Nice people thread part 5 - nicely does it

lostinrates

zagubov wrote: »

Can it be deep-fried if necessary? . It will go well with my masterpiece the rice-and-pasta-pie and chips sandwich.:D

Once you get into deep fried you are looking at panzarotti. There is a famus place in milan, where people queue for hot savoury panzarotti. Its called luini's. It opened and failed in londn, round theobald st i think. They are heavenly.

chewmylegoff

zagubov wrote: »

Can it be deep-fried if necessary? . It will go well with my masterpiece the rice-and-pasta-pie and chips sandwich.:D

Technically it coud be deep fried, but given that you clearly have to be drunk to the point of hallucinating to even contemplate eating one, I would advise having a sober person with a fire extinguisher and specialist third degree unit in the room with you.

PasturesNew

Just turned on the BBC News and there's a couple of parents of dead teenagers who died of drugs - they want schools to teach kids about drugs so they know the dangers. The woman said that 60% of schools teach 1 hour about drugs/year - and 70% of those kids have no recollection of it.

PasturesNew

lostinrates wrote: »

Once you get into deep fried you are looking at panzarotti. There is a famus place in milan, where people queue for hot savoury panzarotti. Its called luini's. It opened and failed in londn, round theobald st i think. They are heavenly.

Maybe because people are inundated with good/favourite food types and places already .... and have no idea what any "furren muck" actually is.

If I saw a sign saying "hot savoury panzarotti" I'd have no idea what it was and it wouldn't even register on my "mmm" scale. It sounds to me like they're flogging fat singers.

lostinrates

It was light really early this morning. Not sure what time, but early, seemed a big leap forward in daylight hours. Mit have felt like spring, had there not been a frost and so cold. Tonight is going back down to minus one or two. The horses wioll think inhave lost it when i tell them they need to get dressed tonight...they are moulting heavily now.

Meanwhile i am trying to get enthusiasm to do some housework before the architect comes. In my dining room the dust is so thick in my dark wood sideboard i could write dirty words in it. I know that because i wrote 'grubby. In it before coming upstairs to put some moisturiser on. I should be apying slap now...but i would love twenty mins kip.

Generali

PasturesNew wrote: »

Just turned on the BBC News and there's a couple of parents of dead teenagers who died of drugs - they want schools to teach kids about drugs so they know the dangers. The woman said that 60% of schools teach 1 hour about drugs/year - and 70% of those kids have no recollection of it.

AIUI, the outcomes for heroin addicts are generally better than for alcoholics. Alcohol is far more harmful than most illegal drugs and has caused me far more problems than illegal ones. I've only ever been punched once to put me in hospital and that was by a drunk.

Even Amy Winehouse, after all her drug taking, managed to drink herself to death.

vivatifosi

Generali wrote: »

If a policy is a very expensive failure then it's probably time to try something else.

I don't disagree with that but my concern is that it will go the same way as the great idea that the UK will suddenly develop a cafe culture if pubs were allowed to open late: there will be unpleasant unintended consequences. It is quite clear what the most dangerous drugs are: cocaine and heroin. I can't see any reason to allow free access to these. However most others are no more or less dangerous than cigarettes and alcohol so you are right in terms of those.

When I've read about the use of hard drugs in this country, the comment from doctors is that we need to have better rehab programmes and more places, not legal access. Unfortunately rehab is hugely expensive so there is never sufficient funding. Also, if we are going to legalise the use of lesser drugs, we need to make available to police the ability to test for them. People should know the limits and not drive stoned in the same way that they can't drink and drive.

I have little faith in the legislators in this country's ability to make any rational changes in this direction though.

lostinrates

Generali wrote: »

AIUI, the outcomes for heroin addicts are generally better than for alcoholics. Alcohol is far more harmful than most illegal drugs and has caused me far more problems than illegal ones. I've only ever been punched once to put me in hospital and that was by a drunk.

Even Amy Winehouse, after all her drug taking, managed to drink herself to death.

Too simple an analysis imo. You don't know really how far its influence might have been because you do not know what different choices you might have made with out (for better or for worse).

A lot of pur friends are, for example, very clever chaps who smoke a joint now and then and like a beer. They would also say its done them no harm, and yet.....i CAN see a difference. They are still clever chaps, don't get me worng, they have no cannabis paranoia or stuff like that (though there are friends of ours with mental health issues which i wonder if they might have developed with out, that is purely wondering, cannot be shown either way conclusively imo). But there is none the less a difference. They will all be fine but they might have been 'more' without, or they might have more driven and driven themselves into an early grave because they could not relax. :rotfl:

Personally for me that drug viewed as the most innocuous is one of the most dangerous, like alcohol, because its not considered a risk.

chewmylegoff

Generali wrote: »

AIUI, the outcomes for heroin addicts are generally better than for alcoholics. Alcohol is far more harmful than most illegal drugs and has caused me far more problems than illegal ones. I've only ever been punched once to put me in hospital and that was by a drunk.

Even Amy Winehouse, after all her drug taking, managed to drink herself to death.

I've never been punched by a heroin addict either, but I think that's a bit of a simplistic way of looking at it, as huge swathes of the population drink, and the majority of them don't give anyone any bother, whereas not many people take heroin but I would hazard a guess that almost all of them are at least being supported by benefits and a majority will take more from society in other ways.

Not sure that legalisation would change much as there would probably still be a black market in illegal (untaxed) drugs - as there is with tobacco. Not sure I really want London full of drug tourists either.

silvercar

PasturesNew wrote: »

Just turned on the BBC News and there's a couple of parents of dead teenagers who died of drugs - they want schools to teach kids about drugs so they know the dangers. The woman said that 60% of schools teach 1 hour about drugs/year - and 70% of those kids have no recollection of it.

I thought that's what kids go to uni for.

I know nothing about drugs. I found a roll-up in the garden and asked the kids what it was. They told me to smell it, after smelling it I was none the wiser. The kids asked if it smelt like weed. I hadn't a clue what weed should smell like.