Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

Double negative.

Skinny,

Is that better?

8-)

D,

Is that a cartoon of H and Cy,

Where's Ch.

Fred, more C and F

For a moment I was thinking better of you.

ummmm 8-(

giles coren said it rather brutally on the radio this morning ..... "If you want to buy a burger for 60p, what do you expect to be in it? Even in a 100% beef burger, what unmentionable bits and pieces do you think are in it?" .... he then went on to say, quite rightly, that you can make your own burgers in just a few minutes and very much cheaper and with the full knowledge of exactly what is in them, purely by buying fresh mince from Sainsbury's or Morrsions, neither of whom are at all implicated in this latest rumpus.

and while all this hot air gets blown around, it should not be forgotten that the problem with the horsemeat is not remotely a health issue .... it is actually to do with fraud in one form or another ..... in China, the perpetrators would simply be executed, thus preventing repetition and also acting as a rather efficient deterrent

alleged lib-lab tax plans to stiff the middle classes is hard to take seriously, as if even remotely implemented, it could (should!) easily backfire and hand the conservatives the next election on a plate .... fred will be pleased

Which alleged lib-lab tax plans?

You often seem to live with false hope!

cynic, the thing I object to is the fraud element in all this food rumpus. If we smoke we know the health risks, if we drink too much we know the health risks, but it would appear that we really don't have a clue what we are putting in our stomachs on a daily basis. What it says on the tin or the packaging is not necessarily the truth.

Besides the simple "fraudulent" and "deception" elements of false labelling, there is more dangerous possibility and that is Anaphylaxis to horse protein.

This was recognised in some in the past when tetanus toxoid injections were given and the patient developed allergic reactions. (Whether that was the actual cause or not, I am not certain.)

But some people are "allergic" to horse hair etc..

"Horse meat and cross reactivity


John Warner who sits on the AC Clinical Panel is Professor of Paediatrics and head of department at Imperial College. He reviewed the evidence and made comment for us when asked if it could be possible for individuals allergic to horses to have a reaction if accidentally consuming horse meat. He said; “Yes, it is very possible that horse hair allergy could also lead to cross reactivity to horse meat. It is not invariable but certainly possible.”

=============


The unforeseen consequences of criminal activity, and hence the need for adequate Public Health Agency.

A little knowledge can sometimes be a dangerous thing.

And little thought even more dangerous.

fred (aka fos fred) .... for goodness sake! .... far more people are allergic to nuts, and i don't necessarily mean you either, nor even the actual eating of them, but just the fact that there are nut particles in the air ..... you may also like to tell exactly how many deaths from anaphylactic reaction to eating horsemeat have actually been recorded in the world, say over the last 5 years

tax plans ..... much as you must find difficulty in buying such a crass broadsheet, read ST front page + page 2

============

doodle - true, but how many people even bother to read ANY packaging? .... very very few ..... creme fraiche is, well, just soured cream isn't it .... hmm! so i thought too until i bothered to look out of pure curiosity at various content labels the other day

and to revert to my initial comment .... when is meat not meat, let alone when is beef not beef?

Cynic,

DYOH, but I can see you being as obtuse as usual. (Allergy to horses are not that uncommon in one form or another.)
-----------------------------

The point I was making is about the necessity and importance of honest labelling of food.

There is an entitlement to know that the food product being bought contains the substances that is stated on the label and not adulterated by substitutes.

Doing so may be hazardous to individuals, who are potentially allergic to the substances used in the production of the food product.

Not labelling food products accurately is “cheating” and “criminal”. It is noted that this con led government is lowering the require standards of food labelling.

Another point is that falsely labelling a product and selling to the public is offensive to those with various taboos (religious, or otherwise). Probably, you would consider this to be of little importance to you, but it is to others.

You are entitled to your own standards, but raising the standards of "public health" has been important to the well being of the UK.

---------------

Is the ST where you gather your opinions from? I though it used to be a sensible paper, but now, it appears to be the paper for cons and sycophants wanting to read the latest right wing tory bilge.

However, I occasionally I do buy it occasionally for the litter bin.

honesty in labelling is correct, even if no one reads it, and even if the "honest contents" don't quite tell you the (whole) truth ..... your anaphylactyic nonsense was exactly that

ST - clearly you didn't bother to read .... must be catching ..... so what do you read? .... Sunday Sport? .... Mail on Sunday? .... Angling Times? ..... Sunday Telegraph? ...... Watchtower? ..... Jewish Chronicle? ..... Khaleej Times?

Cynic.
The Jewish Chronicler
======================
Labelling of a food product should have listing of all contained “known” substances. Complete knowledge unless working and producing in a laboratory is impossible.
But the public has a right to all the known contents of products being sold to them. The checks to keep the producers can be random or with the help of information provided and should be carried out by the various public health agencies, some of which are under threats of cut back.
----------------

By the way, how many papers have you read on allergies and anaphylaxis to be able to give your opinion on the subject.
To simplify matters for you, go back and start with horse serum sensitivities.

horse serum
“immune serum prepared from the blood of a horse that has developed immunity to toxins. Because many people are sensitive to horse serum, a skin test for sensitivity is recommended before passive immunization with horse antibodies. Tetanus immune globulin prepared from human immune serum is preferred.


========================

Cameron and his cabinet who with their repeated introduction of “new” failing policies, U-turns and “blame everybody else” culture rely on punters like you and Hays.

At the moment, the only good thing about Cameron, is that he seems to spend more time with his barrow outside this country than in it. Perhaps, he is looking for safe refuge after the next election.

i leave your rubbish to one side (most of your post) ..... when is beef not beef? ...... is recovered beef (flayed from the bones by water jet) still beef? ..... are beef testicles and other assorted bits and pieces still beef?

Sometimes the Bull wins!

Clegg has gone further with this new proposal, which smacks of the worst kind of puerile class warfare and institutionalised bullying. As the scheme demonstrates, there has never been a political party more badly misnamed than the Liberal Democrats.

This wide-ranging “wealth tax” is neither liberal nor democratic, given that it involves such dramatic invasions of privacy and growth in the state’s bullying bureaucracy

Clegg’s party have again shown themselves to be a bunch of left-wing ideologues, far keener on the appropriation of wealth than its generation.

Enthusiasts for this sort of aggressive taxation like to pretend that only the very richest will be hit. But the lesson from history is that, once a new tax is established, ever larger numbers are sucked within its destructive embrace.
That is certainly true of the upper rate of income tax.

Only 30 years ago, just 3 per cent of taxpayers fell into this category. Soon, more than five million people, including ordinary middle- class people, will be paying income tax at 40 per cent. The same is true of so many other taxes, such as inheritance duties, which were once aimed at the only the wealthiest but now catch huge swathes of the population in their net.

What makes it even more dangerous is the level of intrusion it will require. At present, HM Revenue and Customs have no powers to enter people’s homes routinely.

But all that would change in Clegg’s scheme, where tax inspectors will be in charge of “policing the system” and “may have to visit homes to test whether asset values of jewellery, paintings, etc. are correct.” An Englishman’s home is meant to be his castle, but not in Clegg’s brave new world of the all-powerful state.


http://www.express.co.uk/comment/columnists/leo-mckinstry/378320/The-State-must-not-be-allowed-to-intrude-this-far