My husband and I are considering (trans: I've decided, he's panicking about how to pay for it) setting up a home office log cabin job in the back garden. It's only wee - about 2.5m by 3m - but it will have electricity and warmth and carpet and such.
But most importantly it will not have a fridge.
The fridge is the bain of my existence when I'm working from home. That and the crisp drawer. Today alone I've had a cheese and ham toastie, an instant noodle bowl, two packs of crisps, hUUUGe bowl of crunchy nut, chocolate mousse, two lollies... ugh!
This will all end when I am down the bottom of the garden. I will allow only a smattering of fresh fruit in a bowl and some diet coke to cross the threshold.
(though I may invite a small sweetie stash into the filing cabinet!)
Heads up from The Times Alphamummy blog. It's a You Tube video of the actress Salma Hayek breastfeeding a baby whose mother fears she can no longer produce enough milk. Brings up the whole question of wetnurses. Now, my concierge service, rentamummy.com, provides many things, but wetnursing isn't one of them.
I don't have an ick factor about this. Going to someone's coffee morning where they pick up my son and stuff a boob in his mouth - that's icky. But here the child was obviously hungry and Ms Hayek could provide something far better and safer than anything that might have come out of a bottle (btw, I'm not anti-formula either, I just question the safety of the water and sterilising equipment used to prepare it here). BUT... but something does make me uneasy. What does this woman do when SH has had her photo opp (though I do think she did it with the best of motives)? And how does she feel? I know as a mum that anything I fail to do for my kids, however small, makes me feel shit and inadequate. How does this woman feel having her baby swept away and fed in a way that she simply cannot manage? There are a million questions here, and none of them are as You Tube seems to show, "WHOOO Salma got her titties out!!"
Honestly, boys...
Kind Mr Fry over on Twitter has pointed me in the direction of this http://www.badscience.net/2009/02/legal-chill-from-lbc-973-over-jeni-barnetts-mmr-scaremongering/. When you read it you have to highlight the text as it has legal issues.
The general jist is that Jeni Barnett on LBC has been pontificating about the MMR vaccine and its risks. This whole story, started by Andrew Wakefield over 10 years ago, has been widely discredited and yet she picks up the baton and scares another generation of parents. The upshot of the original misinformation was that vaccine take up dropped to 75% and is threatening 'herd immunity' - that is, even if you've had the vaccine, if less than 80% of the population is immunised at any given time, the strain of the disease can proliferate and you can become infected. And measles isn't a case of two days in bed and itchy spots. It can kill.
And silly women who promote stupid urban myths are just silly. Supposed journalists ought to know better.
RSS Feed