Jump to content

chris@25

Members
  • Content Count

    816
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

10 Neutral

About chris@25

  • Rank
    Registered User
  1. See your GP so they can listen to your chest when you breathe just to make sure you haven't damaged the lung. Assuming you haven't, and the fracture is healing ok, they probably won't do anything other than presribe ibuprofren. You'll just have to take it easy for a few weeks, breathing in will hurt but you need to do it (don't get in the habit of breathing too shallow). After a couple of months it will be mostly better but still feel a little odd sometimes especially if you do any sport. I found it uncomfortable to have any weight on my chest for a couple of years after I cracked one of mine, but it's completely fine now after 5 years.
  2. The trouble with the current paranoia about adults interacting with kids (let's be honest, they mean men, women aren't suspected in the same way) is that most regular, responsible and thoughtful adults will feel inhibited about interacting with kids, but the tiny number of people who may be a threat to kids won't.
  3. I travelled to London for work a couple of weeks ago on the train for 40 quid return in first class, including free tea and coffee and a glass of wine on the way back. Can't imagine why anyone would prefer sitting in traffic. Don't get me wrong, I drive, but that's one journey I'd generally prefer the train for every time.
  4. Yes but the Labour party has been fobbing the country off with similar garbage for a few years now... Most rights of way are across private property.
  5. Can the council impose a public right of way as a footpath, or can this only be claimed after 20 years of use?
  6. Dunno if it's got anything to do with the fair, but I live near the park and someone did try to break into my garden shed at 4am one day last week, so look out, someone with bolt cutters is out and about in S11...
  7. My point is that it is a game played on both sides. Male chimpanzees fight to become the alpha of the group because they will have access to all the females. The females all mate with him because they want both his genes and his protection, but will also mate with other lowlier males (when the alpha isn't looking) to expand the range of genes carried by their offspring. So males and females are doing the same thing, basically. We are only one step removed. Alpha males don't bare their teeth and beat their chest (well they do in some places perhaps) but display their status in society in other ways. And the cave paintings were probably made by one of the non alpha males when he was depressed after being beaten up for going near a female yet again...
  8. It couldn't be that women throw themselves at men in positions of power then? (go for the alpha male, primate behaviour again you see)
  9. The last bit isn't quite true. Using the same analysis (it does explain primate behaviour and we are primates after all) it would be in the female's interest to stay with one powerful male while having some children with him and some with other males behind his back, because this ensures a good mix of genes and the female's genes are more likely to be passed on to future generations. So both sexes have a genetic 'reason' to cheat (and DNA studies show that around 10 percent of people are not related to person they think is their father). Quite. But there are many and varied reasons why people do things and often they don't really know why themselves. But the idea that men are bad and women are good, even at this genetic level of analysis, is balls (or, if you prefer, ovaries). Besides the whole underlying idea of this thread is as many have pointed out, ridiculous - men and women must be equally likely to have affairs, unless there's a very busy woman somewhere.
  10. Not by me they're not! They're a similarly self-agrandising bunch of twerps if you ask me.
  11. If everyone sold their car and bought a bike tomorrow you'd only find something else you feel the urge to protest about. I suspect it's the protesting you are really interested in, not cycling. If you want to promote cycling, this certainly isn't how to do it.
  12. Some stupid little terrier chewed up my lad's football in Bingham park the other week, the owner was just wandering about talking on his phone paying no attention. There's signs up everywhere telling people to keep their dogs on leads, yet dog owners seem to think they don't apply to them.
  13. I asked the council about making the narrow residential roads near me 20mph (as opposed to a one way system they were planning). The reply was that they can't do a 20mph zone without spending a great deal of money on traffic calming, so they wouldn't. Apparently you can't just put up a sign saying "20", you have to spend hundreds of thousands on creating something called a "traffic calmed 20mph residential zone" or some similar burocratic nonsense, which involves many "stakeholders" such as the police as well as various other people and loads of road humps, chicanes and other nonsense... common sense seemed not to be an option. But traffic speed cameras aren't needed, I'd prefer drivers to watch the road. Not narrowing the road would make cycling safer IMHO, along with the option to use the pavement around awkward sections.
  14. Jessop Wing = Jessops... still city centre. Oh sorry just read that again. No ante-natal at NGH? I didn't know that. Doesn't that mean that Labour have gone against their own policy somewhat?
  15. I don't understand how the provision of "modern health centres" in a deprived area of the city will make everyone in that area healthy when it seems the better off area across town with better health outcomes manage fine with the "outdated" GP surgeries system. To take the example you quoted, smoking during pregnancy, everyone knows you shouldn't do this anyway, if people in one area are more likely to do so then elsewhere it's got nothing to do with the provision of ante-natal services. Besides, in terms of the main hospital based ante-natal care, it's all based at the Northern General (next to some relatively deprived wards) or Jessops (in the city centre). There is none in the more affluent south, so how does that account for the different outcomes between north and south Sheffield? You could take smoking in general. More people in poorer areas smoke. It's not that they don't already know it's not good for their health, so spending money on new health centres isn't going to do anything about that. Same with housing - there's no intrinsic difference between the late Victorian terraced houses in, say, Crookes and those in, say, Darnall - or for that matter all the ones that were demolished in the 1960s in the east of the city to be replaced by cheap concrete council housing that was pulled down and replaced again in the 90s.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.