No birthday cake for you my lad.

**InsaneApache** · 06-02-2006, 08:56

No. Not because you've been a naughty boy, because the 'thought police' say so.....

A home-made birthday cake for a 96-year-old man has fallen foul of health and safety police

HE WAS born before the discovery of antibiotics and survived the Depression and two world wars, yet staff at a day centre run by Age Concern decided that it was too much of a risk to let him eat a slice of home-made birthday cake.

The Madeira cake was baked for the 96-year-old man by Elaine Richards, a retired district nursing sister and a member of the Women’s Institute.

But when Mrs Richards, who is in her 70s, tried to deliver the cake to her elderly friend, who does not wish to be identified, her contribution to the birthday fare was rejected because of food and hygiene rules.

No cake today

I remember just before my grandmther died (aged 96) I took her down a bottle of rum for her nightcap and was told by the warden that she was not allowed to have it. I pretended to take it away only to slip it to her later. Bloody do-gooders. The country's gone potty.

**Papewaio** · 06-02-2006, 09:17

I agree with you, but this statement could be used as the reason why:

Originally Posted by InsaneApache

I remember just before my grandmther died (aged 96) I took her down a bottle of rum for her nightcap and was told by the warden that she was not allowed to have it. I pretended to take it away only to slip it to her later. Bloody do-gooders.

"Shortly after giving his grandmother rum she passed away. The prosecution rests."

**InsaneApache** · 06-02-2006, 09:43

Hehe Pape....you got me there.

This is revealing though.

WHAT’S IN THE MIX

Elaine Richards’s cake ingredients: 9oz (255g) flour, 6oz unsalted butter, 6oz sugar, milk, three eggs, candied peel, lemon zest

The shop equivalent: wheat flour, egg white, sugar, vegetable margarine (hydrogenated vegetable oil, water, salt, emulsifier (E475) colours (E100, E106B flavourings), glucose-fructose syrup, humectant, vegetable glycerine, vegetable and hydrogenated vegetable oil, emulsifiers: E471, E475, egg, baking powder (raising agents E450, E500) colour (E170), wheat flour, salt, invert sugar syrup, skimmed milk powder; preservatives: E202, E200, flavourings, soya, flour, stabiliser: E415, dried egg white, colours E104, E124

I know which one I'd rather eat.

**Kralizec** · 06-02-2006, 10:20

That's just because you know what the "E" stands for

**JAG** · 06-02-2006, 18:41

'Thought police'... ?! Where in the article or your statements does 'thought police' come into it?

It seems a simple case of the people meant to look after and be responsible for the man in question, thought that the cake posed a risk to his health too significant to ignore. Whether their decision was correct I don't know, if he wants to kill himself by eating cake, he probably has the right to do so, but I don't know the case well enough to pass judgment. However if, for instance, the old woman was bringing the man a knife to cut his throat with, would you be so against the authorities decision? I don't think you would be, the case isn't too unlike this one, if the cake would be a risk to his health and well being.

**Duke Malcolm** · 06-02-2006, 18:51

There is a slight difference between a cake and a knife...

**InsaneApache** · 06-02-2006, 22:50

Originally Posted by JAG

'Thought police'... ?! Where in the article or your statements does 'thought police' come into it?

It seems a simple case of the people meant to look after and be responsible for the man in question, thought that the cake posed a risk to his health too significant to ignore. Whether their decision was correct I don't know, if he wants to kill himself by eating cake, he probably has the right to do so, but I don't know the case well enough to pass judgment. However if, for instance, the old woman was bringing the man a knife to cut his throat with, would you be so against the authorities decision? I don't think you would be, the case isn't too unlike this one, if the cake would be a risk to his health and well being.

The sad thing is, from our historical duels, I know you mean this.

So when, in your opinion, did a 96 year old man have his personal preference removed by 'we know best' ideology?

Who decided he must be treated as an infant, unable to have a say in what he can and cannot eat?

This is one of the reasons I dislike the plague of political correctness and why I despise the hubris of our political classes. Just who the **** are these idiots that decide what we can and cannot do?

Socialism has found a new home. They can't win by arguement, because it has been found to be flawed and wanting. No. Better to run peoples life by stealth and control.

**Divinus Arma** · 06-03-2006, 01:22

Originally Posted by JAG

'Thought police'... ?! Where in the article or your statements does 'thought police' come into it?

It seems a simple case of the people meant to look after and be responsible for the man in question, thought that the cake posed a risk to his health too significant to ignore. Whether their decision was correct I don't know, if he wants to kill himself by eating cake, he probably has the right to do so, but I don't know the case well enough to pass judgment. However if, for instance, the old woman was bringing the man a knife to cut his throat with, would you be so against the authorities decision? I don't think you would be, the case isn't too unlike this one, if the cake would be a risk to his health and well being.

I think I will make it my personal responsibility to look after YOU. Hurry up and finish school, so I can tell you where to work. Give me all of your money and I will keep you alive after all expenses have been paid to "The state" (me).

**A.Saturnus** · 06-02-2006, 22:01

Originally Posted by InsaneApache

I know which one I'd rather eat.

That's because you don't know what vague and misleading terms like "butter", "milk" and "lemon" actually stand for.

**InsaneApache** · 06-02-2006, 22:51

Originally Posted by A.Saturnus

That's because you don't know what vague and misleading terms like "butter", "milk" and "lemon" actually stand for.

**A.Saturnus** · 06-03-2006, 20:51

Originally Posted by me

That's because you don't know what vague and misleading terms like "butter", "milk" and "lemon" actually stand for.

Originally Posted by InsaneApache

I was dead serious. If you don't know what E471 is, you could look it up. You'll get a description in all chemical details with all possible health concerns. If you buy milk on a farm you don't know whether it contains DDT, lead, animal hormones, dioxine or something else. People don't know what their food actually contains. Many still think that lemonade is made from lemons and who actually knows that one of the main ingredients of yoghurt is wood shavings? And you what? That lemonade is made from bacteria secretion is probably good. You get an artifical substance that way that is free of whatever unwanted things are in real lemons. You simply can't hold real lemons up to the same quality standards as bacteria secretion.
That many people would still prefer real lemons is just a sign how ignorant they are. Just like my grandmother. We once brought her to confess that she wouldn't eat soup containing NaCl and H2O!