Bin Brother - Mercury Rising

Oh dear, it seems that Nanny's green energy crusade has hit something of a wee snag.

What is this snag caused by, can you guess children?

Yes, that's right, Nanny herself!

Nanny's predeliction for low energy (very expensive) lightbulbs is causing Nanny's councils a fair amount of angst.

For why?

These bulbs contain mercury which, as we all know, is toxic. Therefore, there is an environmental and health issue as and when the bulbs are disposed of.

The result?

Many councils across the UK are refusing to collect waste low energy bulbs.

Poor old Nanny, if only real life worked in the same manner as her fantasy "paradise"!

Visit The Orifice of Government Commerce and buy a collector's item.

Visit The Joy of Lard and indulge your lard fantasies.

Show your contempt for Nanny by buying a T shirt or thong from Nanny's Store.

www.nannyknowsbest.com is brought to you by www.kenfrost.com "The Living Brand"

Celebrate the joy of living with booze. Click and drink!

Visit Oh So Swedish Swedish arts and handicrafts

Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries

Nanny Bans Barometers

Once considered to be a harmless, and rather quaint, object in people's homes; the barometer is now deemed by Nanny, and her acolytes, to be a major threat to mankind.

This time Nanny is being helped in her evil work by the "mother of all Nanny's"; the interfering, overpaid, unwanted, ineffective, bureaucratic and totally useless members of the European parliament.

(Editor's note: please feel free to add to the list of adjectives to describe the European parliament, and it's members).

Euro MPs (God bless their little cotton socks!) have decided to ban traditional barometers.

For why? I hear you ejaculate over your banned eggs (can I use the word ejaculate at this time of the morning?).

I shall tell you.

Barometers contain mercury, mercury is evil; therefore barometers must be banned.

The EU, dear readers, is working on banning all products containing mercury in the EU.

Personally I don't know what the fuss is about, I well remember playing with mercury in the school labs (rolling little globules of the stuff around the lab work surfaces etc); as you can see, it never did me any harm!

Anyhoo, Nanny Knows Best!

The EU's environment committee has rejected a bid to exclude barometers from the ban, needless to say the ban will also affect thermometers (what are you mean to insert into your orifices now, to check your temperature with?) and blood pressure gauges.

An amendment to the law supporting the continued manufacture of mercury barometers was passed in the European Parliament last November, but not supported by the member states.

Kudos to one member of the EU parliament who shows some vague signs of intelligence, British Conservative MEP Martin Callanan, he said:

"So the many thousands of people

up and down the country that have

an existing barometer cannot get it

repaired and will therefore throw it

away which will result in more

mercury entering the environment."

Quite!

Where exactly is one meant to dispose of one's stock of mercury then?

Should I pour mine down the toilet then?

Should I sell it to a third world country?

The people need answers!

British Labour MEP, Linda McAvan, true to form as an acolyte of Nanny welcomed the ban:

"Research has shown that even at low doses

mercury is extremely harmful to human health."

Madam, I refer you to my comment earlier about playing with mercury in the school labs.

On the subject of harmful substances, that I don't notice Nanny rushing to ban, what about the emissions from car engines?

That, I guarantee you, does more harm to our health and the health of the young than any number of mercury barometers.

Will Nanny be banning cars, car fumes and emissions?

Will she fark!

Once the legislation is adopted, manufacturers will have two years to switch to alternative ways of making thermometers, barometers, blood pressure gauges, marine instruments, and devices such as hygrometers for measuring humidity.

Some wall clocks have also traditionally been made with mercury.

The EU claim that it will not be illegal to own an old mercury barometer.

Pah!

I spit upon their promises!

How long will they keep their word on that then?

Nanny Bans Mince Pies

In keeping with the season, you will undoubtedly not be surprised to hear that Nanny has banned mince pies.

Rather, Nanny's health and safety Gestapo have ordered that a risk assessment of mince pies be conducted before she allows a Christmas party to take place.

Nanny's jobsworth lackeys in Craven Council have decreed that the organisers of the Embsay Christmas party (a village in the Yorkshire Dales) must perform a risk assessment of their mince pies, or their party will be "nixed".

Nanny's council have also ordered that posters will have to be displayed at the party, warning villagers that the pies contain nuts and suet pastry.

I know that there is currently a world wide nut phobia, as "little Timmy" once got one stuck in his throat. However, since when was suet a health and safety issue?

As if that were not enough, it seems that there has to be a thermometer thrust (can I say thrust at this time of the day?) into the hot chocolate, in case it is too hot.

How did we manage before the invention of thermometers?

Come to think of it, what if the thermometer contains mercury?

Ooh, it doesn't bear thinking about!

Steve Dobson, who is organising the event, said that he learned of the regulations after writing to Craven District Council to ask if he could use a car park outside Embsay village hall to hold the free party for the community.

Now you see folks, that was his big mistake.

Never, ever, tell Nanny what you are about to do; because she will always come along and try to spoil the party or stop you.

Why?

Simple, the sort of people who involve themselves actively with Nanny (such as jobsworth council lackeys etc) could never make anything of their lives in the real world. The only way that they can justify to themselves their existence on this planet, and to give themselves some sense of self worth, is to impose their fears and petty rules on the rest of us.

As I have said before, there is no value or useful purpose to local councils; we would be far better off if they were restructured into oblivion.

Anyhoo, Mr Dobson had planned a fireworks display, mulled wine, Santa's grotto and free mince pies (which would have been made by Nanny's arch enemy the good ladies of the Embsay and Eastby Women's Institute).

You know the sort of thing, nothing unsafe about any of that.

Not until Nanny came along.

Mr Dobson said:

"The council gave me a huge list of things we had to do.

I wrote back, a little bit tongue in cheek,

asking if I really had to risk assess free mince pies

and a brass band, and they said yes.

Everything we do, from putting tinsel up

to providing refreshments has to be assessed.

We have to consider the dangers involved,

that someone might choke on their mince pie or have a nut allergy.

I also understand that Santa may need a Criminal Records Bureau check.

For a small Dales village we found it a bit of a joke really.

It's gone from us hoping to use a bit of council property for a community party,

to needing the same sort of planning

we would have to put in for the Great Yorkshire Show."

Mr Dobson rather wisely is now considering moving the party to private land, elsewhere in the village. The trouble is, he has put his head above the parapet. Nanny will try her best to muscle in on that as well, and I bet charge him for the privilege.

Craven Council's director of community services, Jonathan Kerr, said:

"We support these community events

and we try to help local communities organise them

and make sure they are as safe as possible."

The astute amongst you will observe that the above statement, in the context of the problem, is meaningless.

Nanny does not even bother to try to pretend to justify her actions any more.

Breathtaking arrogance!

Feel free to tell Craven Council what you think of them via these routes:

-General contact contactus@cravendc.gov.uk

-Jonathan Kerr's PA lrichardson@cravendc.gov.uk

-The thirty councillors of Craven are listed here, Craven Council, together with their email addresses:)

A Fishy Tale

As we all know Nanny has, over the years, bombarded us with "facts" and advice about what we should and shouldn't eat.

The trouble is, her advice keeps changing; for example:

• We used to be told to drink at least a pint of milk every day, for strong bones and healthy teeth; now we are told that milk contains unhealthy levels of fat.



• Butter and cheese were good sources of protein and vitamin D, now of course they fall under the fat embargo.



• Eggs, great a few years ago; then first comes Eggwina, and next cholesterol.



• Meat, once an excellent source of protein; now an evil source of fat.



• Smoking, this was (300 years ago) taught to children by the state as a means of purifying and cleaning the lungs. Now, well you know the story now!



• Booze, some doctors prescribe drinking in moderation, others council against it.



• Beef was once the meat of choice, then along comes a mad cow and all hell breaks loose.



• Carrots were meant to help you see in the dark, this of course was bollocks. The "seeing in the dark myth" was a piece of propaganda put out in the war designed to make the Germans think that our success at shooting down their bombers was due to better night vision, when in fact it was down to radar (which was classified secret at the time).

Confusing isn't it?

This brings us on to fish, oily fish to be precise. Once we were told by Nanny that oily fish, such as salmon, was good for our bodies and brains. Now it seems that advice may be bollocks.

Analysis of recent trials has found little evidence that eating fish, or taking fish oil capsules, cuts the risk of dying of heart disease, stroke or cancer.

The analysis indicates that it is difficult to show clear benefits. The better the quality of the trial, the lower the apparent benefit.

The findings are published in the British Medical Journal online by a team led by Lee Hooper, of the University of East Anglia.

Why do the findings differ from what was considered to be the perceived wisdom of eating oily fish?

A study by Dr Michal Burr, of the University of Cardiff, found that fish oil may have a short-term benefit, but a long-term disbenefit; because it contains traces of toxic methyl mercury as a contaminant.

The conclusion that we, the punters in the street, must draw from these results is that Nanny and her minions are prone to base their advice and edicts on heresay rather than on irrefutable scientific fact.

A very dangerous policy indeed.

As such the best course of action must be to ignore what Nanny tells you, and eat/drink/smoke in whatever way that makes you feel at ease with yourself.

Nanny Bans Eating

Nanny, seemingly, never stops telling us what particular food stuffs are bad for us.

I don't know, maybe she gets some form of sexual thrill out of trying to scare and worry people about what they eat.

Anyhoo, yesterday red meat took centre stage; as Dr Elio Riboli, from the little known European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition, said that their study found that those people who eat 3kg of red meat every day are likely to suffer from indigestion and flatulence.

Dr Elio pointed out that they had to issue a fatuous report every few years, in order to justify their existence.

Well, I can tell you, Nanny is outraged she is really mad now!

There seems not to be a day go by, when another horror story about food does not appear on her desk.

Remember these scare stories folks?

-Eggs are dangerous because you can get salmonella, and they raise your cholesterol

-White bread is bad because it is white

-Brown bread is bad because it prevents you from absorbing calcium

-Beans make you fart

-Beef on the bone turns you into a mad cow

-Sugar...don't get me onto the subject of sugar

-Salt, well Sid the slug can tell you all about the dangers of salt

-Salmon contains mercury

-Chicken can infect you with SARS

-Ham contain nitrates and other nasties

-Chili powder is a definite "no no"

-School meals turn you into the working classes

-Milk, butter and cheese contains fat; and we all know what that does to you

-Carrots turn you into an Antique Roadshow Presenter

-Vegetables and fruits contain pesticides

-Genetically engineered foods are dangerous, because Prince Charles says so

Oh dear! The list simply goes on and on.

Well Nanny is fed up, and bored, with constantly telling us about the danger of what we eat.

Therefore she is going to ban eating altogether.

She believes that not eating at all is the safest way forward for her "charges". Not eating is perfectly safe; after all, it hasn't done Michael Jackson any harm has it children?

OK, maybe I am making a little bit of this up (not the list though). However, there really was a report issued yesterday about the dangers of red meat. Seemingly if you eat too much, you increase the chances of getting cancer by 30%.

Now think about that for a minute.

Increase the chances by 30%, what does that actually tell you?

Bugger all!

The study doesn't tell you what your chances of getting cancer are, if you don't eat red meat; eg they may be zero, in which case a 30% increase is still zero.

The report is useless.

Here is another useless report. In 2003 the WHO World Cancer report said that tobacco and diet accounted for 43% of all cancer deaths.

Well think about that fatuous statement for a minute.

We all die of something, be it cancer or heart failure; doctors like to have a reason to put on the death certificate.

Following that reasoning of causality, doctors need a rationale for the cause of cancer. Since they don't know, they use food and fags as a convenient excuse.

All people eat, drink and some smoke; yet we don't all have cancer. However, WHO are stating that because we eat and smoke that this is the cause of cancer.

Their reasoning is unsound.

The human race has been in existence for around 150000 years, and has eaten its way through all manner of noxious substances.

Yet it has flourished.

Nanny, despite being around for only a few years, seems to think that she knows better than 150000 years of evolution.

Nanny and her food fadists should be ignored, and should be treated with the contempt that they deserve.

Enjoy your life; after all, you only have one.