Crofting problems

I was in the village shop the other day and listening to all the talk.  The village consists of -

 the shop 

and

 the pub

The community lives in far flung small crofts

It has always been this way and it has always had the same problems.

and

this was the cause of the discussion in the shop.

Nearly all the crofters manage to exist  - only - by having another small job to help eke out the paltry income.

Some work on the railway, others build dry stone dykes. Some of my husband's ancestors were masons and joiners.

Some work in the shop.

At certain times of year - all crofters are suddenly very very busy on the croft.

Nowadays -  lambing time is the main one –

and that is now - the next 2 weeks. They lamb late up here in the cold and frozen north of Scotland

So

All other jobs are dropped

Suddenly there is no-one to man the shop etc

Crisis

Many years ago in 1792 a cotton mill was built at Spinningdale on the North shore of the Dornoch Firth  - by George Dempster (owner of Skibo Estate) and David Dale, the successful industrialist and entrepreneur, who had already established a cotton mill complex along with Robert Owen at New Lanark.

Although the site offered most of the usual requirements of a cotton mill –

a fast flowing burn for water power,

a climate damp enough to prevent cotton threads breaking,

a means of importing the raw cotton, in this case by sea.

But - the main reason for locating the factory to Sutherland - was to relieve poverty and unemployment. 

Ironically, “problems with the labour force” was the main reason it was not successful. There was no tradition of factory work in the Highlands, and workers – mostly crofters - absented themselves at lambing, peat cutting and harvesting times.

Thus, when the building was gutted by fire in 1806, it was not deemed worthwhile to rebuild it and it remained a ruin.

These same crofting problems continue.

                                 This shows the ruins of Spinningdale Mill

5 a day fruit and veg

Up until now, I have not taken the "5 a day fruit and veg" thing very seriously.
I cynically reckoned that the government grabbed a  number out of a hat  - 5 - and told us it was a good idea.
Well research has come out which has made me sit-up.

The Health Survey of England analysed data on 65,000 people.
4,300 died during almost 8 years of follow up.

It found that -
the more fruit and veg the person ate,
the more their risk of death fell.

After adjusting for factors such as age, smoking, and social class-
People who ate 1-3 portions of fruit + veg a day were 14% less likely to die than those who ate less than 1.
People who ate 3-5 cut the risk 29%.
People who ate 5-7 cut the risk by 36%.
People who ate 7 or more cut the risk by 42%.

That is pretty convincing

The gene that makes one fat

Here is some interesting new research  - reported in The Times 31/3/2014 and published in Nature Genetics

They have found a gene AMY1.

The more copies you have of it  - the better you are at metabolising carbohydrates and starch.

So - in starvation times , you are the one who will survive.
However in times of surplus  - you are the one who gets fat.

AMY1 is responsible for the production of Amylase in saliva
Amylase is responsible for the first stage of the digestion of carbohydrates and starch.

People with more of this enzyme, seem to gain more nutrition from bread etc - so much so - that the top 10% for the number of AMY1 "copy number variations" are 8 times more likely to be obese than those in the bottom.

Studies on non-identical twins with different AMY1 genes but with identical childhood feeding showed how one twin slowly got fatter and fatter whilst the other one stayed slim

Fascinating.

I will do very well in a famine - I always knew that

An Explanation of what is going on in Scotland

This is an answer to my friend in Switzerland who wrote this -

“Please take a minute to explain to me what all this Scottish political problem is and on what side of the divide are sensible people?

 From here it all sounds absurd...."

England and Scotland were originally two quite different countries/nations.

For many years they were sometimes friends and sometimes enemies – a bit like siblings, with England as big brother and Scotland the smaller less significant, younger one.

Sometimes they had different religions - when one was Catholic and the other Protestant (Church of England/ Presbyterian) – a constant source of argument and fighting.

The Scots always had a close relationship with France, whereas the English had the reverse.

The 2 countries had a different monarchy a different legal systems and a different culture.

For many years they squabbled at the border.

Then – in 1290 Scotland was left with no heir to its throne.

Seeing an opportunity, England went for it - and tried to take over Scotland in 1296.

This did not go down well and was the start of the Wars of Independence and William Wallace and Robert the Bruce and all that.

The film Braveheart was all about this - very Hollywood and historically inaccurate, but sadly – it whipped up nationalist, anti-English feelings here in Scotland

In 1314 at the Battle of Bannockburn - the Scots won

And in 1320 The Declaration of Arbroath was signed in which it was stated that Scotland should remain free from English Domination. This was the end of the Wars of Independence.

It is now 2014 - exactly 700 years from that famous Battle of Bannockburn and the Nationalist SNP party at present in power in Scotland have decided that this is the best year for this big vote - the vote to decide on whether Scotland should again become an independent country.

So why did Scotland ever unite with England?

Well it started when both countries ended up having the same monarch in 1603

The famous Mary Queen of Scots was beheaded by her nice cousin Queen Elizabeth of England.

The only one of the 2 queens to have a child was Mary. She had a son – James- and he became King of both countries.

However there were still lots of problems, mainly to do with religion until - The Treaty of Union was finally signed by The Scottish Parliament in 1706

Not only was this a decision made freely by the Scottish people but they were begging for it.

Scotland was in huge economic trouble – a bit like this last financial crash.

Scotland needed to be financially bailed out because it had invested heavily in the catastrophic Darien Scheme (setting up a colony at The Isthmus of Panama to hopefully reap the benefit of trade with the East) which bankrupted the country and most of its wealthy citizens.

So the two countries united and both thrived as a result

The British Empire started and Britain became Great and so did Scotland as part of it

There were no complaints

Until -

The end of The British Empire, North Sea Oil and Maggie Thatcher

Once Britain stopped being Great – after the two World wars – it began sliding backwards. Things stayed good in London and the southern area around it, but the further you got from London, the worse it became. The post industrial age had arrived and all the old areas of heavy industry (in the middle and north of England and the central belt and Glasgow in Scotland) -began to die. Unemployment breeds unhappiness and discontent.

In Scotland a feeling began to grow that no-one in parliament, in London, in England knew or cared about what happened in Scotland

Then oil was discovered - in Scottish waters.  The Scots began to wonder whether they could survive without England - because this North Sea oil was theirs.

Then Maggie Thatcher became Prime Minister. To many Scots it seemed as if she did not care about Scotland.

 I do not agree with this as my father was standing as a conservative MP candidate, when he was killed in a car crash on his way home from a political meeting. My parents knew her, she visited them in Scotland, and she did care about Scotland - as did my father.

However the great mistake she made was to introduce the very unpopular Poll Tax in Scotland well before doing so in England. It was as if she was using Scotland to test it.

The Scots will forever hate her and her Conservative Party because of this. The Scots see the Conservative Party as representing everything they hate most – the English, landowning, upper-class.

There is a weird class system thing going on here. Most of the estates in Scotland, until relatively recently were owned by aristocratic people whose speech sounded English. The same was true in England.

The Duke of Westminster, Duke of Devonshire, The Duke of Sutherland, The Earl of Dalkeith, Marquess of Lothian, Lord Lovat etc etc.

They sound English when they talk because that is the way that toffs talk - whether they are English or Scottish.

Your average Scottish man in the street does not realise this. If they hear an English accent they assume the person is English

The UK used to have a dreadful “old school” network thing, whereby people got jobs because of where they went to school and their network of friends. If you went to an expensive posh school then inevitably you would develop a posh accent (English) even if you didn’t start with one. You got access to the posh club and your posh accent was your entry pass.

I think, even now, there is some discrimination in the jobs market against those with local accents in England and in Scotland.

In Scotland this – quite rightly - has fed a feeling of discrimination. Why should a man with – what sounds like an English accent – get a job/promotion in Scotland in favour of another equally good applicant with a Scottish accent?

Why should someone with an English (toff) accent in Scotland act superior to someone with a Scottish accent?

Any resentment is legitimate and understandable.

To give an example – A young man I know, from a solid middle class background went to his local government state school and did well. He got a place at St Andrews University (later attended by Prince William). On his first night there, at dinner in his hall of residence, a game was instigated by a student with a loud braying posh English accent. Everyone had to stand up in turn and say where they had been to school. When it got to my young friend he stood up, and in his beautiful soft Scottish accent, he named his school. They pretended not to understand him, and he was asked several times to repeat it - with much laughter each time at the strange way he spoke. He was being bullied for having a Scottish accent - in Scotland - by a crowd of superior bullies with English accents.

I don’t know this young man’s opinion now on independence, but he will not be able to vote because he works in England. (Only those living in Scotland can vote)

There are never enough jobs for graduates in Scotland and many have to go South for work.

But there is a bloodless revolution going on.

Lord Lovat – chieftain of the mighty Clan Fraser, who led the brave commandos, with the pipes playing, into battle on D-Day - was Scotland’s most loved war hero.

His daughter Tessa stood for parliament in the area where her family were from. Previously it would have been a foregone conclusion, but she lost. People no longer liked how she talked or what she stood for.

In the last 20 to 30 years it has all changed.

Now – in Scotland - you do not dare open your mouth in public if you have an English accent.

No-one in the Scottish parliament has an English Accent – they would not get voted in.

BBC Scotland news programmes and debates are all reported with a Scottish accent.

The only people, who stand any chance of being listened to in the current independence debate, must have a strong Scottish accent – preferably central belt or Glasgow.

So it raises the question in my mind as to what this is actually all about

Is it about England and Scotland separating?

Or

Is it a revolution against the toffs – against those who speak posh - who may or may not be English -but who have always been at the top of the pile when those with Scottish accents were at the bottom?

Is it against the hated conservative party with all its old Eton pupils - the sons of the big estate owners who make decisions in London and are perceived to know or care nothing about Scotland?

It is interesting to note - that if Scotland does get independence - England will be Conservative for ever after. It is only the huge Labour Party vote in Scotland that prevents the Conservative party winning every time.

It is one of the points most often made by Scottish Nationalists – Why should they be governed by the Conservative party in London, when so few people in Scotland vote Conservative. It is a good point.

Could Scotland do it better if it were allowed to govern itself?

Because of this feeling the UK government in 1997 allowed Scotland to have its own devolved parliament in Edinburgh. We vote for our own members of parliament and our own first minister. At present the SNP are the majority party in power.

So Scotland now has quite a lot of powers to do things as it sees fit

It has been promised that these powers will soon increase to what everyone is calling DevoMax

 -Maximum devolution.

So why do we need independence?

We already have the best of both worlds.

I believe that Scotland is too small to survive on its own. We need our big brother down south.

We are better together

As always the main argument, for those who think, is about the economy and the pound.

If we separate - we lose the pound and the protection of the Bank of England

The best we could hope for, would be to join the EU and use the Euro

We would be divorcing England to be forced into marriage with Europe.

But it seems that the EU may not want us and we may not want the EU under the terms we may be forced to join under.

Originally the Scottish nationalists were quite keen to have the Euro but it is obvious to us here now - that Project Euro is a disaster.

For a shared currency to work, there must also be shared everything else, especially the banking system and tax and economic policies.

For the Euro to work there needs to be a proper Federation of Europe.

Britain is not keen on that and neither is Scotland because we feel that the EU and Brussels are undemocratic monsters that answer to no-one.

But the same principle applies to the pound

The Scottish nationalists would like to keep the pound after independence.

But it would not work unless there was still a sharing of the banking system and tax and economic policies.

Scotland would be in a worse position than it is now, because it would no longer have any say in those matters.

However England (big brother) would still probably have to bail Scotland out if it got into financial trouble. 

England has just realised this and – quite rightly – are not happy about it. Scotland has now been told that England will not allow it to have the pound (tied / backed up by England).   

And – The oil – Scotland’s Oil - Well it is mostly all gone. What is left is very expensive to extract.

Scotland has a small population with little industry except tourism and whisky, huge unemployment and an aging and unhealthy population

Outside Glasgow and the Central belt that population is very rural. Much is beautiful, uninhabited land that is commercially useless, with the occasional crofter trying to eke out a hand to mouth existence

But those who will vote for Independence are voting with their hearts and not with their heads. It is emotion, not thought that decides them.

They see it as the only chance they will ever get, for those at the bottom of the heap to get to the top, for the oppressed to be free of the oppressor. For Scotland to be in control of its own future and destiny and to be the way it wants to be.

Those are pretty strong stirring emotions – I feel them too

But

You cannot let your heart rule your head.

Censored in Russia and China

It is possible for me see how many times my blogs are read,
I can also see in which countries they are read.

It is rather a nerdy, fun thing to do - to occasionally study these things.

I was interested to see that I had a regular following of readers in Russia and in China.

However -
I recently posted a blog with the word "homosexuality" in the title.

Immediately I lost my blog readers in Russia and China  - and they have not returned.

Me-thinks that the word homosexuality has triggered censorship of my blog .
I have been blocked by the communists.
Gosh - I feel very dangerous.

Iron and Magnesium for oldies

It seems that us oldies need to make sure we eat enough Iron and Magnesium in our diets.
Research reported this week says that -

Lack of Iron is a risk for stroke
and
Magnesium  protects against hip fractures

Iron deficiency raises the risk of stroke because it makes the blood stickier
(Dr Claire Shovlin, Imperial College London).
She recommends supplements in those at high risk (who have a rare blood disease that makes it worse).

Magnesium was found to protect against hip fracture, whereas Calcium made no difference
(Science Journal  -BONE, Norway)
Here the recommendation is  - that the effect is so pronounced - that dolomite (rich in magnesium) should be added to the water supply.

Hmm - that one may be worth watching.

Diet in Pregnancy

Latest research is finding that what you eat when you are pregnant will not affect your baby but it will affect your grandchild. 

(Dr Christopher Kuzawa, Chigago).

Contrary to popular belief, calorie intake during pregnancy has little impact on the size of the baby at birth.

What does seem to affect the baby is what Mum got when she was in the uterus and when she was an infant. i.e. what Granny ate in pregnancy and what Granny fed Mum in infancy.

I find this interesting and annoying.

Being now at the pensioner stage of life I am soon to be a grandmother.

When I was at the mother stage I went through all the trauma and guilt -worrying about everything I ate and how it would affect my children.

Now - I thought smugly - it is the turn of my children to go through that.

Not at all - it seems the guilt is all back with me again. 

It is interesting because it is adding to the information becoming available, about the importance of what goes on in the uterus and in early infancy. 

If a pregnant mother is living in a time of famine and she is starving, this information is transmitted to the baby in her womb and that baby becomes genetically programmed to be careful of nutrients. To be careful about how much is passed to a future baby during pregnancy.

If a pregnant mother is living in a time of plentiful food and she eats well - this information is transmitted to her baby and it becomes genetically programmed to be more generous about nutrients passing to a future baby during pregnancy.

The womb with its placenta and fluid is an amazingly clever incubator which responds to external and internal factors affecting Mum. It also responds to factors to do with that particular baby. This all causes a genetic response in that baby.  Some genes are turned on and others switched off.

How clever is that.

I suppose the message to give today’s pregnant mothers is – be careful what you eat or your grandchildren will one day turn round and say -it is all your fault