JoeLeg

I?ve geneeally had really positive experiences with the practice - was recently able to be seen at an hours notice by the nurse practitioner who told me my suspected ear infection was actually rampaging strep mouth (really bad tonsillitis) that required immediate hospital admission, for which I was very grateful (the consultant at Guys told me I wouldn?t have made it another 48 hours without needing an ambulance). My experience has always been that if you can get past the front desk staff the medical team are good. In my recent case it was only when I explained how bad I felt that the person on the phone suddenly remembered that I could see the nurse. And she?s great.

Yeah, well, I?m a local resident and I call BS on any assertion that they made efforts of any type. I?ll be getting into this, though I?m not holding my breath that I?ll get any answers quickly.

I live opposite the cemetery, indeed opposite the new graves, and have to say I?m disgusted that anyone on Wood Vale has objected to seeing flowers! What business is it of ours how people greave?! I might understand if the management had to keep it clear for reasons of safety or land management, but I cannot conceive of Nimbyist locals having any moral authority in this matter. Localresident, to whom should I speak in the cemetery about that? If it?s true then other residents need to speak up - I was certainly never asked! I should sincerely hope there?s been some kind of misunderstanding here.

I think anyone would have a hard time making a case - it requires two medical signatures, both attesting the individual is a danger to themselves/others. While I agree he?s in desperate need of help, I?m not so sure a Section 3 would be feasible, and I reckon he knows it, which is why I reckon it would be counter-productive. If he?s an alcoholic, he isn?t going to be helped until he wants to be helped. In the meantime if anyone wants to help him I think it?s admirable, but he?s the only one who can make the decision to get off booze. ETA - to be fair, an alcoholic can be sectioned if it can be shown that left alone they will drink themselves to death.

Do you genuinely believe threatening him with a Section 3 order will be productive?

intexasatthe moment Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Joeleg - is that why you think people /I post ? > > To obtain the moral high ground ? > > You can't imagine that there might be other > reasons - to express their views ,to hear others > ,to correct an incorrect quote ? You?ve completely missed the point. And I really can?t be bothered with this any more. Enjoy your cognitive dissonance.

All that would be fine if people didn?t then continue discussion publicly, or state publicallyvthat they do not wish to receive PM?s etc. It?s the internet, no one is forcing anyone to respond. It?s hypocritical to try and avoid debate but then continue to talk about it.

intexasatthe moment Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Entiteled to your view JoeLeg ,but you might want > to ask yourself why ,if the "unable to take it " > party says don't send me PMs the "disher out" > continues ? Dude, stop digging. You lost all moral high ground as soon as you started this thread.

intexasatthe moment Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > What on earth is the matter with you that you feel > the need to persue someone with inane criticisms ? Pot. Kettle. Etc...

Always cracks me up when people are happy to get passive aggressive or on their high horse in a public discussion, but as soon as someone tries to discuss something privately ?oh on, I don?t do PM?s?. There?s a few people on here who can dish it out but can?t take it. Childish...

Jules-and-Boo Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > wanting to help someone is admirable - finding the > best way is a challenge - talking about them is a > bit of invasion of privacy, don't you think? > > And I'm not referring to any particular post but > the whole post - perhaps someone who talks to him > might mention there's a forum where he's > discussed. Maybe he'd be flattered, maybe he > wouldn't care. > > Personally, I wouldn't like it. How many threads on here, and the internet in general, discuss someone who isn?t present?

Car accident, long time back, I think.

.

But it's not really that simple Sue. For example, a large part of Nando's offering is that it's very family friendly, which is a bonus if you have young kids. It's also a good place for teenagers to go on their own. As a parent, I'm ok with my children eating there because at least I know where the food comes from, and that it isn't terrible. Compare and contrast with Pizza Express, also very family friendly - I strongly suspect the meats they use are not much different in welfare terms to Nando's. Should that stop us eating here? Maybe I'm a bit of a hypocrite - I would never use less than high end free range meat in my job, and I can trace all of it from field to fork, but in day to day life we sometimes make compromises.

Of course you're right about the issues surrounding Red Tractor, I don't wish to suggest that it is a standard which we should be happy with. But it is at least verifiable and understandable, which too much of our meat is not, and that I think is why I'm happy that it at least exists. I view it (perhaps overly simplistically) and a desirable starting point. The sheer volume of chicken and pork consumed in the UK is stunning; Morrisons, a vertically integrated business with its own farms, abbatoirs and butcheries, still has to import 75% of the cooked/cured pork product it sell, mostly from the Netherlnds where standards are not as good as ours. The simplest answer would be for all of us to eat less meat, but generally speaking that isn't happening.

While I believe there's still a long way to go - and I'm fortunate to be able to afford and have access to meat that I know for sure is ethically sound, I feel that Red Tractor is at least a step in the right direction. If we can get people away from the heap and nasty stuff from Eastern Europe and Asia (where they make Red Tractor look like Soil Association), then hopefully from there we can progress to a better standard for what we produce. Ultimately there is an imbalance between how much meat we consume and the physical amount of space we have in the UK. But stuff like Red Tractor is a good starting point. Of course it should be better, but so should a lot of things in our food chain.

Yeah, I'm not taking the bait on that...

Nando's is far more consistent than Bill's. Bill's tries to do too much, and is not consistent. Nando's sticks to one core product - chicken plus accompaniments, and (usually) does it well. Put another way, if you like what Nando's does you generally won't be disappointed, which is one of the pillars of success in the industry. People like it because they get what they go in for.

keano77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Never eaten in Nando's myself and hope I never > will. > > My teenage daughter and her friends however love > it. > > Good brand moving to Peckham. I await > gentifications objections. Snob! 😉 I like Nando's - the food is at least (for the most part) not deep fried. Much worse places to take kids.

keano77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > Don't be fooled. This is part of the Remainer > counter revolution and Lord Adonis is a patsy in > the greater scheme of things. Look Keano, you just have to accept that the same democracy you and I live in which allowed you to win the referendum allows others to mount just such a counter-offensive, if that's what this is. I find the idea that the 48% are supposed to meekly roll over to be deeply uncomfortable, smacking as it does of nasty little one-party politics in a third world dictatorship. The 52% have spent 40 years pursuing their goal, no one told them they couldn't, so you don't get to tell others they can't fight for what they want. Democracy, innit bruv? (Moreover, if you genuinely think there's actually any liklehood of the referendum being over turned or Brexit not happening then I'll have some of what you're having! Happy New Year!)

uncleglen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > JoeLeg Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Wow. An admittal from UG that the Leave > campaign > > indulged in "conflicting rubbish and lies". > > Yes but after the result the doom-mongering and > personal insults from the Remainers blew all that > out of the water- You have been personally insulting Remain voters since before the referendum, so maybe have a word with yourself before you accuse others, eh? As for 'doom-mongers'? Well here you're a hypocrite too, how about the rumour spread by the Leave campaign that Turkey was about to join? No,you were happy to win using lies and deception. and the EU politicians were a > complete joke as they threw their toys out of the > pram on a daily basis and showed themselves up, at > last, for the total charlatans they really are So, so different to our politicians, eh? Listen up mate, Adonis is a bit of a joke frankly, but he had a few things spot on on his resignation letter. Not the least of which is that we're currently being governed by fools. 'Twas ever thus I suppose, but you don't care because you got what you wanted. The nation is being led up the garden path. Evause the Leave campaign wasn't ready to negotiate, and now you're already blaming others for your own failings.

Wow. An admittal from UG that the Leave campaign indulged in "conflicting rubbish and lies".

Multifish Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > When you have ruling public figures declaring > their wish to continue the trend of shaping the > constitution while simultaneously contradicting > the expressed will of the electorate then it > reinforces the perception of an illusion of > democracy and I don't really blame people for > using the word "traitor". It might sound rude but > it's not a rude word and he is betraying a widely > held principle. (Edited because there's so much in this paragraph that makes me furious and I'm not going there, suffice to say at least Keano backs up his arguments when challenged.)

keano77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Lord Andrew Adonis quits. Good riddance traitor > > Ps Happy New Year all Ah, so you've reduced yourself to calling people who disagree with you 'traitor'. Nice. Just lost any respect I had for you. I've got no time for this trend of defining opponents of Brexit as traitors, it's disgusting. And why is it that Leave voters heap opprobium on the heads of anyone who is even mildly critical of how Brexit is being handled? Has it not occurred to anyone that some of them might have a point? The blanket refusal to countenance any form of disquiet or disagreement is palpably disturbing.

Peckhampam Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > No Joeleg. We are talking about someone without > his knowledge or permission. I don't think you > would like that. I wasn't talking to you. I was addressing the insensitive and frankly inhumane attitude shown by someone else, whose commemts I quoted. Maybe read what I actually posted before flying off the handle at me? ETA - while I appreciate your feeling on the matter, vast swathes of the internet consist of what you describe, and from what I've seen on this thread awareness has been raised of someone who needs help and people even went down to donate stuff to him. I'd say, on balance, this is one of the more productive threads the EDF has generated.