Do you have confirmation

Just a news article. Can’t even remember where I saw it. So yeah. You are likely correct.

That said. If the US refused to support the UK. I find it hard to believe we would not quickly have difficulties maintaing f35s. And given how much they really on software to fly. I’d be more surprised if the US did not have a backdoor.

I’d add that to anything the US sells that they would have reason to fear if turned against them.

I really think is the EU and or the UK want to be independent of the US. Arming with modern US weapons is about as safe as. Well issuing Chinese smart phones to all our politicians.

The US has never been entirely trust worthy when it comes to them Vs the world. Less so now.

Pancreatitis not cancer.

It is inflammation. Can be minor(short term pain and gastric issue), But when acute can lead to death. Mainly as it seriously harm other organs and has a systemic effect on the body when the pancreas fails.

The side-effects would need to be pretty extreme

Pancreatitis ranges from minor to life threatening.

It can become systemic harming multiple organs.

So idepending on what this study shows when done. A high number of severe cases. Could def be worse for the NHS then obesity. Considering 1 in 4 adults meet the obesity Def now. And 1 in 5 cases of pancreatitis are classed as severe. Mass roll out could be a disaster if the study shows high numbers suffer this effect.

Unfortunately the new nukes that fit to the f35 we agreed to buy from the US.

Require US permission to use. So we are far from reducing our reliance on them.

deleted by creator

Both companies question if the 2002 law applies. Saying they think the gov is wrong.

Neither give a shit if they morally should be advertising a dangerous product. Let alone in front of children.

Ain’t capitalism great.

I mean I grew up with tobacco advertising. And below 10 my father sending me to the shop to buy him fags. The 70s were a very different time.

But for all the evil tobacco companies did. They were trying to stay afloat. With a model that started before the health disadvantages were understood. Shitty greed was clearly a motive. But at least some element of survival instinct can be applied. To their desperation to fight the science.

Sainsbury’s knew the harm from day one. Had no business to protect by trying to skirt the law. A law clearly intended to stop exactly what they planned to do. And openly supported by the waste majority of modern British citizens. Heck even my father’s age group tends to agree with the law.

But openly decided to do harm purely to increase profits…

according to my neighbours, you can buy kittens, not do any of that and then just let them be feral around your neighbourhood

Ignoreing the not having to care for them. And legally cats must be chipped now. But that is a very very recent rule change.

This is very much a majority opinion in the UK that cats kept inside is cruelty to the cat. Your opinion that all cats are required to be inside creatures is the rare one. More common in the younger generation. But not one backed up by evidence.

Bird deaths are the most common sighted evidence. But cats are not proven to be the cause of a change in total population. Cats have been in the UK at least since the Romans first arrival. So 2000+ years. And have been used as pest control on farms extensively since at least that period. Most UK bird species have come here via Europe where cats were for much longer. Urbanisation may mean more cats. But the expansion of humanity and removal of habitate is the real issue.

Well it’s sky so I’m not going to disagree with the intent.

But it’s very open to interpretation. Many right wing readers may interpret it that way. But the tittle just questions the cost. Reading the article it seems more like a warning.

“For elderly females that dogs may be a bad pet for them and the NHS.”

I worry more that it makes no effort to compare the huge cost saving regular walking of dogs has on elderly heart and muscle health. And companionship has on mental health.

But that’s less click baity. And really clicks is all they care about.

Nods saw it on social media so tried it with my little dog.

Was stunned how effective and quick it was.

Nods saw it somewhere on social media myself. I have an over eager chihuahua I inherited from an ex.

So gave it a try. Half an hour of doing this he stopped pulling.

I’m far from an expert.

Moving to a nation you are not a citizen off is not simple. More so when the nation you are a citizen of is consided an agressor to the one you want to visit.

But more to the point. No government can force you to. So even if he could. The UK is required to consider all asylum/refugee claims under his percieved risk at his home nation. It’s part of the Geneva convention.

Or you know. More information shared with the public about the needs of certain pets.

Hamsters are the worst off. Most have no idea how big the cage needs to be for them to be unstressed. There already short lives are way shorter and stressed due to pet shops not advising the need a much much larger cage. RSPCA says 1mx50cm or larger. Also if you have a Syrian you likely need a larger wheel.

Pet shop worker are rarely well informed.

Climate change is man made. Mainly from politicians hot air.

Heck the UK alone has 650 massive methane production plants. Doing nothing useful in Westminster.

Heck if we seal the building. We can either heat London. Or prevent the cuts to disability benefits.

Walks Def. Plus company desire to play. It was known in the 80s that pets reduced blood pressure. Just from spending time.

If you remembered the 80s. You would recognise how daft it sounds to suggest folks are less caring about sexual assault allegations now.

He may know it. But it is pretty unlikely the gov has one given its trump uncertainty at play. Not to mention the news released on legal opinion.

But no cabinet member is authorised to declare war or not or future attacks on another nation. Without approval of the whole cabinet. So even if he knows it and one exists.

He is in no way authorised to declare it independent of official channels.

And absolutely any journalist in a position to ask that. Knows full well he cannot answer it.

It is absolutely not reasonable. Unless you are intentionally looking for refusal to answer. Because cabinet policy on attacking a 3rd nation is not and has never been released in such an interview. Such things would be officially announced to parliament first. And be an illegal act of treason for any minister to announce in such a way.

The minister for armed forces dose not have the authority to make the choice. His responsibility is to manage the forces while the cabinet as a whole advices the PM and or parliament on such choices. Depending on the timelines.

So basically. Asking stupid impossible to answer question Then critical about the lack of answer for clicks. Pretty shitty.

Since the 80s all public pool and games areas have become for profit orgs. Often with very questionable business practices.

This has left low income families in urban areas with very limited options to encourage kids to exercise. On a time per pound basis. Games consoles are much cheaper.

Returning to government funded gyms, pitches and courts etc. Added to an effort in schools to introduce children to a wide variety of sports or exercise based on them finding enjoyment rather than meeting some specific gov goal.

Is an infer structure cost that will pay back in multiple way. Not just saving the NHS.

Nothing against video games. But regular exercise should be cheaper or free.

And if the gov listens to them.

Time to sharpen pitchforks.

fines etc do not go to the police in the UK.