WTF?
"The device, short-listed by the Food Standards Agency for a Food
Champion Award"
It's a fucking salt shaker. If people want loads of salt they'll keep
shaking til they get enough, or take off the lid, just like those
fcuking portion pack ketchup things you get in most pubs where you
need about twenty to make the food edible.
Councils should not be spending taxpayers money on salt shakers. They
excuse this behaviour saying it is their responsibility to monitor the
health of their residents. No it bloody isnt. No wonder council tax
has more than doubled under this 'government'.


================
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/tyne/7223094.stm

An innovative way of helping chip shop customers cut their salt intake
is being pioneered on Tyneside.

Gateshead Council has designed a new salt shaker which features just
five holes instead of the usual 17. It was conceived after researchers
found many shops were serving salt in flour shakers.

The device, short-listed by the Food Standards Agency for a Food
Champion Award, has been distributed to takeaways across the town at a
cost of £2,000. Other UK local authorities are now conducting trials
with the design.

Gateshead councillor Malcolm Graham, cabinet member for health, said:
"Our research is especially worrying because it has shown that it's
quite possible to get most of a whole day's allowance of salt in a
single serving of chips.

"However, the five-hole salt shaker helps to reduce the amount of salt
you automatically receive when you ask for salt on your chips, helping
to protect your health. We are certainly not trying to stop people
from enjoying their fish and chips. All we are doing is offering them
a choice."

Health experts currently advise that no more than 6g of salt should be
consumed per day.

Ed  wrote:
> Gateshead Council has designed a new salt shaker which features just
> five holes instead of the usual 17. It was conceived after researchers
> found many shops were serving salt in flour shakers.

Did they bother to find out why?  It's to speed up the process.  If you have
a nasty little salt shaker with just a few holes, it always has to be filled
up and it takes many shakes to get sufficent salt out.

F&C from the shop is the only meal I add salt to because it's part of the
whole experience. Who the hell do they think they are guarding _my_ diet?

-- 
As an atheist I don't accept the god theory.

You know, when you start ranting about the same stories as Allan
Tracy, it's time to start worrying. It's understandable if you
don't read his posts though.

http://groups.google.com/group/uk.media.tv.misc/browse_frm/thread/b60d5b030cb49ed1/06bb6019c5ca1395?lnk=gst&q=allan+tracy#06bb6019c5ca1395

On Tue, 01 Jul 2008 09:42:28 +0100, Ed  wrote:

> WTF?
> "The device, short-listed by the Food Standards Agency for a Food
> Champion Award"
> It's a fucking salt shaker. If people want loads of salt they'll keep
> shaking til they get enough, or take off the lid, just like those
> fcuking portion pack ketchup things you get in most pubs where you
> need about twenty to make the food edible.
> Councils should not be spending taxpayers money on salt shakers. They
> excuse this behaviour saying it is their responsibility to monitor the
> health of their residents. No it bloody isnt. No wonder council tax
> has more than doubled under this 'government'.
>
>
> ================
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/tyne/7223094.stm
>
> An innovative way of helping chip shop customers cut their salt intake
> is being pioneered on Tyneside.
>
> Gateshead Council has designed a new salt shaker which features just
> five holes instead of the usual 17. It was conceived after researchers
> found many shops were serving salt in flour shakers.
>
> The device, short-listed by the Food Standards Agency for a Food
> Champion Award, has been distributed to takeaways across the town at a
> cost of £2,000. Other UK local authorities are now conducting trials
> with the design.
>
> Gateshead councillor Malcolm Graham, cabinet member for health, said:
> "Our research is especially worrying because it has shown that it's
> quite possible to get most of a whole day's allowance of salt in a
> single serving of chips.
>
> "However, the five-hole salt shaker helps to reduce the amount of salt
> you automatically receive when you ask for salt on your chips, helping
> to protect your health. We are certainly not trying to stop people
> from enjoying their fish and chips. All we are doing is offering them
> a choice."
>
> Health experts currently advise that no more than 6g of salt should be
> consumed per day.

Anyone that agrees or sympathises with this sort of thing is a Nazi.

In article <afd2f067-2810-4155-8393-d5b2cdee4e15
@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, thunderbird57303@hotmail.com says...
> 
> Anyone that agrees or sympathises with this sort of thing is a Nazi.
> 
> 
> 

Godwinned, thank fuck.

-- 
Halmyre

That's you that is.

On Tue, 01 Jul 2008 20:28:51 +0100, allan tracy  
 wrote:

> Anyone that agrees or sympathises with this sort of thing is a Nazi.
>

No, just way too obsessed with attacking New Labour/lefties etc.

Fred X

On 2 Jul, 19:35, "Fred X"  wrote:
> On Tue, 01 Jul 2008 20:28:51 퍝, allan tracy  
>
>  wrote:
> > Anyone that agrees or sympathises with this sort of thing is a Nazi.
>
> No, just way too obsessed with attacking New Labour/lefties etc.
>

No, it's really quite simple.

Why oh why won't they just leave us alone - that's all?

If people want to put f**king salt on their chips and if they want to
put too much f**king salt on their chips what business is it of
their's?

No, they just have to interfere and infuriate, people like that just
deserve a good smack in their face.

Maybe surprising to many here I did stop being a child all too many
years ago and I'm more than old enough to make my own choices. It's
called freedom and last I checked I was supposed to be free I hope you
agree.

It's their right to be free to tell me to eat less salt but it's my
right to be free to tell them to f**k off and they should leave it at
that.

P**sing about with the salt cellars goes way beyond that mark.

On Wed, 02 Jul 2008 22:12:48 +0100, allan tracy  
 wrote:

> On 2 Jul, 19:35, "Fred X"  wrote:
>> On Tue, 01 Jul 2008 20:28:51 +0100, allan tracy  
>>
>>  wrote:
>> > Anyone that agrees or sympathises with this sort of thing is a Nazi.
>>
>> No, just way too obsessed with attacking New Labour/lefties etc.
>>
>
> No, it's really quite simple.
>
> Why oh why won't they just leave us alone - that's all?
>
> If people want to put f**king salt on their chips and if they want to
> put too much f**king salt on their chips what business is it of
> their's?
>
> No, they just have to interfere and infuriate, people like that just
> deserve a good smack in their face.

I'm not infuriated about it, perhaps you should ask yourself why are
you. Is a reduction in the number of holes in a salt cellar at chippies
going to have a major impact on your life? Why do you get so worked
up about stuff like this?

> Maybe surprising to many here I did stop being a child all too many
> years ago and I'm more than old enough to make my own choices. It's
> called freedom and last I checked I was supposed to be free I hope you
> agree.
>
> It's their right to be free to tell me to eat less salt but it's my
> right to be free to tell them to f**k off and they should leave it at
> that.
>
> P**sing about with the salt cellars goes way beyond that mark.

But presumably you expect the government to have health services
available for those who damage their health by consuming too much salt?

Fred X

On 3 Jul, 18:28, "Fred X"  wrote:
> On Wed, 02 Jul 2008 22:12:48 퍝, allan tracy  
>
>
>
>
>
>  wrote:
> > On 2 Jul, 19:35, "Fred X"  wrote:
> >> On Tue, 01 Jul 2008 20:28:51 퍝, allan tracy  
>
> >>  wrote:
> >> > Anyone that agrees or sympathises with this sort of thing is a Nazi.
>
> >> No, just way too obsessed with attacking New Labour/lefties etc.
>
> > No, it's really quite simple.
>
> > Why oh why won't they just leave us alone - that's all?
>
> > If people want to put f**king salt on their chips and if they want to
> > put too much f**king salt on their chips what business is it of
> > their's?
>
> > No, they just have to interfere and infuriate, people like that just
> > deserve a good smack in their face.
>
> I'm not infuriated about it, perhaps you should ask yourself why are
> you. Is a reduction in the number of holes in a salt cellar at chippies
> going to have a major impact on your life? Why do you get so worked
> up about stuff like this?
>
> > Maybe surprising to many here I did stop being a child all too many
> > years ago and I'm more than old enough to make my own choices. It's
> > called freedom and last I checked I was supposed to be free I hope you
> > agree.
>
> > It's their right to be free to tell me to eat less salt but it's my
> > right to be free to tell them to f**k off and they should leave it at
> > that.
>
> > P**sing about with the salt cellars goes way beyond that mark.
>
> But presumably you expect the government to have health services
> available for those who damage their health by consuming too much salt?
>
> Fred X- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I imagine the saturated fat in the chips is far worse for you than the
salt, and as i said earlier, the number of holes wont really mean
people add less salt, they'll just take longer with the shaker.

Fred X wrote:
> I'm not infuriated about it, perhaps you should ask yourself why are
> you. Is a reduction in the number of holes in a salt cellar at
> chippies going to have a major impact on your life? Why do you get so
> worked up about stuff like this?

Perhaps it is not the amount of holes that annoys, but the council tax 
wasted on such things.

>
> > But presumably you expect the government to have health services
> > available for those who damage their health by consuming too much salt?
>

In the longer term it's the ones that don't damage their health that
end up costing all the money.

>
> I imagine the saturated fat in the chips is far worse for you than the
> salt, and as i said earlier, the number of holes wont really mean
> people add less salt, they'll just take longer with the shaker.
>

Up north the traditional chippies cook in beef dripping (pure beef
fat) no doubt another avenue of pleasure that must be closed.

>
> I'm not infuriated about it, perhaps you should ask yourself why are
> you. Is a reduction in the number of holes in a salt cellar at chippies
> going to have a major impact on your life? Why do you get so worked
> up about stuff like this?
>

Because the principle of freedom of the individual should never be up
for discussion in a free country it's a basic right never to be eroded
no matter in how small a way.

It starts with the little things and ends up with terrorist
legislation being used to check up on parents giving false addresses
for their kid’s school (only a f**king socialist could conclude that
the greatest crime against humanity was wanting the best for your kid
i.e. contrary to what the state thinks is best).

Health and Safety legislation was never meant to be used in this way
what next Gordon Ramsey being told don’t cook in butter?

Besides, with these bastards a little bit of science (and boy is it
ever a little bit) is always a dangerous thing.

Oh and by the way, it's the elderly bar none that are the biggest
drain on the public purse those that die early are invariably doing
the nation a big favour financially popping their cork just when they
are at their, or about to become, most unproductive.

>
> Perhaps it is not the amount of holes that annoys, but the council tax
> wasted on such things.

Well, yes there's bound to be a 'five hole co-ordinator' in there
somewhere.

Let's face it, why resort to a bit of hole blocking super glue when
you can launch a whole new program initiative (following an intensive
brainstor..... sorry though shower sessions).

Then there's the compulsory consultation period, the bit where you
cover your ears and hum loudly.

On 3 Jul, 18:37, "Ophelia" <Opheilia@nix,co.uk> wrote:
> Fred X wrote:
> > I'm not infuriated about it, perhaps you should ask yourself why are
> > you. Is a reduction in the number of holes in a salt cellar at
> > chippies going to have a major impact on your life? Why do you get so
> > worked up about stuff like this?
>
> Perhaps it is not the amount of holes that annoys, but the council tax
> wasted on such things.

Was that not made clear?

allan tracy wrote:
>>> But presumably you expect the government to have health services
>>> available for those who damage their health by consuming too much
>>> salt?
>>
>
> In the longer term it's the ones that don't damage their health that
> end up costing all the money.
>
>>
>> I imagine the saturated fat in the chips is far worse for you than
>> the salt, and as i said earlier, the number of holes wont really mean
>> people add less salt, they'll just take longer with the shaker.
>>
>
> Up north the traditional chippies cook in beef dripping (pure beef
> fat) no doubt another avenue of pleasure that must be closed.

Chips cooked in beef dripping actually have *less* saturated fats than those 
cooked in "healthier" vegetable oils.  The reason for this is that the 
dripping is maintained at a far higher temperature. The chips fry quicker 
and so there is less time for them to become sodden with fat. When the chips 
are removed from the fat, small droplets remain. Beef dripping droplets are 
at such a high temperature that they evaporate almost instantly because the 
fat evaporates quicker that the droplet can radiate its excess heat away. 
Vegetable oil droplets are at a lower temperature and they radiate their 
excess heat away, and so fall below the emperature at which they can no 
longer evaporate, much quicker, leaving the remaining fat soaking back into 
the chips.


-- 
Enzo

I wear the cheese. It does not wear me.

Ed wrote:
> On 3 Jul, 18:37, "Ophelia" <Opheilia@nix,co.uk> wrote:
>> Fred X wrote:
>>> I'm not infuriated about it, perhaps you should ask yourself why are
>>> you. Is a reduction in the number of holes in a salt cellar at
>>> chippies going to have a major impact on your life? Why do you get
>>> so worked up about stuff like this?
>>
>> Perhaps it is not the amount of holes that annoys, but the council
>> tax wasted on such things.
>
> Was that not made clear?

Had it been clear, I would not have made the above remark. Perhaps I missed 
that bit?