My New Favourite Dish.

I like cooking and in particular I like the results of cooking, but I hate the mess it leaves behind. So a few weeks back I decided to do a one-pot meal. Mozzy (see the Who’s who tab at the top of my blog page) had given us a little one-pot slow cooker. Frigging slow alright! I started to use it, but it was obvious it would take HOURS, if it was going to heat up and cook stuff at all (sorry Mozzy, but I can see why you didn’t use it yourself).

I quickly aborted using it, for a trad. saucepan on the stove top. After cooking it, it came out LOVER-LY! I’ve made it several times since, and it’s SO damn easy, I wanted to share my recipe.

Ingredients:

250-400gm of meat (depending on the cut of meat, and or how “hearty” you want your meal), of any type you desire, gammon, lamb, beef, chicken, pork (I’ve not tried it with pork yet, but will be tomorrow night), roughly cut into 1cm chunks.
Optional – flour to coat red meats or pork.
1 small onion, chopped (I use pre-chopped onion that the local supermarket sells – saves the tears)
1 medium potato, peeled and chopped into small cubes

Media_http4bpblogspot_jbexs

1 medium sweet potato, peeled and chopped into small cubes
1 medium carrot, peeled and chopped into small cubes
2 tablespoons of uncooked long-grain white rice
1/2 cup of frozen peas
1 vegetable stock cube dissolved in 475ml of boiling water
Vegetable/olive oil for frying
Salt and pepper to taste.

Use a medium pot 18/20cm size, with a 1.5 to 2lt capacity.

If using red meat (beef or lamb) or pork, coat the meat with some plain flour in a plastic bag.
Add some oil to the saucepan, add onion and cook until lightly coloured. Add the meat and cook for a few minutes until meat sears. Add salt and pepper (if desired). Add all the vegetables, except peas. Add the rice. Give all ingredients a quick stir around, then add stock water. Bring to boil, then let summer slowly on the stove top, stirring occasionally. Leave simmering with lid on for approx 20 minutes, add frozen peas, leave to simmer for a further 10 minutes. The dish is now ready to serve, but can be left to cool slightly by turning off heat and removing lid for 5-10 minutes.

For a meal for 2, just double everything, including the size of pot!

Photo supplied by: 2-Dog-Farm under Creative Commons license.

I’ve felt really bad today

I’m lamenting my inbox being empty. I’m embarrassed by myself. I cried myself to sleep this afternoon. Em was wondering what was wrong with me, but I couldn’t explain out of embarrassment. I feel like a 12 year old. I feel stupid. I feel depressed. I want to lash out but I’ll just look like a freak and a bunny boiler. Life sucks. . .people suck.

It’s no biggy, but at the start of 2008…

I ran out of my latest supply of pepsi max and drank some bottled water I had. After a day, I thought “to hell with fizzy diet drinks, I’m drinking only water from now on!” A fizzy drink has not passed my lips since Jan 5. Just from this one act, I have lost weight. So much for DIET drinks! Anyway, I’ve been doing more walking. Especially to the local supermarket which has a killer hill to negate on the way back. I NEVER used to walk there, now I go at least once a week. Nothing for a lot of people, but a big deal for me. Ciao

Globesity – The New “Buzzword”.

Where have we got this sudden desire to merge words to make a new one from? All this Brangelina/Bennifer stuff is just weird.
Anyway, I digress.

This word, reportedly first used by a writer at the World Health Organization, in an article about the “global obesity epidemic”, is increasingly being used to describe the state of the 1st world’s health.

The figures ARE worrying. Despite the fact that I’m some 130-odd kilograms in weight myself, and therefore a “globesity” statistic, I do suffer the mentality of “well, I don’t want to live until I’m 110, so I’ll eat what I damn well like, thank you very much!”. But I really would like to be healthier in the here and now. I might not want to prolong my life, but I’d like for it to be a better quality of life at the moment.

I am old enough to remember (sadly) a time when food was still not as readily available as it is now. Supermarkets when I was growing up seem to only really have the basic things. Fruit and vegetables (nothing exotic mind…and only things “in season”…which is not something you have to worry about anymore – big “up” to food miles!), bread (white and brown, that was it – pretty much anyway), butter and marg (although margarine was pretty low quality then), milk (in cartons or bottles), some sweets/lollies…not at the stock levels we have these days though, nowhere NEAR those levels. And I’m pretty sure that, until the early to mid 1980’s the supermarkets in Oz didn’t sell meat. You still went to the butcher for your meat. My mum refused to by meat from the supermarket until into the 1990’s and then she would only buy small amounts. Now, if she wanted to, she probably couldn’t find a butcher to buy from!

It was an absolute TREAT for us (me, my siblings, kids around my street and local area) to get any kind of sweets. You felt really special if you were allowed to buy something off the ice cream man (who would come around at least once a day, most likely twice, three times on weekends, and during the Xmas summer holidays, they might as well have parked in the street they seemed to come around so often!!). A BIG treat was an ice cream, perhaps a paddle pop (they only use to cost 20 cents!), or a bubble-o-bill (about 30-40 cents). The biggy was a gaytime – that was the creme de la creme of ice cream treats. I think they were a whopping FIFTY CENTS when I was in single figures, but 50 cents was a big deal! But we’d be more than happy with a 5c or 10c bag of lollies (sweets). You didn’t expect these things every day. Half the time you’d be too afraid to ask, cos you know your mum would go MENTAL if you even asked. Pester power was NOT going to work on our war/post war baby mothers!

Now it’s so readily available and affordable that we’ve had a generation of kids that have been given chocolates and sweets as pacifiers. Cry = get a bar of chocolate.

Food was much simpler as well. Post-war, what could you buy? Milk, sugar (in limited quantities), eggs (again – limited…no eggs at all during the war), butter, limited meat, fruit (only seasonal, and limited), vegetables (seasonal), tea. If you wanted bread, you made it. It was like that for a long time.

Even while I was growing up, we had lots of casseroles and soups and stews. My mum was always making Irish stew and home-made friend rice. To have a Chinese take-away was an extra special treat. Half the time you had to go to the restaurant, there was no “take-away” as such. Not being delivered to your door anyway. I think I was around 12. We (my family) went to a Japanese restaurant in Sydney for my mum’s 45th birthday. I remember trying sashimi, only a taste. It wasn’t something I ordered…no way. Raw fish – are you kidding?!!! I’d not even had a take-away curry until I moved here to the UK.

Most nights as I got older, into my teens, we’d still have just a meal of meat and 3 veg. On a really lazy day you might have take-away fish and chips, or a burger and chips. But even then, the burgers weren’t McDonalds slop. It was a burger from the local milk bar, made with a fresh meat pattie, fresh bun, filled with lettuce, tomato, onion (I didn’t have onion then), beetroot (yes! beetroot on a burger – it is delicious), maybe cheese. If we made them at home, we’d even have an egg on there. One hamburger was a complete rounded meal…not a bun of artery hardening slop. You wouldn’t know it to hear of my size…but I rarely have take-away/fast food. My downfall is sweets – chocolate, lollies, cakes and crisps.

I think food is now too readily available. It’s too easy to get, with supermarkets open 24/7. I think supermarkets contain far too much stock these days, and are far too over-sized (I think the increasing size of the supermarkets are in line with the size of the obesity problem). I don’t have a problem so much with the opening hours, more the size of these supermarkets. I’m sure walking the length of one of these “super” supermarkets is the only exercise some people get – me included!!

And we have the genetic problem in us. We (as humans) veritably starved for thousands of years and our bodies are designed to crave fat and sugar. And now with the over-processing of food, all we’ve put in to processed food is fat, sugar and salt.

I think we need to design a pill that rectifies what is now a genetic flaw or defect (IE: the bodies fixation in obtaining fat/sugar). A pill to tell the body that fat/sugar is no longer wanted or required. Not at the rate it needed anyway. We’ve gone from our bodies not getting this stuff, only in very limited quantities in fits and starts, to having a balanced, stable intake of it, to – LOOK OUT, HERE IT COMES, in the last few hundred years. The last phase – from balanced to LOOK OUT – in the last 50 years!! It’s pretty bad.

Supermarket Alcoholics.

Media_http2bpblogspot_tsesg

I was disgusted to hear recently that three of the big supermarket chains in the UK, Tesco, ASDA, and Sainsbury’s are selling cans of lager for just 22 pence each. They are sold in packs of 4 for 88p or (in ASDA for example) in packs of 12 for £2.64.

Are these supermarkets only just catering to alcoholics? Who in their right mind would CHOOSE to buy a supermarkets own “no frills” lager? No connoisseur of beer, that’s for sure. This would mean you could buy a 24 can carton (beer in Australia is usually sold in 24 can/bottle cartons) of beer for the equivalent of $12.50. That is truly disgusting. Or…fantastic, depending on your outlook. The alcohol volume of the lager is “light” at 2%. But I’m sure if you drink enough, you’ll get drunk!

To me it’s nothing short of irresponsible. Britain is in the midst of a binge-drinking epidemic. Surely the last thing we need in where the culture has become not about the enjoyment of drinking and drinking to be social, responsibly – to turning into drinkers who just want to get pissed…surely that last thing required is 22p lager? Isn’t the degree of availability of “alcopops” enough without 22p cans of lager? It doesn’t cater for people who enjoy their drinking. It’s catering to drunks, teenage drinkers and homeless tramps. How can the supermarkets live with themselves catering to a market like that?

Granted, when they see the government give licences for pubs and clubs to stay open 24 hours a day, why continue to have a conscience? Twenty four hour licensing should NOT have been granted. And now it has been (and been in place for nearly 3 years now), why are the landlords and bar owners not being held more responsible for people leaving their premises far more intoxicated than they should be?

I’m not against people enjoying themselves, I’m not even against pubs and clubs being open 24 hours, but what I AM against is people having access to alcohol 24 hours a day. I suppose if people want to drink, they’ll drink no matter what. But irresponsible landlords still serving highly intoxicated people and supermarkets selling 22p lager isn’t helping the situation.

And we wonder why 25 year old men and women are rocking up to hospitals with cirrhosis of the liver! Come on government! Wake up!! Stop the sale of these super-cheap lagers and please make landlords and bar owners more responsible for serving alcohol to highly intoxicated patrons.

Bankruptcy, Hospitals and Christmas.

Where do I start? For starters, Em goes to hospital on Tuesday for surgery. She’ll be there for about 5 days and will need 4-6 weeks recuperation time.

Next. Money woes. We are BEYOND broke. But these days, who isn’t? We’ve seen Citizen’s Advice and they will be helping us negotiate with creditors. We need to change bank accounts and may eventually have someone else operating an account on our behalf. In the New Year we’ll no doubt be officially bankrupt, but bizarrely it’ll probably mean we’ll cope better than we have done in recent years.

The down side is that this year will be an extra lean Xmas. I mean we’ve not been extravagant by any means in recent years. We would just indulge a little on having nicer food (IE: buying from M&S rather than ASDA). But it’s going to be really tight this year so not even nicer food will happen. Keeping a roof over our heads is just a TAD more important!

Despite all this, I feel upbeat. We’re doing stuff to sort out our debt. Em’s surgery will hopefully result in her improved well being. And Xmas is all about being thankful for your lot and (not forgetting) celebrating Christ’s birth.

I know there are people out there still FAR worse off than us. How can I be anything but upbeat about our future?

It Wasn’t Just Children Who Were “In Need”!

Shambolic is the only word that could describe this years Children In Need. And why the hell should I be made to feel guilty for not donating when Terry Wogan can command 1500 pounds an hour for his hosting “skills”. The man is crap! He behaved as if drunk. If wasn’t taking his cues properly. He was making weird “off the cuff” remarks. He was amateurish at best.

Most of the acts were throw away. The cast of Eastenders doing Beatles songs. The Spice Grans MIMING their new single “Headlines” which sounds more like they are singing “hairlines” to me.

Not 5 minutes into the show, the new Joseph lost sound on his mic when performing “Any Dream Will Do”. The sound problems continued all night.

It WAS awful! I’ll never get those 7 hours back!

For those of you wondering what the hell I’m talking about. Children In Need is sort of like an old style telethon in which a load of “entertaining” bits of TV are put together to get people to watch and donate money. It’s put on by the BBC each November. For more info in to: www.bbc.co.uk/pudsey

I’m a Lark trapped in a night Owl’s body.

Media_http4bpblogspot_fvnah

I don’t know just how long through my life I have craved to be able to arise in the morning with the birds. I’ve been a night owl for many years. Mum tells me it started from the moment I was born really. I’ve had brief dalliances into the world of the lark. Mostly when it involved being awake for SSSOOO long that I was already awake the next morning! A few times it’s happened due to jet-lag. And a few times it’s been down to pure luck and I’ve “fluked” a few weeks of larkish behaviour.

At this point in time I’m further away from being a lark than I ever have been. I was in Australia for several months at the beginning of this year. It started out well. Jet-lag allowed me to be a lark for about oh…two weeks! Then the old owl crept back in, and eventually took over. This was helped greatly by some inexplicable, freakish event that overtook my nerves and made it almost impossible for me to sleep for the rest of my stay in Oz. I was like it for weeks. Most nights I wouldn’t get to sleep until around 5-6am. If you can still regard that as night? No, it isn’t, is it?!

And that’s my point. I’ve always loved the idea of waking around 6am, watching the sun come up, hearing the birds wake up. But instead that’s when I’m fast asleep from only nodding off just a couple of hours before. At the moment I’m getting to sleep around 4am. Then I’m DRAGGING myself back out again around 10.30-11.00am. If I was getting my recommended 8 hours sleep, I wouldn’t get up til midday (and on the odd occasion I do, because I’m just SSOO dog-tired)!

I’m a creature of habit really. And this behaviour is habitual. It’s fueled by two things. Firstly, I can never drag myself away from TV at night. I’m always finding something to watch around 10.30-11.00pm which gets me hooked for an hour or so. Also by this time (well, use to be, not so much now), Em is asleep, so then I spend some time on the Internet. Which means I go to “bed” at any time between midnight and 1.30am. Then I don’t turn in straight away, I’ll play my Nintendo DS, or play games on my mobile phone, or listen to music. So, probably by around 3am, I’m ready to turn in.

I don’t know. Sometimes I get REALLY guilty for being like this (night owl) and other times I think “why do I care”? It’s not like I’m some super-fit person or something. It’s not like if I got up early, I’d be outside with the birds or anything.

I just think I’d feel better being a lark.

Photo supplied by: Spirit635 under creative commons (some rights reserved)

When *IS* the right time?

Media_http4bpblogspot_fadge

I’ve just been reading an article on the BBC News web site about the argument for lowering the legal limit at which you can have an abortion from 24 weeks to 20 weeks. The Health Minister Dawn Primarolo argues that there is insufficient scientific evidence for lowering the limit on the basis that extremely premature babies have not increased their survival rates in recent years.

Surely that is not the point. Isn’t the point that at 24 weeks most medical professionals will do all they can to help a premature baby live? And if that’s the case, surely then at 24 weeks the medical profession believe that child to be at a more established human development?

Ms Primarolo also provided statistics which reveal that the vitality of babies born at 21 weeks is 0%, whilst the vitality of babies born at 23 weeks is 11%. Well what about the babies born at 24 weeks? It must be a higher figure? She also says that 89% of abortions take place before 13 weeks. So based on those figures why would you not feel compelled to lower the legal limit to 20 weeks, or even 21 weeks?

This seems ridiculous to me. In this day and age, women can know that they have conceived just DAYS after conception. Medical complications in pregnancies are detected earlier and earlier. I for one see no valid justification in keeping the legal limit at 24 weeks. That is almost 6 months into a pregnancy. It’s far too late.

I think somewhere like Western Australia have the right approach to abortion. The legal limit is set at 20 weeks. Abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy may only be performed if the foetus is likely to be born with severe medical problems – which must be confirmed by two independently appointed doctors.

Read the full article here.
Photo supplied by Leo Reynolds under creative commons (some rights reserved).

Stevie, the wonder fish!

About a week ago now, we (me and my partner) saw a little tiny fry (baby fish) in our tropical tank. When we set up the tank last year we bought several mollies, a few tetras and a male guppy. The very next day we had fry! The mollies had just let their kids drop overnight! We ended up with 6 or 7 surviving fry, but over time they have fallen ill and died. The tetras and guppy went the same way too. All we had left was one single molly. Now, we assumed initially that this a fry from the molly that was left. We though it was a bit of miracle seeing as the molly hadn’t had company for so long, but it’s not beyond the realms for mollies to incubate eggs for several months.

The fry was very, very small when first spotted, but within the last week has grown somewhat. As of yesterday, it has now become obvious that Stevie (named after Stephen Fry – fry=small fish, hence Stevie) is in actual fact a TETRA! We’ve not had a tetra in the tank since around Xmas, and there has been several tank cleans that have taken place since then. And unlike mollies who are live-bearing fish, tetras lay eggs. So, given all this, Stevie is truly a miracle fish!!

img_2440.jpg

As you can see he is a little fish. The pic is a bit blurry, but you can’t get fish to stay still for you!!