In The Kitchen

So, it takes something like this to bring me back to my blog.  

I love my coffee.  I’m not a coffee-snob: a good cuppa joe with half and half is all it takes to make me happy.  I need my four cups every morning, and from time to time, extra later in the day. 

But this totally freaked me out. 

Cafe au Bat? Woman Treated for Rabies After Finding Bat in Coffee Filter

It’s a short story; I’ll just post it here:

CEDAR RAPIDS, Iowa  —  It wasn’t just the caffeine that gave an Iowa woman an extra jolt after she had her morning coffee. It was also the bat she found in the filter.

The Iowa Department of Public Health says the woman reported a bat in her house but wasn’t too worried about it. She turned on her automatic coffee maker before bedtime and drank her coffee the next morning.

She discovered the bat in the filter when she went to clean it that night. The woman has undergone treatment for possible rabies.

Health officials say that the bat was sent to a lab but that its brain was too cooked by the hot water to determine whether it had rabies.

Help me out here, folks.  How the heck did a bat get in the coffee filter?  How did the woman not notice the “essense of bat” in her coffee?  How did she go to bed at night not concerned that there was a bat in her house in the first place?!?  Don’t get me wrong; I like bats.  I’m not into bat collectibles or anything like that, but how can you not like a creature that can eat thousands of bugs in a day?  Sweet creatures, in spite of their bad reputation.  But, I wouldn’t climb into bed at night unconcerned about one in my house.

OH…and that last part…the bat’s brain was too cooked by the hot water to determine whether or not it had rabies.  Oh please. 

So, here I sit, morning coffee within reach and pondering the imponderable…bats in my coffee.



Mothers, take note: your picky eater just may be showing the signs of racism. That’s right folks; it must be true because a government funded organization in the UK says it is.

According to this article in the Telegraph:

The National Children’s Bureau, which receives £12 million a year, mainly from Government funded organisations, has issued guidance to play leaders and nursery teachers advising them to be alert for racist incidents among youngsters in their care.

This could include a child of as young as three who says “yuk” in response to being served unfamiliar foreign food.

Are they out of their minds?!? I was happy my kids ate PB&J, mac and cheese, and Cheerios without complaint at age three. Saying “yuk” can be construed as a “racist incident?”

OH, and this:

Nurseries are encouraged to report as many incidents as possible to their local council. The guide added: “Some people think that if a large number of racist incidents are reported, this will reflect badly on the institution. In fact, the opposite is the case.”

Right. So, if Jr. says “yuk” to hummus, it’s going to be reported to the local council? Will this lead to Jr. receiving a scarlet R next to his name in his school file? If Ahmed says “yuk” to mashed potatoes, will he be branded a racist for not liking bland Irish food?

My 11 year old son tasted my BBQ pork rinds today at lunch. His reaction was more dramatic than “yuk.” Does this mean my son is harboring the seeds of…what? Hating Southerners? OH, and I saw you wince when you read that I eat BBQ pork rinds. You must hate Southerners, too!

Pray for the UK, people; this is but a glimpse of what they’re dealing with. And then pray for us, because it won’t be long before this lunacy makes it across the pond.

I’ve just discovered that I’ve been tagged for a book meme by Sheri.  icon_biggrin.gif

Rules of the meme:

1. Pick up the nearest book (of at least 123 pages).
2. Open the book to page 123.
3. Find the fifth sentence.
4. Post the next three sentences.
5. Tag five people

Hmmmm….A few inches from my left hand is Gary Taubes’ Good Calories, Bad Calories: Challenging the Conventional Wisdom on Diet, Weight Control, and Disease.  A meaty 601 pages; the last 140 of which contain endnotes, the bibliography, and index.  Well documented! 

(Why, oh, why does my blog make italicized words red?)

Taubes is an award winning correspondent for Science magazine.  His point in a nutshell?  Everything we’ve been led to believe about low-fat/high carb diets and their use in the  prevention of obesity, heart disease, and other ailments is wrong.  No wonder he’s making waves! 

Anyway… 123….This brings us to Chapter 7:  Fiber.

(OK, before I continue I need to reveal my inner engineer….because I want to know – need to know: Should I start counting with the first complete sentence on the page?  Do I include the fifth sentence and post sentences 5, 6, and 7?  The instructions seem to indicate that I should post 6, 7, and 8, do they not?  Why not just say that?  OK….I’m done with that weirdness.  I shall start with the sentence that appears on the first line of the page – even though it begins on page 122, and post the 3 sentences after the fifth one.  Does your mind ever work like this?  You have my sympathy.)

Here we go:

Cohen testified that there was no “direct relationship” linking heart disease to dietary fats, and that he had been able to induce the same blood-vessel complications seen in heart disease merely by feeding sugar to his laboratory rats.  Peter Cleave testified to his belief that the problem extended to all refined carbohydrates.  “I don’t hold the cholesterol view for the moment,” Cleave said, noting that mankind had been eating saturated fats for hundreds of thousands of years.

I haven’t gotten that far yet, so I really can’t properly put it into context for you.  You’ll just have to read the book yourself. 😉  I was going to post about Good Calories, Bad Calories anyway, so Sheri’s tag was great timing.  As for me tagging five friends, I believe most, if not all of you, have already been tagged!  If, however, you’re a quiet visitor to my blog…consider yourself tagged.  Keep it going. icon_biggrin.gif

As for me and my book…it’s time to snuggle up on the sofa. 😉

Next Page »