Alcolhol ‘safe levels’ too high say bansturbators

“Government alcohol guidelines that were “plucked out of the air” wrongly suggest that we can drink almost daily with no ill-effects, doctors have said.

The limits have been set too high and fail to take into account new evidence showing that drinking only modest amounts (like a thimble full of beer once a month) raises the risk of cancer and other diseases.

The issue has been investigated as part of a three-part You & Yours documentary into Government guidelines on alcohol, diet and exercise, being aired over the next three days (starting January 2) on the Bolshevik Broadcasting Corporation’s propaganda station, Radio 4.

The current guidelines recommend men should limit themselves to “three to four units a day”, which NHS information likens to “not much more than a pint of strong lager, beer or cider”. (Funny but a pint used to be two units. Those units keep getting smaller – LNM).

Women should not regularly drink more than “two to three units a day”, equivalent to “no more than a standard 175ml glass of wine”.

New research published last year suggests consumption should be much lower – perhaps just a quarter of a pint of beer daily.”

Read full story.

Let’s carry this latest bansturbator Neo Nazi outrage to its logical conclusion.

Every human being breathes air. Every human being who ever breathed air, if not already dead, will die sometime in the future.

Remember, the arseholes scientists who come up with this repressive and authoritarian bullshit are paid out of your tax money.

Air kills. We must stop people from breathing it now.

Return Of The Food Fascists

My initial feelings about the coalition government were that I wished them well but feared that like their predecessors they would be unable to resist the attractions of control freakery.

I was right to worry.

The Health fascists have been out in force this week. With reports on the dangers of alcohol, meat, salt and obesity published our resistance is being tested. Like Most of you Little Nicky is enjoys a nice steak washed down with a glass of decent wine, a sprinking of salt on our food makes it much more tasty and so what if you are a shade overweight. Tgis blog has always been happy to expose the dodgy ‘science’ and rigged evidence behind theses control freak fear and panic exercises.

Here’s the first in a Daily Stirrer series on the bogus science used to support control freakery.

Acohol Abuse Will Kill 250,000 A Year Unless Governmnt Acts say Control Freak Doctors

The War On Live Music

The War On Entertainment

Liberal Democrate Culture, Media and Sport spokesman Tim Clement Jones says Live Music Must Not Be Silenced Mr. Clement Jones is introducing a bill into Parliament that, in the unlikely event of its succeeding in becoming law would reverse some of the draconian measures in previous government licencing law reform that places prohibitive restrictions on small venues whishing to offer live entertainment. These laws, he claims, are preventing new performers and musicians from gaining the experience on which they can build a career.

For all Labour’s hypocritical posturing on the binge drinking culture we should remember it was they who changed licensing laws in favour of 24 hour drinking which not only made the lives of pub landlords harder but at the same time did a big favour for the profits of the Coporate Interests that owned pub chains and drinks manufacturers.

At the same time the Labour regime tightened up regulations on live music and entertainment venues. Well their corporate paymasters did not want anything to distract the binge drinkers from spending money on booze did they?

The Daily Stirrer

Child Poverty and the Financial Crisis

Last weekend Trafalgar Square, London, was the venue for a protest aimed at holding the Labour Government to its election pledge to reduce child poverty. What? You couldn’t be arsed turning up? You heartless bastards, how could you ignore the plight of those poor children?

I missed it too actually, not through indifference or inertia but by design. I refuse to subscribe to the notion that child poverty can be separate from adult poverty. All poverty is relative of course so how do we define child poverty? Are those who do not have the latest trainers, games consoles etc.. poor? Or are the onces who are decked out in the latest designer clothes and equipped with the latest toys and gadgets but starved of attention really the ones living in poverty? If everybody was given £1000 a week to live on then the people who smoke, drink, do drugs, live in over-mortgaged houses, drive Chelsea Tractors and eat only in restaurants would be impoverished while those who live on lentils, drink home made elderflower wine and drive a pair of raffia sandals would be in the money. Little Nicky’s Theory of relativity.

I digress however, so getting back on topic, a protest about the government’s failure to reduce child poverty is really nothing but a protest against hypocrisy. While this NuLab government is in power a protest against hypocrisy seems futile. Why did they single out child poverty? It is, is it not, hypocritical for a government that has devoted so much time and effort to increasing poverty among the lower paid, disabled and old and raising the bar below which people cannot afford to keep a roof over their heads, eat and keep warm to talk about reducing poverty when what they mean is performing conjuring tricks with economic statistics?

We should not heap all the blame on NuLab of course; Brown, Blair, Mandelson et al have made matters much worse than they need have been but the foundations of our broken society were laid by Margaret Thathcher’s Conservatives. The blueprint was drawn up long before them however.

The English speaking world, Britain, America, and to a lesser extent Australia and Canada suffers from a disease that though know in other parts of the globe does not periodically reach epidemic levels. The most visible symptom of this disease is an uncontrollable urge to buy houses. This obsession, once established, quickly becomes all consuming. People will sell comfortable homes that are well within their means to trade up to something bigger / in a better area / nearer to a good school (the list of excuses given by people about to plunge themselves into financial hardship is almost endless. At the bottom end of the market even people for whom anything but renting a home seems like insanity will clamour to get on the “mortgage ladder.”

not so many years ago it would have been impossible for the unemployed or low earners to buy a home but so effective was the great lie of the finance industry that property prices always go up in the long term the lenders in the industry even believed it themselves. They gave mortgages to people who should not even have been allowed to borrow the bus fare home. Thus demand was maintained in the market forcing up prices far beyond a level that was realistic and people were persuaded to take on debts they could never hope to service let alone repay even had their stated income been anywhere near accurate instead of just a figment of a cowboy who worked for a bank (The Loan Arranger).

For almost three decades and despite two major bubble / burst cycles the madness has gone on. How can the cycle be broken when even now governments speak of injecting cash into the economy to get the market moving again? The first step towards breaking the mould and alleviating poverty would be the most painful for politicians who have nailed their colours to the mast of Free Market Economics and would have to admit they were wrong. There needs to be a campaign to reverse the propaganda to the markets madness decades and destigmatise rented homes. People who rent their homes are not of less worth, it is simply the case that their circumstances are different, they have made different choices.

The next big step, painless for politicians but agonising perhaps for us ordinary punters, is a process of reeducation in individual responsibility. We cannot live on debt, we cannot simply keep borrowing more. That Cowboy Banker The Loan Arranger might tell us we can but it only works so long as we can keep earning more to service the debts. As soon as our interest payments default, good bye lifestyle, hello poverty. Borrowing more than on can afford to repay is insanity but only the individual can decide what proportion of income is available to service debts. Only you can decide how much you have to send on CDs, books, wine, gadgets, designer clothes etc. to maintain an acceptable quality of life. Only you can decide whether you want to live in a mansion, eat only bread and soup and sleep on the floor or live in a dump and go go to lots of gigs, parties, clubs etc.

The Loan Arranger says “If you will just be the same as everyone else you will be happy, trust me?” And you do because he is so likeable and really seems like your new best friend.

The very very first thing people need to learn to get themselves out of their personal mess is never trust anyone who says “trust me.”

If we get our heads round those simple things we are well on the way to alleviating poverty.

Sunday Round Up

TODAY WE COMMENTED ON:
Last Oders Please on the tube The last party on the London Underground.

Not The Time To Abandon Green Ambition Government scientific adviser shows why the young shun careers in science in this piece of pompous claptrap that only proves many scientists don’t live on this planet.

The price of indiscreet blogging When Emily Gould, editor of Gawker blog published an explicit essay on her sex life she was deeply wounded by the hostile responses. But as Gould’s blog has encouraged lewd and offensive attacks on other women, in one case a young teenager, has she any right to complain?

Iain Dale’s Diary Conservative blogger Iain Dale reports a record month with 350,000 page views. In offering our congrats we just mention a record month in May ourselves.

Huffington Post – McCain’s shaky maths John McCain proves he can’t count. Is that unusual for an American Presidential candidate. So long as he knows a hanging chad when he sees one he should be OK.

Love me, I’m a Luddite Amanda Marcotte at Pandangon thinks those who say texting is pointless are just trying to show their superiority by sneering at technology. Amanda does not know the history of either Luddism or the SMS text system. I do. I learned about Ned Ludd for my Social History A level and did a lot of work on developing the internetwork gasteways that allow text messages to cross from one network to another. Which I think qualfies me to say people who think texting is cool are a bit sad.

The Pissed Parishoners of Harrogate

You would be forgiven for thinking Harrogate, Yorks, is a sleepy spa town with the faded elegance of its Georgian Architechture and inhabitants slipping into genteel decay. Such is the image presented in novels and TV drama. They and you are wong however. Its all happening in Harrogate according to the government’s latest healthcare health scare.
Gangs of pissed up middle aged people and pensioners are roaming the streets scaring the shite out of teenagers who only want to enjoy a quiet bingw with their mates.
The Government has named Harrogate as one of the centres of “hazardous drinking.” This is not binge drinking or even alcoholism, but the civilised, quiet, responsible consumption of a glass or two of wine with dinner. Such behaviou puts you at risk according to Super Nanny State. Hazardous Drinking in Harrogate is a bigger threat than obesity or climate change you might think. Do not get involved, you will be at risk!

At risk of what? Getting a life? Having something that too closely resembles fun? Aiding and abetting the Euro rats of Brussels in their effort to undermine British sovereignty?

All us affluent, middle aged people must up our alcohol consumption now in order the nip this in the bud. If we fail to do so, what innocent pleasures will they target next?

Depravity in Devonshire?

Group sex in Guildford?

Booze, Brains and Bureaucrats

What is it about bureaucracy and its associated mindset that prevents government departments from ever proposing sensible solutions to social problems.
Amid growing concern over binge drinking among the under 18s and the violence that often results, senior police officers and officials in the Home Office and Health Department are suggesting the age at which people can legally drink be raised for 18 to 21.
Now one of the most serious aspects of this problem is the increase in drunkenness among 11 to 15 year olds.
So raising the age at which they can legally drink from 18 to 21 is going to achieve what exactly?