a bit hard up or just want to see a new movie without paying ridiculous prices. When it was on orange wednesday (buy one get one free tickets) it was insanely cheap. In more recent times, I loved going there with my baby daughter for the mum and baby screaming and had a particularly brilliant time singing along to Sunshine in Leith jiggling my sleeping daughter around in her sling. However, you get what you pay for: the cinema is not well-appointed and rarely very clean by the evening showings. There's no bar and nowhere nice in the cinema (though plenty of places locally now) to meet up for a pre-show drink. Worst of all, the sound quality for the films themselves is not the best. Comparing that to the Ritzy (I've not been to the ED picturehouse yet) is a false exercise: aside from the fact that both show films, the experiences are miles apart. So, in the round I would always rather pay a bit extra and go to a picturehouse (unless they're not showing the film I want to see) but think we're all really lucky having the Peckham plex on hand for a cheaper treat. Sorry for the distraction from the bickering. As you were.

I think you can get private allergy tests done so maybe Google that. Wished my mum had done it with me before we got a cat: I get asthmatic as a result of the allergy (don't have any asthma at all otherwise) and ended on a nebulizer at hospital. Cue tears all round as the cat had to be returned. My mum then got 2 cats as soon as I left home, presumably as a preventative measure to ward off any cjhance of my return!

Get a big green egg...mmmmm.

maxxi Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > KidKruger Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > Try it. You might surprise yourself. You twat. > > > And Iceland has its new tag line. Love this post.

Otta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > So that's that sorted then. > > > > Louisa So...does this mean Otta is Louisa?

Newbie, Poor you and your little baby. Agree with the poster who said that you need the help of the Dr to try to identify the cause of the bites or irritation. When that's established then you could take some advice from the citizen'a advice bureau or a personal injury firm of solicitors on whether you have a claim (slater and Gordon represented lots of claimants in the main group action on the toxic sofa claims which settled in 2010, Macmillan Williams are a firm with a local office in Herne Hill who might be able to help). But finding out the cause is the absolute first priority. Good luck x

Cyclist Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Happy to continue this conversation in a > meaningful way when you have presented some > meaningful data for reference. > > SLad Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Arrogance compared with stubbornness is a > ticking > > time bomb. ps. I love the fact that your initial reply was a bare "Whatever" which you then edited to this reply. If only Chuka could have done the same with his "trash" comment.

Cyclist Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The helmet is a fair point. > > Some actual statistics would help to put the > actual "risk of cycling with dogs" in context. > Today, a total of 4 cars went pass my position on > Townley road in 1 direction. All travelled at a > speed of around 10 to 15 mph prior to and after > passing my position. Townley road is the "busiest" > stretch in the whole trip. For the rest of the > journey, 1/3 has even fewer cars - today count is > 2. The remaining 1/3 is not even on roads with > car. > > Firstly, let's agree that this journey is not the > same as cycling on Camberwell Road or Denmark > Hill. In fact, it is far from it. > > Is there a risk of accident ? Of course ! But if > this is something to warrant a chat with me while > I am on the road, please, just simply ban cycling > on the road in UK. > > Has anyone seen the police riding on horse > strolling down roads in London city centre ? They > don't gallop. Instead, I suspect drivers take > extra care when they are in sight. Substitute that > with a bike with dogs that travels at speed > between that of the mounted police and the 10 mph > cars, and travels in a predictable straight line > just like all other "average" cyclists (The weight > of the extra child adds to the weight and, > "surprisingly", the stability of the travelling > bicycle.) Suddenly, all form of predictions of the > inevitable crash and ticking time bomb appear from > nowhere. > > Let us then reflect on what do these different > perception of risk points to. > > It is that the attitude of the road users should > be the single biggest concern as the cause of > accident between a bicycle and a car. If the car > driver takes the same care when he/she sees a > bike, a bike with dogs, a bike with dogs and > child, on the road as he does when he sees mounted > police, the number of road incidents with bike > will be far less. And this is exactly the attitude > a car driver in the semi-residential / residential > roads in Dulwich should possess every time they > are on the road. This goes for all cyclists too. > And if we cannot be sure of that, then that is > what the cycling lobbyist, road safety association > etc. should be working on. The message, if not > already clear, is this - in residential areas, > roads are shared between cyclist and cars to a > greater extent. Drive slowly and take extra care. > The same goes for the cyclist. But sending this > message across is not an easy and quick task. It > will be a drawn out process. On the other hand, > stereotyping and restricting the use of roads from > a non-typical cycling user of 20 mins per day, is > the easy way out. Hence we see here, a concerted > attack that has not been substantiated by any > basic statistics and reasoning, and attempted > interference in real life (for those who want to > approach me while on the road) occurring in the > forum. What is illustrative of the > unreasonableness of this attack, is that the > accuser requests evidence from the accused to > support the accusation made against the accused. > > Today, an attempt is made to restrict the use of > road by a cyclist with dogs because someone > happens to think that it is dangerous and the > cyclist is a no-brainer. Tomorrow, the restriction > may then be argued to be put on cyclists who carry > child, because these cyclists do not care enough > about the risks that the child is exposed to while > on the road. There will always be a temptation to > eliminate diversity for singularity and > uniformity. But actually there are two choices : > either give in to the tyranny of the mass, or open > up ways for a more diverse and greater use of the > roads. > > I may be an idiot, but I will firmly defend > against any encroachment by unrelated people on > what is perfectly reasonable to do - the right to > cycle with dogs without being harassed by the "H&S > Fascist" - thank you, it is a good term. Thanks heavens you might now consider putting a helmet on your child's head. At least some good has come out of all of this.

Arrogance compared with stubbornness is a ticking time bomb.

Otta Wrote: > > This has been going on for a few weeks, makes me > so cross. Parents don't lift a finger to stop it, > and so you look like a right mean bastard when you > tell your kid that they can't join in. Tell me about it. I almost became the world's worst Aunt when I told my niece and nephew they weren't allowed to play on it. Luckily they were sated when they got to play on the brilliant new bits of play equipment which have been opened up at the end. Who knows why the fence hasn't been removed yet (I assumed a final safety sign off which could well include the risks posed from allowing small children to clamber all over relatively steep banks without bedded in turf), but in addition to my safety concerns I have this weird and rather old-fashioned belief that certain things should be observed like spiky fences keeping little ones out of unfinished play areas.

Funnily enough, I just came across this in the context of a matter I've involved in at the moment: http://www.rospa.com/road-safety/advice/pedal-cyclists/carrying-children/

Dear Cyclist, I have argued about the relevance of cycle helmets in a professional context on many occasions so I am au fait with the benefit/disadvantage arguments but you'd be hard pressed to find any medic who would suggest that they don't serve to protect some element of damage, even if only soft tissue injuries rather than the percussive brain injuries we are exposed to when our head is subjected to brunt trauma of impact on pavement/car/street furniture as a result of a collision. If you've got an empirical data source for me to compare the statistics on accidents involving cyclists riding whilst not attempting to maintain control of dogs and cyclists riding whilst doing so then please point me in the right direction but I'm sure you're not suggesting that one should just compare the number of accidents themselves given i'm sure there are more of the former category of cyclists than the latter out on our streets. However, I think you've misunderstood my point: I'm not focusing on helmets, I'm focused on this circus style means of transport (exacerbated by the failure even to accord your child the protection of a common and cheap piece of safety equipment) which jeopardises your safety but, more importantly, that of your child, your dogs and other road users. And don't worry about my advocacy for cycle safety: I can reassure you that I am vocal and active campaigner for greater cycle safety but tend to find that the cycle safety message is often undermined with the general public by the unsafe practices commonly adopted by cyclists in London such as failing to observe traffic lights, and cycling in a demonstrably unsafe manner but hey ho.

Dear Cyclist, Bully for you that you feel sufficiently confident in your dogs' temperament and ability to avoid becoming distracted or embroiled with street furniture, the general public's ability to avoid any type of inadvertence which might impact on your unusual caravan, and your own control of that flimsy bicycle you cycle (which, by the way, is no match for any other vehicle on the road) to feel that you place your child in little danger by adopting this circus style means of transport without even bothering to protect part of your child's head with a helmet. As someone who sees the consequences of third party's inadvertence on our roads day in day out and the devastation the resultant accidents can cause, I'm afraid I think it's misplaced and a sign of a significant ego. I wish that you and your child remain safe and well but do sincerely hope that you consider modifying your approach at least to leave the dogs at home and put a helmet on your child's head. You can be stupid enough not to bother wearing one but don't inflict that self same stupidity on your child for heaven's sake. Yours, S

Fuck fuck fuck.

As of this weekend, the children were playing there because someone has purposefully pulled down a section of fencing and lots of irresponsible parents were allowing their children to play in that area. My husband and I managed to avert one accident by stopping two little boys from trying to climb over a section of the spiky fence because they hadn't realised it was breached elsewhere. The new equipment may well not have been signed off as safe yet so i can't imagine how stupid those parents have to be to allow their little ones in there. Hopefully the fence is reinstated or the new section opened fully soonest.

24 hours is a good pace. We got blisters. They weren't that bad. I think having toughened the feet with lots of walking in the boots I wore before helped. I've also heard that vinegar baths can help to toughen the skin but didn't try that myself. When a blister was acquired I used compeed which is ace. 24hours on the flat is feasible without killing yourself. You'll need good support crews with a variety of foods and excitement to keep your spirits up. and folding chairs and tables...makes all the difference to be able to have a 10 min sit down. We also all used poles from about 20km in why was v helpful but don't know how feasible on the Thames path. Practice with them beforehand though.

I am no expert but happy to have limited brain picked. it was a great experience and I'm looking for another similar thing to do soon so I'm very enthusiastic about the whole thing right now.

I trained for and did the Oxfam Trailwalker event (100Km over the South Downs Way). I basically walked home from work (then Temple to West Norwood) as often as I could and did (as far as memory serves) 4 all day training walks with members of my team so that we could learn to walk in pace with each other in order that we could keep together and give each other lots of moral support. I found that the best training walks (usually between 12 and 20 miles) were those we did on the actual course we were going to be walking as that made it feel less daunting - plus the S Downs Way is beautiful! The thing which i did least well on the walk itself was eat...I know it sounds bonkers but having started walking at 5am, by the time it got to 10pm that evening I couldn't eat anymore and then I had a massive energy bonk in the middle of the night (which is definitely not what you need). Luckily I had a very patient and supportive team and managed to eat something new at one of our middle of the night stops so it was a bit better after that. I'm sorry that I'm not doing any serious training at the moment so can't invite you along for the ride but good luck and I hope you find someone. S PS have you tried listening to the Rambling series with Clare Balding on the BBC iplayer - i've just started and it's making me chomp at the bit to get out and do more lovely walks.

Recycle it?

Pies from Beamish and McGue on Lancaster Avenue (spinach and mushroom is amazing) or get a daal from any curry house and eat it with a heated frozen paratha (you can get frozen ones in DKH Sainsburys and they are AMAZING). If I'm really being lazy I'm a massive fan of frozen fresh pasta (which takes 3 mins in boiling water to cook through) with pesto and veg. Good luck. Is a right pain having to cook when you just want to kick your heels up and relax.

Roast chicken piled high with delicious veg. Followed by jelly...fruit juice for the littlies and elderflower for the grown ups. All easily prepped in advance. Enjoy x