High Fructose Corn Syrup, bees and humans.

.
Mrs Rigby always liked the idea of having bees in her garden, because she and all the other Rigbys eat quite a lot of honey. Like so many good ideas, nothing ever came of it, but it doesn't mean she isn't interested in what happens to honey bees.

Bee-keeping seems to be beset with problems these days, with whole colonies being wiped out by the nasty little varroa mite, but there were other things going wrong.

Some clever scientists in America think they might have worked out another reason for bees dying - it's the food they're being given by their well-meaning keepers.

Mrs R spotted an article in a newspaper and promptly lost the link, so spent a couple of minutes searching the net to find it again. She's managed to tracked down the source, which is the Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry. This is what it says

... high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) has become a sucrose replacement for honey bees and has widespread use as a sweetener in many processed foods and beverages for human consumption. It is utilized by commercial beekeepers as a food for honey bees for several reasons: to promote brood production, after bees have been moved for commercial pollination, and when field-gathered nectar sources are scarce. Hydroxymethylfurfural (HMF) is a heat-formed contaminant and is the most noted toxin to honey bees. ....

There's more of the article, but unfortunately Mrs R isn't a special enough person to be able to read it, so she looked somewhere else and found this

The scientists measured levels of HMF in HFCS products from different manufacturers over a period of 35 days at different temperatures. As temperatures rose, levels of HMF increased steadily. Levels jumped dramatically at about 120 degrees Fahrenheit.

Yes, that's all fine and dandy, they've found something that kills bees. It's a solvable problem because they can be given something else to eat. Sounds like good news to bee-keepers and good news for honey-eaters too, because it might mean that British honey is safe after all.

There's a extra bit

Because HFCS is incorporated as a sweetener in many processed foods, the data from this study are important for human health as well,” the report states. It adds that studies have linked HMF to DNA damage in humans. In addition, HMF breaks down in the body to other substances potentially more harmful than HMF

So we're eating this stuff too? And it can alter DNA?

Where are the banner headlines telling us all about the health risks? There were some only a few days ago telling us that ham sandwiches might give us cancer, but zilch, zero, nothing at all about this - so mebbe it isn't really dangerous at all, unless you're a bee.

Mebbe, though, if you eat some hot High Fructose Corn Syrup and then give a DNA sample ...?

Nah! Silly idea!
.

Unhealthy buildings?

.
It's reported here that a charity is refusing to share a building with certain other businesses.

Apparently Cancer Research UK is refusing to share the £50million Angel Building in Islington with the likes of fast food outlets, tobacco firms or pubs, and the developer, Derwent London, has agreed to enforce the restriction.

Director Paul Williams said:

“Cancer Research UK didn’t want to be associated with certain types of business.”

Mrs Rigby had a quick look around and found this

Angel Building is the re-invention of an early 1980’s commercial property on a prominent but under-used site on the corner of St John Street and Pentonville Road, Islington. Award winning property company Derwent London have pre-let 13,000 sq m as the new headquarters for Cancer Research.

and

St John Street will see a newly landscaped public realm set around existing mature trees and the introduction of shops and restaurant will bring activity to this important frontage in the heart of Islington. Angel Building is currently under construction and will be completed during 2010.

Mrs R also found a 2007 press release here, but she can't find anything that refers to rules that exclude certain groups of commercial tenants, and Mrs Rigby wonders if such a restriction (which would have to be a restrictive covenant in the lease) is against free competition.

She would be interested to know what MacDonald's thinks about this too, more especially because they are mentioned in the article and their menu includes what they call "healthy options".

Mrs Rigby also wonders if the selection of suitable business tenants would extend to the dictating the menu in the proposed restaurant? Would Cancer Research UK try to insist it is a vegetarian or vegan restaurant? Would they also try to restrict what people can eat and drink in the courtyard area - will they try to ban ham sandwiches?

Mrs Rigby is intrigued by the whole thing and wonders why any lessee thinks it has the right to make these demands.

Cancer Research UK is a charity that does a lot of good, its remit is research. Its website says :-

Cancer Research UK is the world's leading independent organisation dedicated to cancer research.

We support research into all aspects of cancer through the work of more than 4,500 scientists, doctors and nurses.

Maybe their research (which won't be carried out at Angel Building) has shown you can catch cancer from being in the same building as a corporate group that represents somebody, or something, you don't like?

Aside from that though, Mrs R wonders if we are truly reaching the time when the so-called 'good guys' can demand almost anything - and get it?

And if so, is this the world we want to pass onto our children?
.

Did Gordon get his timing wrong?

.
Mrs Rigby hasn't a clue whether this is good timing or not, but she has a feeling the overall impression will be that Mr Brown was trying to beat Mr Cameron to a PR opportunity - and it won't help the troops one little bit.

From the Mail

Mr Brown flew to Afghanistan yesterday to meet British troops and military leaders just 48 hours before Mr Cameron was scheduled to make an identical journey.

and

The Tory leader scrapped his own visit – which has been in his diary since July – to avoid an unseemly cat-and-mouse game and wasting overstretched military resources.

Mrs Rigby thinks that if Mr Brown had kept out of it he might have been able to ask why Cameron had gone to Afghanistan, he could have claimed it was a vote-gaining political stunt, he could have asked how much it had cost and so on. He might have been able to make some capital out of it all - especially when we all know that the MoD is strapped for cash.

But, he's lost that chance, and it looks too much as if he merely scurried out there so he could get in first and, somehow (at least in the Rigby household) Cameron looks like the good guy who has called off his own planned visit to the troops because,

‘We were conscious of the military resources required for our trip and chose to reschedule.’

While I don't have a lot of time for Mr Brown, mainly because he likes to hide behind his sofa when the going gets tough, I think he's been badly advised and this is yet another PR calamity.

But is it deliberate?

In the end, assuming all the various polls are right, when Labour is trounced at the next election the blame will no doubt be laid solely at Gordon Brown's door - and none of his so-called advisers will get an ear-bashing.
.

Oops?

.
Is this an "Oops!" moment?

The Times reports :-

The British government decided it was “in the overwhelming interests of the United Kingdom” to make Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi, the Lockerbie bomber, eligible for return to Libya, leaked ministerial letters reveal.

Gordon Brown’s government made the decision after discussions between Libya and BP over a multi-million-pound oil exploration deal had hit difficulties. These were resolved soon afterwards.

The letters were sent two years ago by Jack Straw, the justice secretary, to Kenny MacAskill, his counterpart in Scotland, who has been widely criticised for taking the formal decision to permit Megrahi’s release.

The correspondence makes it plain that the key decision to include Megrahi in a deal with Libya to allow prisoners to return home was, in fact, taken in London for British national interests.

and The Mail picks up another issue :-

The Lockerbie row took another twist yesterday when it was revealed that a public relations company owned by one of Lord Mandelson’s close friends has opened a branch in the Libyan capital Tripoli.

Brown Lloyd James (BLJ), whose partners include the friend, ex-Beatles manager Peter Brown, has been conducting a campaign to promote Libya’s business interests for the past nine months.

The firm’s favoured position with the oil-rich regime has now raised questions about the PR guru’s connection to Peter Mandelson, whom he has known since the Nineties.

Mrs Rigby was sure Mr Brown said the Megrahi release was nothing to do with trade, that it was a Scottish decision, and was nothing to do with Westminster. Maybe she misunderstood? It seems to happen to her quite a lot lately - these 'senior moments' are coming thick and fast!
.

The Sun, Mr Brown, and firing blanks whilst paying tax.

.
The Sun doesn't pull any punches in this piece about the Army, Afghanistan and the MoD.

The Sun is proud to be the Forces' paper. We admire their astonishing courage and weep for their dead and injured.

But they need the right kit. They need money. They need to feel their Government is behind them.

Our heroes have been abandoned and are dying. This Government must remember that there is a bloody war on. A war that they chose.

If the Prime Minister will not take charge and take responsibility for the war, he should resign and be replaced with a Premier who will lead from the front.

Gordon's response is make a "surprise" visit to Afghanistan, where during the two hours he spent at Lashkar Gah he hinted that more troops may be sent to the front line.

Mrs Rigby thinks it's a pity that many of these troops will have been using blank ammunition during their training

British soldiers are being forced to train with blanks rather than live rounds to save money.

Apparently ...

The bullet ban is the result of a £700m cut in the money available to run the army in the UK.

Mrs Rigby wonders what ARRSE will make of this!

She also wonders what they will make of Lance Corporal Dean Byfield's question,

"Why do we have to pay tax while we are out here?"

Mr Brown told him it was ...

because the soldier was a British employee, his income was taxed back home while he was stationed overseas

I wonder what soldiers actually get in return for their taxes?
.

Mike Perham and Laura Dekker.

.
Mike Perham, arrived back in Portsmouth today, 29th August, and is lauded as being the "youngest person to circumnavigate the world solo with assistance."

Mike is 17. He was the youngest person to sail the Atlantic single handed, which he did when he was 14.

Mike left Portsmouth in his Open 50 racing yacht Totallymoney.com on November 15 last year.

During the 30,000-mile voyage he battled 50ft waves, gale force winds, numerous technical difficulties and his own fear of heights when he had to climb the mast for essential rigging changes and repairs.

The previous youngest person to complete a similar voyage was American Zac Sunderland who was two months older than Mike when he completed his voyage last month.

13 year old Laura Dekker would like to sail round the world single handed, she would like to be the youngest person to achieve this feat. She would like to break the Mike's record.

Unfortunately for Laura the Dutch authorities don't like the idea and have made her a temporary ward of court, while "psychologists assess her capacity to undertake the risky voyage."

Apparently Laura spent the first four years of her life sailing round New Zealand, which sounds quite a nice thing to do - but Mrs R wonders how this sets her up to sail round the world?

Mrs Rigby doesn't know Laura Dekker, she doesn't know how capable a sailor she is, although she has read that when she sailed across the Channel she was stopped in England whilst her parents were brought to accompany her home - but she managed it on her own. Mrs R notes that Laura hasn't sailed the Atlantic single-handed, and there's quite some difference between crossing the Channel and sailing all the way round the planet.

Mrs Rigby has some experience of 13 year old girls, she knows they can be moody, she knows they can be irrational and she also knows that they tend to grow fast. Mrs R remembers reading some time ago that teenage girls grow so fast that even the Royal Ballet School acknowledges that they lose some co-ordination and muscle control whilst the nerve fibres catch up with the bone growth, and adjust their practical training accordingly.

So, although Mrs Rigby admires Laura Dekker for wanting to sail round the world (and thinks her parents are bonkers for encouraging her), she isn't entirely sure that it's the right thing for her to do until she's finished growing - even if the Dutch psychologists decide she's mentally capable of enduring the stresses of the risky voyage and, presumably, time spent alone and all the other things associated with being a young teenage girl.

Mrs R thinks Laura should wait a while and maybe try to beat some of Ellen McArthur's records instead of just wanting to be "youngest".
.

Richmond Council doesn't like Lynn Barber

.
In an article in the Telegraph outlining why"Lynn Barber, the writer and interviewer, has withdrawn from a literary festival after the local council refused to use a publicity photograph which showed her smoking a cigarette", Mrs Rigby noticed that a spokesman for Richmond Council said this :-

As a local authority we are responsible for encouraging good health habits in the area ...

Mrs Rigby thought local councils already had enough to do, what with running car parks, enforcing anti-litter laws, policing rubbish collections and so on, without taking on a job that should be the responsibility of the local health authority.

Or maybe some councils are trying to make themselves look very busy, to explain why they cost so much to run?
.

Kennedy.

.
I've tried, believe me I've tried, but I can't shed a single tear for Edward Kennedy.

I keep remembering Mary Jo Kopechne and how she died at Chappaquiddick, and how he left her there whilst he went to talk to his "aides" instead of calling the Police. I keep remembering that he was lucky not to serve a custodial sentence, and that the truth of the incident will have died with him.

Mr Brown, as my Prime Minister, is meant to speak on my behalf. He said this

"Senator Edward Kennedy will be mourned not just in America but in every continent.

There probably are people on every continent who have mourned his passing, and I know Mr Brown is meant to say nice things about our "friends", and it's bad form to speak ill of the dead. But even so Mr Brown didn't seem to worry too much when he said the recession started in America, and he didn't seem too bothered that America was irritated when Megrahi was let out of jail to go home to Libya.

Maybe Mr Brown didn't think, for even a fleeting moment, of all the people in Britain whose lives were badly affected by Teddy Kennedy's links with NORAID - who gave money to the IRA, which they spent on explosives, which they then used to blow up civilians in both Ireland and on mainland Britain.

So, no tears in the Rigby household for Teddy Kennedy, the last of the dynasty, and no tears that he didn't collect his honorary knighthood either.
.

Nanny designs a new pint glass

.
When, oh when, will Nanny realise it isn't the glass's fault - it's the person who breaks it who is responsible.

there are ... around 87,000 violent incidents involving glassware each year, which costs an annual estimate of £100m in NHS, police and court costs.

So what is Nanny doing about it?

The Home Office has called in a team of designers to create a safer beer glass in a bid to reduce the number of violent assaults.

It's all in the Mail

.

Database breached by at least 34 local authorities

.
Henry Porter in the Guardian discovered a little-read report in Computer Weekly, which he reported in his article "Nine sacked for breaching ID card database"

Computer Weekly itself reports that staff from at local authorities have accessed the DWP site and that:-

Computer Weekly has established that staff from at least 34 local authorities have misused the Department of Work and Pensions' (DWP) Customer Information System (CIS) database to look up personal details of the public.

The database, which holds 92 million records on the population, underpins the government's ID card programme. It stores sensitive data such as ethnicity, relationship history and whether someone is being investigated for fraud.

Nine staff have been quietly sacked from their local authority jobs for abusing the database, nine have been given official warnings, two have been suspended, four resigned and six had their database access privileges removed, Freedom of Information requests lodged by Computer Weekly have revealed.

But none of the local authorities have chosen to bring prosecutions against their staff for abusing their access to the CIS database.

So if you illegally access the database to find personal information about your friends, neighbours or celebrities you should do it during working hours, because the worst penalty you can face is losing your job.

In case you didn't spot the link to the list of breaches it's here

These people looked at the personal details of
* friends,
* neighbours,
* work colleagues,
* celebrities,
* acquaintances,
* "someone I knew"
* benefits claimant
* family
*partner

There is also an instance of an individual looking up "friend's father's address" - with goodness knows what consequences.

Also picking up the story is www.PublicService which reports that :-

The CIS database holds 92 million records on the population. It stores sensitive data such as ethnicity, relationship history and whether someone is being investigated for fraud. As part of its terms of use, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) – which is the lead department for the system, warned that it may prosecute staff who access files they are not entitled to see. The DWP can also remove access to any council who is considered to be abusing it too much.

Let's play the last bit again :-

The DWP can also remove access to any council who is considered to be abusing it too much.

Too much?

Too much!

They shouldn't be "abusing it" at all!

Could a violent misogynist avoid prosecution by saying, "I didn't abuse my wife too much!", or a paedophile get away with, "I didn't abuse the child too much!"?

No, of course they couldn't, and DWP should be ashamed.

Any data we give the government and its' many agencies is provided on the understanding that it's kept safely. It shouldn't be copied onto CDs or datasticks and left on the train, and nor should anybody's personal information be picked over by government employees who've got nothing better to do with themselves when they're "at work"!

This "secure" database has developed more holes than the Jumblies' sieve!
.