Things you often Wonder

[mottaloo]

55 minutes ago, Xela said:

Its a bit extreme just to get rid of your ear and nose hair? 

Ah yeah, they singe them off if I'm not wrong ?

Ah sod it - can't be any worse than my back sack and crack 

[il_serpente]

11 hours ago, mottaloo said:

Not a real heavy one here....but has anyone on VT ever tried a Turkish barber (or similar) for a shave ? Y'know, the cutthroat razor, hot towels scenario ? 

I'm tempted but have quite a sensitive upper lip area that i have to be careful about. Also, conversation would be limited like at the dentist....even if she was called Taneh 

I hear there's a good one down Fleet Street, named Swini Tahd.   Nice place next door you can pop in for a pie beforehand, too.

[turvontour]

About 5 years ago as a 25 -26 year old, I finally realised that some crisps are aimed at children. Up until then I thought crisps were crisps, it hadn’t really crossed my mind about the names or packaging, and I'm still not completely convinced by it.

 

Now today, the BBC are saying that Kellogs is to cut sugar in their children’s cereals including Rice Krispies., Coco Pops, Multi-grain etc.

 

Am I just eating children’s food every day?

[Xela]

16 minutes ago, turvontour said:

About 5 years ago as a 25 -26 year old, I finally realised that some crisps are aimed at children. Up until then I thought crisps were crisps, it hadn’t really crossed my mind about the names or packaging, and I'm still not completely convinced by it.

 

Now today, the BBC are saying that Kellogs is to cut sugar in their children’s cereals including Rice Krispies., Coco Pops, Multi-grain etc.

 

Am I just eating children’s food every day?

I'm sitting at my desk eating sugar puffs and percy pig sweets. Don't let them change you!

 

[mjmooney]

Yep, they're shite aimed at kids, to get them hooked on sugar. Works, too. 

I like sweet stuff, but I haven't had any of those things since I was about 12. 

Weetabix, granola or porridge. That's it.

[Stevo985]

36 minutes ago, mjmooney said:

Yep, they're shite aimed at kids, to get them hooked on sugar. Works, too. 

I like sweet stuff, but I haven't had any of those things since I was about 12. 

Weetabix, granola or porridge. That's it.

More sugar in Granola than in loads of kids cereal.

[AVFCDAN]

I've had this discussion with my mate, he regards pretty much anything thats not Cornflakes or All Bran as a kids cereal and said that he would feel embarrassed buying them in a supermarket.

Obviously we're no longer speaking.

[mjmooney]

39 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

More sugar in Granola than in loads of kids cereal.

I know. I said I liked sweet stuff. I put honey on my Weetabix and sugar on my porridge. I just have no interest in stuff with cartoon animals on the box. 

[Xela]

47 minutes ago, mjmooney said:

I know. I said I liked sweet stuff. I put honey on my Weetabix and sugar on my porridge. I just have no interest in stuff with cartoon animals on the box. 

[sharkyvilla]

I noticed the other day Sugar Puffs arent called Sugar Puffs any more.  Political correctness gone mad.

[chrisp65]

23 minutes ago, sharkyvilla said:

I noticed the other day Sugar Puffs arent called Sugar Puffs any more.  Political correctness gone mad.

ahh, this explains why I could only find Sugar Benders in Morrisons

[Xela]

48 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

ahh, this explains why I could only find Sugar Benders in Morrisons

They're still called Puffs but Sugar was deemed the more offensive word and removed. 

[Xela]

In other cereal news, Kellogg's are to stop making Ricicles. 

Goodbye Captain Rik, may you rest in peace. 

 

How long before Tony the Tiger is put down by the sugar hating killjoys?

[JB]

Nutrition-nerd rant coming up that will probably interest nobody but will make me feel better .  Possibly one for the TTPYOTS thread...

I wonder how much of an impact this sugar reduction will have. Actually I don't. It's little more than a PR stunt targeted at people who don't know any better.

Rice Krispies, for example, only have 3g of sugar per serving. Kellogg's are apparently reducing sugar content by 'up to' 40%. Even if they remove all the sugar from Rice Krispies, that will be a grand total of 12 fewer calories per serving i.e. virtually nothing. There would be almost identical calorie reductions in Coco Pops, too. It will have literally no impact.

Calories consumed have been unequivocally shown to be the number one factor in nutritional health. Sugar isn't good for you but it isn't inherently bad for you, either. All forms of carbohydrate are utilised by the body in the same way (turned into glucose). The problems with sugar are that it has no nutritional value and it is very, very easy to overconsume (too many calories) but if health improvement is the goal then the focus needs to be on education and reducing how much people eat.

[Stevo985]

1 minute ago, JB said:

 if health improvement is the goal then the focus needs to be on education and reducing how much people eat.

This. 

Educate people about nutrition at an earlier age.

 

Sugar is just the hot topic at the moment. Just like it used to be fat before. Everything was low fat. And people still think because something is low fat that automatically makes it healthy.

[turvontour]

On ‎11‎/‎25‎/‎2017 at 11:07, Stevo985 said:

On at least 3 occasions this season I’ve seen a blind guy at Villa Park for a game. I see him by the food bit in K7. 

 

Hes clearly there to “watch” the game. And he’s clearly very blind. He has the white stick, he has to be led through the concourse. So he clearly can’t see much, if anything. 

So I often wonder what he gets out of it. He can’t see the game, so does he just go for the atmosphere? Does he listen to commentary or something? Or do the people he’s with describe it for him?

 

Just caught sight of this (excuse the pun) and thought I’d give my take on it, given I have some personal experience.

 

My dad’s blind, and has been blind since he was six, and so clearly has been without his sight for my whole life too. We had season tickets at Villa as a family for about 10 years while I was growing up, and go down whenever we can, although I now have a very young family myself so it’s fairly infrequent nowadays.

 

My dad probably isn’t your typical blind person though (and really not generalising here) in that he is quite successful, has a well-paid job (with 5-10 sighted people working for him), wife, family, mortgage, etc. Literally the only difference between him, you and I is that his eyes don’t work.

 

Growing up, he would be bringing the bulk of the income into the family home and so when we went to matches it would be him that’s taking us in a cost sense, rather than my mum, who was physically taking him and us (by holding hands or having his hand on her shoulder in crowds). He would also know the trains and bus routes that we would need to catch, so again he’s leading us while we lead him if you’re with me. I think it’s important that I include this as it was ultimately a blind guy that facilitated our experiences and love of Villa as a family, of which we’re really grateful.

 

Back to a few of your questions – Does he listen to commentary or something?

 

Yes, he’d listen to the game on the radio, that’s the main way that my dad consumes Aston Villa, and I suppose most things in general. I think years ago there was a specific commentary for the blind Villa following but nowadays you can pretty much always get the game on the radio.

 

A great anecdote from a few years ago when we were sitting down at the front of the Holte that stays with me. Gabby went through on goal at the North Stand end only to be called offside. Everyone around us jumped up remonstrating with the linesman who had raised his flag, “he’s never offside”, “are you blind lino” was shouted around us. A couple of seconds later my dad took his earphone out and leaned over to me saying, “they’re left-back stepped up, Gabby went early, was two yards off”. So while the thousands around us were clueless as to whether the correct call had been made, the blind guy has the facts, slightly ironic I suppose.

 

So does he just go for the atmosphere?

 

I think ultimately he just wants to be as close as he can to Aston Villa when they’re playing football. Arguably, it would be better for you and I to watch Villa on TV with all the available angles, replays, analysis etc, but we still prefer to go to the games don’t we. I’ve chosen to go to Everton in the pouring rain only to stand behind a pillar for 90 mins. I’ve been to other away games and stayed in the concourse for too long after half time having a beer and a song and missed goals, but I was still there. I’ve been over to Germany with England and watched about 40 minutes of the match etc. I suppose we all consume and support in different ways don’t we? From the lower Holte my dad knows that the goal posts are 20 yards away, the North Stand goal posts are 140 yards away, the away fans are 120 yards away, managers 70 yards etc. He loves the atmosphere and joins in with the songs, just as much as sighted people do, but its about being there more than anything else.

 

I’m not going to recommend you go all good Samaritan when you see that blind guy next and help him if he’s struggling, but he could be anyones father, husband, brother etc who's trying to make his way to his seat. Oh, and by the sounds of it, he loves the Villa!

[Stevo985]

8 minutes ago, turvontour said:

 

Just caught sight of this (excuse the pun) and thought I’d give my take on it, given I have some personal experience.

 

My dad’s blind, and has been blind since he was six, and so clearly has been without his sight for my whole life too. We had season tickets at Villa as a family for about 10 years while I was growing up, and go down whenever we can, although I now have a very young family myself so it’s fairly infrequent nowadays.

 

My dad probably isn’t your typical blind person though (and really not generalising here) in that he is quite successful, has a well-paid job (with 5-10 sighted people working for him), wife, family, mortgage, etc. Literally the only difference between him, you and I is that his eyes don’t work.

 

Growing up, he would be bringing the bulk of the income into the family home and so when we went to matches it would be him that’s taking us in a cost sense, rather than my mum, who was physically taking him and us (by holding hands or having his hand on her shoulder in crowds). He would also know the trains and bus routes that we would need to catch, so again he’s leading us while we lead him if you’re with me. I think it’s important that I include this as it was ultimately a blind guy that facilitated our experiences and love of Villa as a family, of which we’re really grateful.

 

Back to a few of your questions – Does he listen to commentary or something?

 

Yes, he’d listen to the game on the radio, that’s the main way that my dad consumes Aston Villa, and I suppose most things in general. I think years ago there was a specific commentary for the blind Villa following but nowadays you can pretty much always get the game on the radio.

 

A great anecdote from a few years ago when we were sitting down at the front of the Holte that stays with me. Gabby went through on goal at the North Stand end only to be called offside. Everyone around us jumped up remonstrating with the linesman who had raised his flag, “he’s never offside”, “are you blind lino” was shouted around us. A couple of seconds later my dad took his earphone out and leaned over to me saying, “they’re left-back stepped up, Gabby went early, was two yards off”. So while the thousands around us were clueless as to whether the correct call had been made, the blind guy has the facts, slightly ironic I suppose.

 

So does he just go for the atmosphere?

 

I think ultimately he just wants to be as close as he can to Aston Villa when they’re playing football. Arguably, it would be better for you and I to watch Villa on TV with all the available angles, replays, analysis etc, but we still prefer to go to the games don’t we. I’ve chosen to go to Everton in the pouring rain only to stand behind a pillar for 90 mins. I’ve been to other away games and stayed in the concourse for too long after half time having a beer and a song and missed goals, but I was still there. I’ve been over to Germany with England and watched about 40 minutes of the match etc. I suppose we all consume and support in different ways don’t we? From the lower Holte my dad knows that the goal posts are 20 yards away, the North Stand goal posts are 140 yards away, the away fans are 120 yards away, managers 70 yards etc. He loves the atmosphere and joins in with the songs, just as much as sighted people do, but its about being there more than anything else.

 

I’m not going to recommend you go all good Samaritan when you see that blind guy next and help him if he’s struggling, but he could be anyones father, husband, brother etc who's trying to make his way to his seat. Oh, and by the sounds of it, he loves the Villa!

Really interesting, thanks!

[Paddywhack]

13 minutes ago, turvontour said:

My dad’s blind, and has been blind since he was six, and so clearly has been without his sight for my whole life too.

That's quite a strange time to lose your sight, I imagine. Not blind from birth, but then probably wouldn't remember a great deal before that age.

[limpid]

17 hours ago, JB said:

Rice Krispies, for example, only have 3g of sugar per serving. Kellogg's are apparently reducing sugar content by 'up to' 40%. Even if they remove all the sugar from Rice Krispies, that will be a grand total of 12 fewer calories per serving i.e. virtually nothing. There would be almost identical calorie reductions in Coco Pops, too. It will have literally no impact.

But how many people eat the ridiculously small serving sizes for breakfast cereal?

[JB]

 

25 minutes ago, limpid said:

But how many people eat the ridiculously small serving sizes for breakfast cereal?

Well I’m sure you don’t need me to do the maths for you but say it’s a 100g serving then - around 380 total calories. There’s currently 10g of sugar in that - 40 total calories. Even with the top end of the ‘up to 40%’ reduction in sugar, it’s only a saving of 16 calories. Take all of the sugar out and you’ve still only saved 40 calories. Still essentially nothing so the point still stands.