Sunday, 18 December 2011

Pricing meat out of the plebs' reach.

Flying visit tonight. More deadlines.

Just had to mention the best way we have of long-term storage for bacteria. We freeze-dry them. Freezing will reduce their numbers but it's certainly not a reliable way of killing them all.

Chilling only irritates them. A fridge at 2 C is no better than one at 4C, despite what the mindless morons in Brussels might have been told by fridge manufacturers. When it's an open chill cabinet, the cost of losing those extra few degrees is appalling and will be reflected in prices.

Still, as with smoking and drinking, we can't eat meat if we can't afford it, eh? The smoking-ban template has been applied to everything. Break the smoking ban and you break it all. Consider this, even if you don't care about smoking at all. The smoking ban's success is the reason for the ban on the thing you do care about. As long as it is there, the banmeisters will never stop.

Destroy the root and the whole tree falls over. Chop off a branch and another one grows. You will never stop the bans unless you destroy the root. As long as smokers are the whipping boys, everything you enjoy, everything you hold dear, comes under Righteous control. We were just the beginning, as we told you at the time and you didn't listen. Some never will. We were proof of concept and it worked. It's now working on you.

Right, back to deadline-chasing. I made the last one, just, and the next one is imminent too.


Anonymous said...

The never ending tsunami of bullshit continues.

Maybe LI can write a paper saying SHS/ "smoke drift" - the new IMPROVED bullshit is reduced under a certain temperature or atmospheric conditions, I'd donate a fiver for it...

Fucking YAWN...

Anyway have a happy Christmas/Saturnalia (delete as appropriate).

Anonymous said...

Just a thought but.........
If the smoking ban is the root wasn't the hunting ban the seed that root grew from?

Fausty said...

Just as well our masters also deny us weekly bin collections; plenty of rats to eat.

Anonymous said...

"It all began when officials at the Department of Health decided to part-fund a piece of independent research looking at how health professionals could help combat the effects of climate change.
The scientists came up with a rather courageous idea. Why not kill 30% of Britain's cows and sheep?

Not only would this help save the environment; it would also make us healthier.

The theory goes like this: if you have less ruminant livestock, you emit less climate-damaging methane into the atmosphere.
You also have less meat to eat, which means less saturated fat in our diets and thus less heart disease.

Officials liked the wheeze so much they decided Health Secretary Andy Burnham should give a speech at the launch of the report by the Lancet medical journal.
There Mr Burnham congratulated the Lancet on its "timely report".

The Department of Health put out a handy press release summarising the report's conclusions.
It even rang up the Department of Energy and Climate Change and got it involved.

A useful quote from Climate Change Secretary Ed Miliband was included on the press release.
Not to be outdone, a quote from international development minister Mike Foster was produced. All agreed that health and climate change could be two sides of the same coin.

There was only one problem: no one had bothered to tell the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) and, as its name suggests, it is in charge of cows.

Defra officials gently pointed out that perhaps the "kill-a-cow, save-the-world" policy might have a few flaws."


Anonymous said...

I always think that it's helpful to see these pronouncements in some kind of context.

Shun meat, says UN climate chief - 2008

"People should consider eating less meat as a way of combating global warming, says the UN's top climate scientist.

Rajendra Pachauri, who chairs the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), will make the call at a speech in London on Monday evening.
UN figures suggest that meat production puts more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere than transport."

Eat less red meat, Government scientists warn - 2011

"Britons will be warned that they must cut their consumption of red meat to reduce the risk of cancer, following official advice from the Government scientists."

"The experts will say the full study has confirmed the link between higher meat consumption and cancer, but is not able to quantify this fully, partly because of the complexity of the data examined, which stretches back to 1998."

"Last year, Sir Liam Donaldson, the then Chief Medical Officer for England, said cutting consumption of all meat by 30 per cent would prevent 18,000 premature deaths a year."


Anonymous said...

I belong to the church of moderation
I think most things in moderation are fine. That goes for red meat and the death of us all, butter ! LOL
I only eat cold cuts that I make, they have mininal amounts of cure
I try and buy organic meats but admit I dont take the same care with other food groups ( are there others ? )
I rarely use salt when preparing food, even in rubs. When I do use salt, its ground sea salt, not iodized
Red meat tends to be relegated to the weekend.
They say pork is not so bad for you, neither is chicken so I figure so ribs and BBQ wings won't kill me

Maybe I am wrong in my convictions. But if you dont eat truck loads of twiglets and pickled onions and this stuff all the time, I thnk overall you have to be not too far off

johnny presschoc said...

you see, we're all steakholders in this society, but soom uv oos are bigger steakholders than others -the less the riff-raff get, the more for those discerning gluttons amongst the political intelligentsia (like moi, abbott, cameron and his chum georgie podgie) elected to indiscriminately stuff their faces for britain.

Mr Angry said...

Scientists, huh? Don't you deride the opinions, their methods and their politics.

Scum, the lot of them.

Anonymous said...

I can't afford meat any longer unless it's something on sale in bulk size and it's priced low enough at just that moment I can afford to stretch the budget to buying just that and then taking it home, cooking it all at once, chopping it into tiny bits and freezing it to be pulled out of freezer a teeny tiny bit at a time to add into meals for as long as I can make it last.

That said, I am no longer a steak-holder, and the way the righteous have oppressed me from being me, I am no longer a stake-holder either.

First they came after the stake-holders and I did not see.

Then they came after the steak-holders, who now cannot afford to hold steak.

It's how one bad ban leads to economic destruction and eventually disintegrates the entire world, 1930's style.

It's also how, like the at the root of the tree sits the smoking ban, the most discriminatory, hateful, divisive and unnecessary creation ever devised and from whence all further economic, social and political destruction will be coming.

Nippy Zippy said...

Stake a steak with a steak stake
That's what steak stakes are for
I've a stake in a steak stake maker
May my steak stake stake grow evermore


opinions powered by