h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

NaJoPoMo 6/11/12

I soon realised that I don't have enough to write about academia, culture, and the country.

Whilst listening to the radio this a few weeks ago I was struck by the fact that so much of the media about about brining me opinions from uninformed people. As I had to drive somewhere during the day I found that I was listening to a phone in where people who didn't know anything about current events got airtime to talk about them. All linked together by a presenter who didn't know anything about the event in question.

Honestly. Why?

When will this all end?

Is the next step film reviews by people who have never seen the film? Restaurant reviews by people who haven't visited the establishment in question?

Ahh yes, we have thoughts on the care of the dying by someone who knows sod all about it:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2217748/Care-No-pathway-killing-people-doctors-deem-worthless.html

I could give my personal opinions about the liverpool care pathway. But I haven't practiced clinical medicine since 2010, (other than the odd locum shift) so I am in fact uninformed as well.

I suggest you do read the opinions of someone who is a) a doctor who works in the field of palliative medicine, and b) not expected to live more than a year. An informed opinion:

http://drkategranger.wordpress.com/2012/11/04/end-of-life-care-through-the-eyes-of-a-doctor-and-a-patient

I haven't much comment on the blog post - it's too much to take in. But I read the article, and just wow.

"First, the word ‘dying’ has been applied to people suffering from terminal illness..."

Wait, you mean people with a terminal illness are not in fact dying? Terminal illness describes diseases are expected to result in death within a reasonably short period of time, correct?

"Yet that is precisely what has been happening, ever since the courts ruled in 1993 that the feeding tubes could be removed from the Hillsborough stadium disaster victim Tony Bland, who was in a persistent vegetative state, because such artificial nutrition and hydration were deemed to be ‘treatment’.

The judges disingenuously claimed then that this was not killing, but allowing Tony Bland to die. But he was not dying. "

Well, she got that last bit right. The patient was in a persistent vegetative state? Then no, he wasn't dying. He was already dead.

What a nasty, misinformed article.

Not being from the UK, I've only got what I read about it on h2g2 to go by, but isn't the Daily Mail sort of a right-wing propaganda rag?

The Daily Mail is the right-wing rag for those with pretensions of superiority.

Thus, for example, when The Sun prints pictures of topless celebs and says "Fwaaah, look at this everybody! ", The Daily Mail prints pictures of topless celebs and says "Outrageous! Immoral! But fwaaah! Look at this everybody! Tch Tch!"

Yup.. and no.

A terminal illness can refer to one that is likely to result in deaths in the next few days-months. Dying as such probably refers to the last few days or hours.

It is a nasty mis-informed article. The cases she has dredged up seems to be ones where the guidelines were used inappropriately.
If you use the wrong set of care guidelines then you are going to harm your patient. If you treat someone with pneumonia using guidelines for a heart attack you are probably going to kill them as well.

[Amy P]

Are restaurants culture?

Ben has been telling me how good the new Resturant is for some time. She's right, Red box noodles on Nicholson st in Edinburgh is brilliant for vegans.

It's got a simple menu, select your choice of noodles, meat or tofu, veg, and sauce, specify how much chilli coriander or lemon grass. Then sit back whilst they stir fry it and it serve in a US style cardboard box. This adds up to at least 20 different vegan options, plus starters. It's partially like a take away, so none of the fancy china cats or lucky dragons. You take a seat and they bring your food in its cardboard box to your table. It's cheap and cheerful but the food is amazing, better than most sit-down Chinese restaurants.

Oh and I forgot to mention the price: two courses for two people came to £15, at least half what you would pay in a proper Resturant.

Sounds good

There's a local chain restaurant that does a sort of DIY stir-fry that's very vegetarian and vegan friendly. I normally avoid chain restaurants but I'd gotten a gift card once, and they send me a coupon every year for my birthday.

Basically, you go up to a buffet type thing, serve up some rice (brown or white) or rice noodles, pile on all the veggies, mock meat, tofu, (meat, shrimp available as well), any combination of various sauces (including teriyaki, lemongrass water, chili garlic paste, at least a dozen options), nuts and seeds, seasonings, sri racha, etc. Then you put a little plastic stick in it to indicate whether you want roti bread with it, if you want soup, if you want egg scrambled in, if you have allergies or are vegan (in which case they cook on a separate grill), etc. Then they fry it up for you.

It's not as inexpensive as your place - it's about US $15 per person for dinner, but dinner is all you can eat. I'm usually good for one bowl of soup and one stir-fry with a piece of roti.

[Amy P]

My Great Great Grandfather Edward casts a long shadow. Nearly 100 years after his death my grandmother berates my father for being 'too much like *him*'.

Edward 'Z' was a prosperous Victorian in the Town of Littleborough near Rochdale, Lancashire. I don't know much about his early life, but by his 40s he was doing well. He owned a cotton mill and had three sons. I would like to say he was a kind and benevolent mill owner, but I know nothing about how he treated his employees.

We know that he was a member of the town council, a magistrate and a leading member of the Methodist Chapel. He raised the money for the construction of a methodist chapel in Littlebourgh, then he gave a speech and 'laid the final stone' at the opening. He was supposed to just tap the stone, but he knocked it much too hard and he ceremonial hammer was damaged. In 1997 we went to find the chapel, and found a small abandoned building awaiting demolition. One of the stones born the engraving 'laid by Edward 'Z'. We wanted to bring the stone home, but it was impossible. My father still has the hammer and you can still see the dent, a small brass plaque commemorates the date the stone was laid. We think he would have been very sad if he knew that the hammer out-lived the stone.

We know for certain that he was an outspoken man and had quite a name for himself in the town. One of his most notable fights was against the local council. They decided to use the rate payers money to subsidise the education in the Church of England Schools, but no money was to go to the methodist schools. He was disgusted by this. Why should the rates of methodists subsidise Church of England Schools? He gave many public speeches in protest and when that was ineffective he refused to pay his rates. He ignored the usual summon and was arrested during a council meeting. This whole episode mortified his wife and sons, all respectable middle class Victorians, who talked of it for the rest of their lives.

'After all,' My grandmother said over 100 years later, whilst trying to persuade me leave the Socialist Workers Party, 'all that fire and thunder, and what happened? The Church of England schools are still funded through our rates. He should have thought of his family and stayed at home'.

He married three times. The final time he married his son's sister-in-law. (His son's wife's sister)Whilst he was in his 50s his wife died and he decided to remarry. By this time his son James, my great grandfather, was engaged to be married to a woman whose had an attractive sister a few years older than herself. Edward proposed to the sister and became his son's brother-in-law. All lived together in the family home.

When the first world war was declared and the country was caught up in a gripe of patrotism Edward was again outranged. As a methodist he was a committed pacifist and fiercely opposed to war. When conscription came through in 1916 he would have been a conscientious objector to make a point. Unfortunately he was too old to be called up, so he made sure that his son's were conscientious objectors. It was difficult to be a conscientious objector and his sons were ostracised.

By now he had he branched out of cotton mills and established a company that made cattle feed. This operation needed three factories, one in Lancashire, and one in Dublin, I don't know where the other was. One son was appointed to run each factory and Edward was supposed to retire. He didn't mange to retire, and could never fully trust his sons. So he would regularly go to the factories to check up on them. It was difficult to get to Ireland during wartime, so he would take the Irish Mailboat, on the 10th of October 1918 he was on the RMS Leimster which was torpedoed. The ship was full of young soliders who offered the elderly gentleman a place in a life boat. He refused and insisted a young man should take the place. And went down with the boat.

My grandfather always believed that he would have died saying 'We should not sacrifice young men for old'. Something he had said many times at home.

We have a copy of the obituary in the local newspapers. It may have been hard to write. In 1918 no one could write an obituary and say that the deceased was an anti-war trouble-maker. Instead they said that he was pro-war even though his methodist faith meant he could not say so, and that giving him his place on the lifeboat was an act of patroitism, demonstrating gratitude for the soliders. His family knew that was not true.

[Amy P]

That was a really intersting read. He sounds like quite a character and I hope your dad is proud to be compared to him.

Deb

Well when you are compared to him my grandmother doesn't mean it in a positive way. I'm going to post more about the next four generations of conscientious objectors.

That's a really interesting story, Z. I can see your grandmother's point, in a way, but I think there's a balance to be struck. We may still fund the education of Anglicans, but methodists, atheists, presbyterians and catholics don't pay tithe to the Church of England. I suspect that they still would , if it wasn't for non-conformist shit-stirrers like Edward 'Z'.

The obituary is really interesting, too. I've noticed before that documentary evidence often doesn't rhyme with family history. Sometimes it is because the writer feels the need to 'keep up a good front'. Sometimes, it's because we all like to think the best of our ancestors. Sometimes again, it's because the writer neglected to do the basic ABCs of research.

I wonder how 'accidental' it was that he damaged the ceremonial hammer. A hammer is a pretty hard tool to damage.

Not really--Z didn't say how large the dent is, plus I doubt that a ceremonial hammer used tool-hardened steel

Oh, I think it would still take a bit of effort.

The hammer is actually made of polished mahogany, and looks nothing like a hammer, it's a sort of conical mallet. I think the younger generations, who never met him are very proud. But it's notable that everyone who knew someone who knew him has rather mixed feelings. I also think that protests like this are a crucial part of the separation of church from state and of being a more pluralist society. So yes, there was a success there.

The obituary is interesting. It's almost although the newspaper staff didn't want to say that he was anti-war because that would speaking ill of the dead. Even though he was.

Good lord. That sane people are still stigmatized by this 'four feathers' mentality really sucks. No wonder there are still wars, if were more people with civil courage who were COs the politicos might think twice before engaging in such stupidly wasteful and destructive enterprises and get other people's sons and daughters killed.
Disestablishmentarianism is a great thing. Even though Quakers, and Methodists and other leveling denominations were scary to the status quo, they might have a good effect. You might want to remind your sceptical colleagues of that.