It is? Never mind fin, we still have English companies running the drinks industry oop north, we can always close them down and bring them home There was something I saw where the extreme remainers are going on about trade deals and particularly about with the U.S. and chlorinated chicken, still. Firstly if I can explain why this is a red herring. You will not see any of those people saying it is not safe to eat. The reason it is banned from the U.K. is not the quality of the meat but more to do with husbandry. We tend to be moving away from the rack em, pack and stack crowded way of chicken battery farming, the states on a whole is not Our safety of the chicken is largely from start till death of the chicken and the states is not as strict with husbandry so relies on making sure the chlorine wash is the end state safety. On that basis, the extreme remainers would have you believe their U.S. chicken is dangerous to us and ours is okay. I've seen figures that say you would have to eat 4 full U.S. chickens every day for years for the chlorine to effect you. There is nothing wrong with U.S. chicken even more so given as the U.K. and many places in europe, do not chlorine rinse chicken, so food poisoning through campyloebacta and salmonella due to chicken food poising is well know by most. My point here is, both chickens from the EU and the US are safe to eat, chlorine or not, if cooked and stored properly But as too, yah boo chlorinated food Americans, how many know you already eat chlorinated food approved by the U.K. and the eu? In order to help our northern cousin to understand, one of yours, look at what food they use chlorinated rinses for http://www.scotmas.com/ select the industries tab, how many know OUR fruits AND salads are often chlorine rinsed ? or these links which show just how much is used on the foods we eat and give to our children as "healthy foods" https://www.telegraph.co.uk/foodand...-not-necessarily-clean-warns-food-expert.html https://www.healthyfood.co.nz/articles/2008/january/ask-the-experts-lettuce-and-chlorine and on this one, look at pre packaged salads http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36822962 I hope we can let the "we can't deal with the U.S. as they use chlorinated rinses for their food so we can't have a trade deal with them" argument go because, it's very clear, we currently do and have for years, eaten and continue to eat, chlorinated food whilst in the eu already
Oooo dukey with a facts page, usual standard I see, good to see you again too duke. any comment on the chlorinated food above?
Shit. How much chlorine would a person be expected to ingest by going to their local swimming pool btw?
Quite a lot of pools put a dye in so if someone pee's in the pool, the water around them turns purple. In forum terms, there would be a lot of purple around duke and fin
It should be remembered also that it was the UK which dragged Europe and the EU up to our standards on animal welfare in food production, not the other way round. As in so many areas, it was not the EU that civilised and enlightened the UK but the UK which enlightened and civilised (almost - we did our best) the EU. We don't need lessons in governance from the apprentice.
I think as long as they remain with the labelling system of country of origin then people are switched on enough to make their own minds up. I only wish the silly people who use "chlorinated chicken" argument as a remain tactic, would be so passionate about halal Generally though, brexit is moving forward. The transition stage is annoying but most brexiteers knew there would be a couple of years of resettlement then we would see the benefits. Generally the U.K.'s position is a good one, we are still offering to be a strong friend of europe and help where we can. I feel most of the countries understand that but the eu commisioners are still pissed that we are leaving and that is where most of the hostility comes from, the eu project and not the countries of the eu.
That's a good point. There is a takeaway close to me. For 18 months or so, and up until recently, he's openly displayed a "Halal" sign on his shop front. I don't agree with Halal, so on the very rare occasion I fancy a greasy kebab, I won't give them my patronage. The same sign has now been changed to "Good Food". I wonder if business was suffering and he got some feedback on it? I will never go in because I doubt the business model has changed. I appreciate that I could be eating it without knowing it, but where confronted with the information, I've made my choice. I also won't buy any products from a supermarket labeled such.
Well in past employment I worked in a slaughterhouse and we had a contract for the Egyptian army,there where two religious men from that belief (who were local restaurant owners)who's job it was to pray over the animals in the pens and then cut their throats(all very quick and professional no trauma) however sometimes the order was for 30thousand kgs of beef and the order was "a few thousand kgs short" the shortfall was sourced from other fridges(normal slaughter) and the balance was achieved, strict religious views/orders. Aren't always as strict as the should be!
Cutting an animal's throat by hand is fine if that animal has been rendered insensible beforehand. That is the law in the UK. Chickens are killed by throat cutting on production lines but they have been electrically stunned first and pigs have been slaughtered by throat cutting for centuries. If someone wants to pray over an animal, carry on. Fat lot of good it'll do you or the animal but, if the rules on stunning are being side-stepped to appease an alien sub-set of religious fanatics, however quick or expertly the knife is wielded, that is outrageous. If that means Halal would effectively be banned, let it be banned, and if anyone doesn't like it, they know where the door is. But stunned or otherwise I would certainly never buy any meat labelled Halal because there is no place for religious dogma in the process of humane animal slaughter. Provided the UK's standards on animal welfare and slaughter have been met I have no problem with other post-production processes (such as chlorination) in food products reaching our shelves post-Brexit provided they are clearly and prominently labelled as such so that people can make their own mind up. Arguably that isn't the case now. Food is often labelled as "product of the EU" which doesn't mean much. The EU isn't a country, its a political construct comprised of multiple countries who produce food by different traditions and in different ways. In theory they all follow EU regulations, in reality of course they do not and different countries interpret the rules in different ways. Some follow them punctiliously, others flout them routinely. The "product of the EU" label stirrs them all in together and all it tells consumers is that the contents could be a mixture of produce from up to 28 different countries of origin, precise traceability is impossible and if some sources have followed the regulations and others have not it is impossible to tell which is which in the final concoction, so good luck. I look forward to being able to choose between "produced in the UK", "product of the EU" and "produced in the US from chlorinated meat". I know which I'll choose.
no less arrogant i see noob, nothing i aint used to btw and 48% aint wearing it, there will always be proud scot buts, theres one or two on ere, but that figure is on the rise. just keep doing what you do. gove and mundel repeatedly said we would have powers over immigration, it now seems the most powerful devolved government in the world a Co signatory to this union is just an english county now crazy init? how the brexiteers like to focus on the minutia forgetting the overall picture. heres some figures if that is all yer interested in. i guess it could be down to several factors in a country you are hoping to align yer selves with, high levels of poverty with a,poor health service. 14.7 per cent of the US population suffers from a foodborne illness every year, compared to 1.5 per cent in the UK. This is almost 10 times the percentage of the population. 3,000 people a year die in America from foodborne illness, compared to just 500 in the UK. The US population is about five times the size of the UK. About 380 of those annual deaths in America are attributed to salmonella poisoning, but in England and Wales, no deaths were recorded from salmonella between 2005 and 2015. Campylobacter, a pathogen found mainly in chicken, has an infection rate of 6,289 per 100k of population in the US, with the frequency of outbreak on the rise. In England and Wales, the rate was just 96.22 per 100k population. An average of 1,591 cases of listeriosis, usually caught from eating soft cheeses, unpasteurised milk and chilled ready-to-eat foods such as pate, are reported in the US every year. In England and Wales, the average is just 177.
Aw bless ya fin, you're cute when you try and fail but you still try. Facts with no link again, consistency lad, I like that about you. There is no minutia argument at all fin. One of the extreme remainers claims over future deals, particularly the U.S. was the chlorinated Chicken. I showed you and with links to support it, A Scottish company that already sells chlorinated food washing equipment, the areas it is used, goverment links, news sources links and all agree that far from the claim that the U.K. doesn't want chlorinated food, we have and whilst in the eu, been eating it already and for decades. Tell me fin, when you use these two as a counter argument 3,000 people a year die in America from foodborne illness, compared to just 500 in the UK. The US population is about five times the size of the UK. About 380 of those annual deaths in America are attributed to salmonella poisoning, but in England and Wales, no deaths were recorded from salmonella between 2005 and 2015. Fin your calculator is diane abbots, gotta be. U.S. pop rounded up is 326 million, U.K.'s population rounded up is 66 million. Now fin divide 326 by 66 and you get 4.9 so despite you claiming 5 times the population it would back up the U.S.. are no better or worse on foodborne illness's. As to Deaths by salmonella, where has that come from? I've just re read my post where salmonella was mentioned and deaths by it was never mentioned by me at all, can you show me where it was? Nice attempt and consistent attempt to divert fin but I can't help notice you bypassed the point of the post, if eating chlorinated food is wrong, why do we in the uk as an eu country, already eat chlorinated food, which we do?
yip, the remainers love this kind of talk, just keep at it. tick tock. Aw bless ya fin, you're cute when you try and fail but you still try. Facts with no link again, consistency lad, I like that about you. https://www.google.com/search?q=foo...+to+the+uk&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b
The national student U.S. food versus U.K. food during my travels, was your top reply argument? again I'll ask fin, why would you say no deal with the Americans because they have chlorinated chickens, when we already eat chlorinated food anyway?
Any deal with any partner, U.S. or not would be looked at in all it's challenges, chicken or no chicken As you you slipping it back to devolved Scotland (who could have seen that coming) I think it highlights the grandstanding particularly of the snp government. In Scotland you have the devolved government, county councils and local councils. There is a chain of command that works upward and for many decisions made in Scotland by the snp government, they will have inputs from the local to the county councils and the county councils to the snp government but ultimately in those decisions available to the snp government, their decision is the final one. What the snp continually attempt to do is have their cake and eat it. They attempt to use the buck stops here with their own councils but try then to insist on a system for the U.K. government that the snp government will not allow for it's own under bodies. Absolutely all of the four nations must be listened too and then the countries national government will make the decisions. The trouble is, the snp government tries to sell " we were involved, put forward a lot of suggestions, some have been accepted and some have not " as "the tories in westminster refuses to listen to the Scottish people". At some point the buck has to stop somewhere, in the U.K. it is the U.K. government
which of course is a pile of shite, the snp is the government, add on the greens.liberals and labour thats about 75-80% of the government who represent the people, the people voted for devolution by 75% 20years ago, its still supported by 75%. the settlement says all things not reserved are devolved, the government is respecting and defending the Act. yip, noob who knew, somebody from Scotland, the other country with a signature on that act of union would be interested in protecting whats been agreed. but in all fairness, its not what yerself and others, including MP's from the other signatory have had any real experienced of until fairly recently. pesky northerners holding the uk gov to account, what are they like eh? anyhoos. batter on.
