Following on from yesterday's soju fallout, I am back to my normal perky self:)
I followed the tried and tested formula of drinking gallons of water, as I have always done after such issues.
Now imagine my shock and dismay to read that Nanny (or some Nanny type "expert") claims that drinking water is not as health giving as previously thought.
How many times has Nanny trumpeted a product as being healthy, only to come back later and say it isn't?
- Smoking used to be considered good for the lungs, children were taught how to draw it in deep.
- Carrots, were once great for the eyes; now, apparently, not.
- Cocaine was sold over the counter at Harrods, in "Welcome" packs; Sherlock Holmes did his best thinking whilst unbder its influence.
- Eggs were once good, then they became bad, now they are good again.
- Milk, once good is now bad for you.
- Ditto cheese.
- Fish and chips an excellent source of protein, is now lumped in with all "evil" fast food.
- A glass of wine a day used to be alright, but Nanny now says pregnant women shouldn't drink.
It would seem that Nanny makes "medical" pronouncements on the basis of some very dodgy "evidence" and bends and twist in the wind of media opinion, changing her mind at the drop of a hat.
Is it any wonder that people don't listen to her?
I stopped for a meal yesterday at Clacket Lane Services on the M25 (having earlier passed Heathrow's Terminal 5 as it gleamed majestically in the midday sun). I probably exceeded Nanny's safe annual limit for junk food but I enjoyed it.
ReplyDeleteNanny has three prefered solutions to most things;
ReplyDeleteTax it,
Regulate it,
or Ban it.
What Nanny needs to do is trust people to take responsibility for themselves and just suggest moderation in all things, however Nanny can not do this as, if she did she wouldn't be Nanny would she?
It's the classic 1984 Orwellian technique. One day we're at war with Eurasia, next day they're our closest allies against Oceania. Keep changing everything round just to show how much in control you are, and kee the gamm-minuses in their place (sorry for the literary mixed analogue there!)
ReplyDeletearchroy,
ReplyDeleteI suspect the gamma minuses are pretty much oblivious to Nanny's dictums, other than an awareness of her apparent largesse. They will carry on much as before one way or another, perhaps influenced to some degree by an influx of 'other' cultures.
It's the betas who will surely be most affected by Nanny's strictures. After all the betas, even the younger ones, may think have some vague idea where Eurasia and Oceania are thus giving credence to the stories.
Grant
All this anti nanny stuff sounds real Freudian - penis envy and all that.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete