Toasting the Produce===Minister Pickles Bans Use of Government Funding to Lobby Government

I thought that I would have a go at ‘toasting’ a bit of last year’s produce tonight. I did my best to get the oven to a constant temperature of 66C. It was not easy because the cooker is not designed to be used for such low temps, but I got it about right. I put a small quantity of ‘baccy’ on a baking tray. The sample was dry but soft (not brittle) and I popped it in the oven for an hour, as per the instructions. The temp gradually crept up to around 76C, but it did so very slowly. I doubt that it mattered. After an hour, I raised the temp to 130C for half an hour. It was much easier to maintain that temp reasonably accurately. By the way, I was using a probe and external digital thermometer to help me to set the cooker controls.

After toasting, I took the tray out of the oven and put it on one side to cool. After about half an hour, I sprayed the baccy with water and left if to absorb the water, which it did. After about 15 minutes, I carefully stirred it up and left it again to air-dry to some extent. Oddly, there was a strong smell when I wet the stuff, But the smell was different. It was sort of chocolate-y.

After a couple of hours, I put a small amount on a saucer and blasted it in the microwave for 30 seconds. Letting the stuff dribble through my fingers exposed it to the air so that it dried more quickly. Then I made two fags.

I had no idea what to expect when I lit them and tasted them.

I don’t want to exaggerate the effects. Remember that the stuff that I was using had been over-fermented and had, shall we say, a ‘savoury’ taste: like too much garlic, or something similar. JB from Ireland and I concocted a scale so that we could talk about taste. We imagined the taste of an orange (but not literally) at the best end of the scale, and the taste of a lemon at the other end. The pleasanter the taste, the nearer to the ‘orange’ of the scale, and vice versa.

Anyway, without exaggerating, the taste of two fags that I made was ‘acceptable’. There was still a hint of the bitterness (the lemon end of the scale) but less than I expected. Let’s say that, as I enjoyed the second fag, I hardly noticed the ‘lemon’ part.

That is very good news, if it is correct. It means that the over-fermented stuff has been changed to be more palatable and may well be the foundation of a jolly pleasant blend.

Needless to say, ‘more research is required’. Could I get a grant, do you think?

SUMMARY.

‘Toasting’ could take the place of ‘ageing’ (waiting for years before the baccy can be used).

=====

Contrasting Messages.

Good news.

Eric ‘Plump’ Pickles, Communities Minister, has ordained that no organisation in receipt of taxpayer funding will be allowed to use that money for any sort of lobbying purpose.

Damn! I cannot now find the link. Ah! Found it!:

http://velvetgloveironfist.blogspot.co.uk/2015/02/some-good-news-about-sock-puppets.html

It seems that Pickles has actually spelt it out pretty clearly. An organisation which gets government funds cannot use those funds to lobby government in any way at all, to get laws and regulations, either at a local level, or through MPs or through Parliament. In theory, that buggers up ASH, Alcohol Concern, etc, unless they can get funding elsewhere. But, then again, if they get funding elsewhere, then they can no longer claim to be ‘official’. ASH is buggered.

But an interesting point arises concerning University academics. They are publicly funded, even if the receive grants from outside. They are publicly funded because they receive salaries as teachers, provided by students who pay for the expertise of the teachers. It is not the intention of their contributions to enable a lifestyle for the academics while they pursue other paid interests.

The directives from Plump Pickles make it even more incomprehensible why Cameron and Hunt have capitulated to the anti-smoker gang as regards smoking in cars and PP.

I mean ABJECT capitulation since 99% of the responses to the PP consultation were against the idea. Even Cameron himself said that government intrusion into private lives was a bad thing. And yet, the arsehole has approved just that.

This is weird and incomprehensible. Will a person who smokes in a car in the presence of his own children be required to shop himself? After all, ‘CONFESSION’ is very much part of our judicial system. If you confess, then you are likely to get off lightly. If you do not, you are likely to be battered. That idea certainly helps magistrates, but at the same time encourages further criminal acts. I suppose that it is a Catch 22 situation.

Imagine this:

A person presents himself at the police station. He says, “Officer, I must admit to a transgression. I cannot tell a lie and I cannot live with it. While driving to London from Manchester, I smoked a cig in the car in the presence of my two kids, Angela, who was 15, and Andrew, who was 17. I feel really bad about it and deserve fifty lashes – and, no, I do not want a fine because I can easily pay a fine, I want fifty lashes of the cat-o’nine tails. Don’t give me no shit”

One might ask what the response of the police officer might be.

And yet that is the driving force behind the Bristol ‘voluntary ban’. Few people will see that the ideas of ‘voluntary’ and ‘ban’ are contradictions.

OK. Well, at least Plump Pickles has made a break for it. But it will not stop me personally voting UKIP, since the Tories abandoned me, a disgusting, filthy, stinking smoker. They have lost the historic knowledge that most of their heroes enjoyed tobacco. What about Churchill? He was fat, and he drank too much alcohol in the form of brandy, and, worst of all, he enjoyed tobacco. Clearly, he was not, and is not, a role model for the ‘yoof’.

—–

There is a word in the English language which perfectly describes all of Tobacco Control. That word is ARTIFICIAL. The whole construct of Tobacco Control is ARTIFICIAL. Smoking causes lung cancer? Miasmas from swamps cause malaria. What is the difference? The statistics at the time would have supported the idea that ‘miasmas’ from swamps caused malaria.

 

 

Advertisements

10 Responses to “Toasting the Produce===Minister Pickles Bans Use of Government Funding to Lobby Government”

  1. Rose Says:

    What about Churchill? He was fat, and he drank too much alcohol in the form of brandy, and, worst of all, he enjoyed tobacco

    It depends if you value the brain over the body.
    Personally I value the power of someone’s brain over the body beautiful.

    After all, you might look like a gargoyle, I have no way of knowing, but I do like the way you think and what you think about, so I consider you a friend.

    To value the physical body over the brain as Public Health currently appear to do is shallow and holds us back. It could be why they treat the rest of us as infants.

    • beobrigitte Says:

      It depends if you value the brain over the body.
      Personally I value the power of someone’s brain over the body beautiful.

      I couldn’t agree more. Show me a gargoyle-look-alike-politician who can’t be bought and I show you the most likeable person to vote for.

      Ageing is a problem for the healthists

      *shudder*

      I take the stand that if someone minds my wrinkles there is no interest in me as a person. WHY would I want to vote for them?

      • junican Says:

        I think that she is quite pretty in a Dracula sort of way.

        Seriously, Rose, thanks if your comment about brain and ‘beauty’ referred to this blog’s administrative assistant – aka moi. Your thinking is reciprocated. In fact, there is an awful lot to be said for not being too close physically. A twenty-year-old speaking the same language as me is precisely similar to a seventy-year old. Age and appearance do not matter one jot. Perhaps that is why the internet will eventually change perceptions – propaganda will lose its effectiveness.

      • Rose Says:

        Of course it was ,Junican.

        If you think about it, internet comment threads are a communion of brains with the thoughts passing to and fro.

        Public Health obsesses about other people’s bodies and takes little account of how their actions may harm minds.

  2. prog Says:

    You might be interested in this J – Doll and Hill cited

    https://anthonymasters.wordpress.com/2015/02/24/vapour-filled-rooms/

    • junican Says:

      Thanks. Masters got upset because I addressed him as ‘Mr’. He has a doctorate, apparently, in mathematics. Fine, but he is just as susceptible to tobacco control propaganda as anyone else. He seems to have been upset that I called him out about using the Hospital Study rather than the Doctors Study.

  3. The Blocked Dwarf Says:

    “The temp gradually crept up to around 76C, but it did so very slowly. I doubt that it mattered”

    I too doubt it matters over much. As far as I have understood the toasting process, the initial ‘baking’ at low temperature is simply to get the tobacco really really REALLY dry and ready for toasting ‘proper’. If one tried to toast tobacco that wasn’t totally dry then it might singe too easily. Grandma always said that day old bread made the best toast ie that bread that was dry etc toasted better. If one toasts very fresh bread then it tends to be crispy on the outside and boiled dough in the middle.

  4. Frank J Says:

    The funding use ban may be a step in the right direction (about time – 4 years, eh?) and spare us the nauseating sight of the likes of everybody’s favourite nursery teacher, Arnott, sitting in the various Parliamentary galleries during debates and voting but I doubt it will stop the DoH from funding the likes of ASH.

    They will still continue their ‘surveys’ and feed the ‘results’ to their lapdogs in the APPG and they will still stuff the media full of their sh*t and see it readily printed.

    As said, an initial correct step but still a long, long, way to go.

    • junican Says:

      I think that it is more important than that. Pickles has thrown a spanner into the works. He is the first Minister who has recognised that millions of pounds added to other millions of pounds, and multiplied by the number of ‘charities’, produces a big number. What makes it worse is that the there is a huge knock-on effect, financially, which is mostly beneath the radar, as a result of the apparent simple grants.

Comments are closed.


%d bloggers like this: