pfifes

This one? That’s a very nice stove, I wouldn’t mind one myself! https://www.topstak.co.uk/stoves/stoves-by-type/freestanding-stoves/clearview-pioneer-400p/?gad_source=1&gbraid=0AAAAADpzkuK5yHIYoAv5g3xn1CJPlVNAw&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIs4uihZ_NiAMVl4BQBh2mUAPLEAQYAyABEgJfE_D_BwE

Yes, several neighbours have wood burners. Most are fine and I actually like the smell. There is a problem with one neighbour though due to the position of the flue and burning wet wood.

A neighbour has a wood burning stove and the smoke coming from the flue is a problem. The flue is below the ridge tiles. Is this against building regulations? Can people burn whatever they want on these too as it is causing a bad smell.

Self service tills in supermarkets for customers buying a few bits are good in my opinion as they keep queues down. I was in Marks & Spencer's at Meadowhall the other day though and they have also installed in some clothing areas. I think that’s taking it too far. There seemed to be a lot of little glitches so the assistant had to run around helping just about every customer so I don’t think it really saved time and was good customer service.

Definitely suspicious that. You should note down the precise details and report that to the police.

It was last night according to Sheffield Online. I don’t think it’s very appropriate to speculate on blame about last night’s accident. Let’s just hope that poor man is OK no matter whose fault it was. What I will say is that isn’t the first accident I’ve heard about in that area. I seem to recall there being quite a few over the last few years. I suppose we could say it’s a busy area and unfortunately that happens blah, blah. But perhaps the road layout there does need looking at to try to minimise risks. I know there are pedestrian crossings and a subway but I’ve also seen cars speeding and running red lights quite frequently. Maybe cameras and fines are the answer? I also remember the road behind the back of Wickes car park/Premier Inn being tricky as a pedestrian with cars whizzing around using it as a rat run.

This initiative is supposed to be aimed at reducing the amount of junk food children eat. Which is well intentioned and I thought was a positive move until I saw the criteria they were using and the rather baffling list which exempts syrup and icing (both largely consisting of refined sugar and generally used as toppings on (banned) cakes, puddings and deserts. Then gives porridge and rice cakes in the list of categories defined by the government. Bonkers. I sure all the fat kids gorge on porridge and rice cakes. Not! It does feel it like the government being seen to be doing something without really tackling the issue properly.

Well yes that’s true and I agree about exercise. But I don’t think that list is well thought through at all and it’s not properly targeted at the types of junk food that appeals to young people and are problematic for obesity in them. Young people are not getting fatter from eating porridge with a modest amount of sugar. Fruit loaves, crumpets and scones don’t particularly appeal to young people and are fine in moderation as part of a healthy diet. Takeaway iced doughnuts are very popular with young people though and far more unhealthy. In fact the former appeal more to older people who probably have a healthier diet and never eat takeaway doughnuts and pizza!

Ok, but why would things like syrup and icing be exempt and something like porridge have to have to be included in one of 13 categories identified by the government. Even porridge with added sugar/salt isn’t nutritionally terribly unlike say takeaway doughnuts and pizza (which are popular with young people and I would hazard a guess a much bigger issue than porridge with a little added sugar!). This camp needs to be targeted at genuine junk food which is popular with young people. Not ordinary food that may contain modest amounts of sugar/fat/salt.

Yes, and the inclusion of a lot quite ordinary foods in that list I think could lead to more disordered eating issues in young people. The old sayings of ‘everything in moderation’ and little of what you fancy does you good’ are a more sensible approach that demonising every food that isn’t nutritionally perfect. It might also be sensible to have more emphasis on school sport and active hobbies for children. I know that doesn’t substitute having a healthy diet but it is an important factor in preventing weight gain and is good for mental as well as physical health.

That’s one type of curtain twitching. The other type is having next door neighbours who of course recognise you watching every time you go and do some gardening or jobs outside. It must be better than TV.

Agreed but what I think should be stopped is a requirement to download a parking payment app to pay for parking. I haven’t come across this in Sheffield fortunately but it exists in other areas. There are people that don’t have a smartphone but also personally I don’t want to have download various different apps just to park (because they don’t all use the same payment provider).

I’ve often seen porridge recommended as a healthy breakfast so I find it very odd that it’s on a list of banned ‘junk foods’ to avoid advertising to children. Another oddity is icing being exempted. Icing is very high in sugar. Even as child I disliked it as I found it too sweet. And icing is normally a topping on cake or similar which is banned! Garlic bread is exempted on this list but crumpets, scones, fruit loaves and hot cross buns are banned. Now I suppose homemade garlic bread might not be too bad but pre prepared or takeaway garlic bread (I.e. the type advertised on TV) would generally be very high in fat. Much more so than crumpets, scones, fruit loaves and hot cross buns which although not a perfect health foods, are generally lower in fat than takeaway or pre prepared garlic bread. Some of these items contain sugar but normally in relatively modest quantities. They are also traditional foods than have been around long before any obesity crisis and aren’t items that especially appeal to children. It feels like yet another initiative with good intentions, which is not properly thought through.

It doesn’t say that on the list you posted. And besides which syrup usually very high in sugar. In fact many add it to flavour to plain porridge. Maybe there are sugar free syrups available but even so they could scarcely be described as ‘nutritious’.

So porridge oats are deemed unhealthy and banned. But syrup is allowed? Rice cakes are deemed unhealthy and banned. But garlic bread (which can be absolutely loaded with fat) is allowed? Oh dear.