Faecal transplants (the transfer of beneficial bacteria from the colon of one person into the colon of another) are not an entirely new idea. Their first use in Western medicine dates to 1958, but they have been a part of Chinese medicine since the 4th century. Is there anything the Chinese didn’t invent?
Read more here >>>>
All posts by Keith
In Defense of Working Girls
If I believe what I read in (some parts of) the press the authorities seems to be unreasonably waging war on London’s prostitutes, especially in Soho. And no doubt this is going on elsewhere in the UK too.
There was an interesting, and rather worrying, article in yesterday’s Observer under the banner:
‘There is a land grab going on’
The prostitutes of London’s red-light district are being evicted …
Rupert Everett argues … that closing down the brothels
has nothing to do with protecting women
If what Everett writes is correct, and while I cannot verify it I have no reason to disbelieve it, then there appears to be a conspiracy between the law enforcement authorities and the judiciary (backed by business) to vilify and persecute prostitutes in the name of stamping out “trafficking”.
Yes, trafficking cannot be condoned and needs to be clamped down on. But it seems that many “working girls” have not been trafficked, are not involved in trafficking, and are not being controlled by pimps — all of which would be illegal.
Prostitution in itself is not illegal in the UK, and (unlike in some countries) neither is paying for sex. Everything I read indicates that most (not all, but most) “working girls” are doing so from choice and not coercion. Trafficking is illegal, so is “living off immoral earnings” (ie. pimping) and soliciting on the streets.
In my book everyone, female and male, has the right to sell their body for sex if they so wish. And everyone has the right to buy sex. Arguably prostitutes provide valuable services to those (a) wanting something different, (b) who have strange fetishes they couldn’t otherwise fulfil and (c) who might otherwise be/feel disenfranchised in the sexual marketplace. We are all entitled to our sexuality, whatever form that takes, just so long as it is between consenting adults.
Whether you like it or not prostitution is a fact of life and one which, whatever the law says, will not go away. So like many other things we would be wise to recognise this and bring it out in the open where it can be regulated. (If you make it legal you can then regulate and tax it, which surely also has to be good for the economy. See also marijuana.)
We need to normalise sex, prostitution and sex workers. Criminalising them just forces them underground where there is far more danger because then they can (and will) be exploited by the criminal fraternity. Keeping them in the open is actually safer for everyone: prostitutes and punters.
I’ve never used the services of a prostitute, and I can’t imagine I ever will, but I can see no harm in the activity as long as it is not in the grips of the underworld — but sadly that seems to where the authorises want to shove it. Eeejits!
Photograph of the Week
This week, just a little reminder that Spring is on the way despite the current gloomy wet weather we’re having in the UK. No story, just a nice photo.
Reed
Kew Gardens, June 2008
Buggered Britain #20
Another instalment in our very occasional series documenting some of the underbelly of Britain. Britain which we wouldn’t like visitors to see and which we wish wasn’t there. The trash, abused, decaying, destitute and otherwise buggered parts of our environment. Those parts which symbolise the current economic malaise; parts which, were the country flourishing, wouldn’t be there, would be better cared for, or made less inconvenient.
This magnificent frontage is not far from where I live; I spotted it earlier this week. What you cannot see is that the “stonework” is actually some very badly finished concrete and that the sides of the mini-porch-let are scrofulous wood in the same style as the tympanum. The door is a disgrace and the whole was just set off by the dying Christmas tree and recycling bags & bins. Seldom have I seen such awful construction.
Five Questions, Series 5 #2
So here I’ll give you an answer to the second of the Five Questions in Series 5 that I posed at the beginning of the month.
Question 2: Describe your fantasy girl.
Oh dear. Whatever I say I’m on a hiding to nothing here, being married (for half a lifetime) as I am! And also knowing that Mrs M will read this.
I suppose I could just hide behind the old response to this question: Come naked, bring beer”! For as Tiffany Madison says in Black and White:
It is assured that men of all ages imagine a woman naked when they first meet.
Which is not entirely true, though I’m sure for many not far from the truth.
But maybe I’d better be a bit more open, although to tell the truth I’m not at all sure I can conjure up an ideal girl. There are just so many variables and so much is down not to looks but to personality and even that simply unknown chemistry.
What sort of things to I find attractive physically?
Pale ginger hair and freckles is a good start. Blonde can be good although I’ve noticed over the years I seem to think more generally of brunettes.
Small perky breasts. Yes, really. Unlike most men (or at least what most men will tell you) I have never been one for big tits.
Average (or slightly above) height. I don’t go for very tall girls, or for very long legs — somehow they always seem to be out of proportion.
Slim figure but not thin. I hate the half-starved look.
But possibly more important is personality.
I like my girls intelligent and amusing; they need to share my warped sense of humour and be able to hold a meaningful conversation.
Sharing (at least some) interests makes things work well too.
Good in bed? Well yes, that’s good too.
And of course on top of that there is the indefinable chemistry that some how makes it work, or not. No, I don’t understand it and I don’t think anyone does.
How does this match up with Mrs M?
That, as they say, is for me to know and you to find out. So, no, I’m not going to tell you.
Ultimately the mental can (and, arguably for a successful relationship, should) outweigh physical looks and even practical skills. Besides, as I imply above, I think the whole thing is down to chemistry, which at rock bottom will overpower both the physical and the mental. Why else would we succumb to lust and the erotic? As Jean-Luc Godard allegedly observed:
Eroticism is consenting to live.
Another Amusement
This one, found on Twitter, is just too good not to share. Chicken flavour, indeed!
Something for the Weekend
Milky Bar Waste
A few days ago diamond geezer wrote about the amount of milk which gets wasted in cafés, restaurants etc. when one orders tea (or in some places coffee).
Milk appears in a jug which almost always contains far more milk than one will ever need in tea, even if you are of the “half a cup of weak tea with half a cup of milk” persuasion.
(It doesn’t work so well for coffee as the barista is often adding the milk as part of the coffee-making process.)
I’m not like that — I dislike milk — preferring my tea strong and with a minimum of milk. Typically I put no more than a thimbleful of milk in a cup of tea. I’m the same with coffee on the rare occasions I drink it.
When I was working I used to buy tea from the in-house coffee bar. I’d order a large strong tea with just a splash of milk. The staff soon learnt that my splash of milk was just that, they went “plop” with the milk jug and that was enough. As a system that worked well as the staff dispensed the milk.
But go to one of the ever increasing choice of coffee bars and order tea. More often than not it comes with a jug of milk. A few days ago we were in a central London Costa Coffee and having time to kill I had a pot of tea, and then another. Each pot of tea held just one cup (which I consider a little mean) and was served automatically with a tiny jug of milk — about an eggcup amount. Even after two pots of tea I had still used only half the first jug of milk. There’s good odds that as a consequence 1½ jugs of milk were thrown away, as food hygiene rules say that once served food cannot be reused. OK that’s partly my fault as I should have thought to decline the jug of milk with the second pot of tea.
Indeed decline milk is what we often do. When we do our supermarket shop (usually early on Friday morning) we always stop in Waitrose’s café for a drink and a bacon roll to fortify us for the fight ahead. I have a pot of tea and Noreen has plain filter coffee. Each comes with a jug of milk. But we always say “one milk between us is enough”; and it is — my two thimblefuls for my two cups of tea and Noreen’s generous addition to her coffee and there is usually still a dribble left in the jug.
Yes, jugs of milk are a good; they allow us to control the amount of milk we each want in our tea/coffee. And they are infinitely preferable to the horrid little plastic pots of milk, the quality of which always seems dubious because who knows what’s been done to the contents.
Individually we are talking about small quantities of milk. But as diamond geezer says, multiply that across every customer and every coffee outlet and we are wasting horrendous amounts of milk. And even if everyone doubled the amount of milk they took in tea or coffee we would still be wasting huge amounts.
Please can we get places to dispense less milk? Ultimately it will save them money!
And while we’re at it can we please ban hot milk as well?
Words: Absorb and Adsorb
Absorb and Adsorb are two easily confused verbs which scientifically decribe different interactons.
Absorb
1. To swallow up.
2. To engross, or completely engage, the attention or faculties.
3. To suck in, drink in a fluid; to imbibe.
4. To take up by chemical or molecular action.
Absorption is essentially a macroscopic level effect.
Compare this with …
Adsorb
1. To undergo or cause to undergo a process in which a substance (often a gas) accumulates on the surface of a solid forming a thin film, often only one molecule thick. Mostly used in Chemistry and often descriptive of molecular level catalytic processes where a reaction is enhanced with one molecule sticking to the surface of the catalyst.
There is more than a subtle difference here. Note the use of the Latin prefixes ab- off, away, and ad- to, onto, towards.
Think of it this way in everyday terms: A sponge absorbs water, whereas a sticking plaster is adsorbed onto the skin. Alternatively, the man eats the pie (absorption) or the pie sticks to the man’s face (adsorption).
Book Review
John Conway, CM Kosemen, Darren Naish
Cryptozoologicon, The Biology, Evolution and Mythology of Hidden Animals, Volume I
(Irregular Books, 2013)
This is strange book. It is one I wanted to read and I was given a copy for Christmas. It sounded as if it would be interesting.
What the authors set out to do, and they are up front about stating this, is to look at some of the myths of strange animals unrecorded by science and then to look at how plausible the myths are and what the animal might be. They write a couple of pages about each of the 28 creatures they choose. All of which is fine, if eccentric.
What they then go on to do is to speculate wildly about history, evolution and taxonomy of each creature as if it were real. They do say repeatedly that what they are indulging in is speculation, but they acknowledge that it will be misinterpreted by the wilfully minded.
As they say on the cover blurb:
Cryptozoologicon is a celebration of the myths, legends, evolution and biology of hidden animals. Always sceptical, but always willing to indulge in speculative fun, Cryptozoologicon aims to provide a new way to approach cryptozoology: as fictional biology.
And in their Introduction:
For each cryptid, our entries consist of three sections. We consider it important that people understand exactly what we have done. In the first section of text, we briefly review what people have said beforehand about the given cryptid. We refer to the key accounts and describe what the creature is supposed to look like.
In the second section, we present an evaluation of the reports, make a conclusion about the identity of the given cryptid, and decide whether the accounts refer to a real creature or not. Given that we have included quite a range of mystery animals in our book — some of which are fairly ridiculous and others of which have essentially been debunked — our conclusions range from the open-ended to the “case closed” type.
Finally, we include a third section of text in which we deliberately jump onto the bandwagon of speculation, and wax lyrical about the identity, evolution and biology of the cryptid concerned, tongue firmly planted in cheek.
Yeah, “fictional biology” is about the size of it. I had hoped that it might present some interesting new evidence for something. It doesn’t.
And I had hoped that even if it didn’t the book might be amusing. It isn’t that either.
I found it tedious beyond belief. There is nothing here except a regurgitation of the already known myths and their debunking with some wildly speculative and very tedious fiction. The text is extremely dull; not especially poorly written just unimaginative and not sparkling. On top of that I dislike the large colour illustrations; that’s down to their style rather than content; for me they didn’t add a great deal.
The book could, indeed should, have been interesting; and this could have been done with very little extra effort.
For me this book just didn’t work. I found it incredibly tedious and in fact gave up reading attentively no more than half way through and skipped through the remainder.
Unless you have to read this book for some reason, frankly I’d give it a miss.
Overall Rating: ★☆☆☆☆