\/* *\/
Journalist and TV presenter Charlie Brooker has come under intense scrutiny for mocking Jeremy Corbyn in his 2016 Wipe \u2013 the latest instalment of his annual dose of spiky mockery of the past year.
And by \u201cintense scrutiny\u201d, your mole is of course referring to that great organ of free expression, the nation\u2019s last bastion of speaking truth to power, The Canary. Yes, those click-thirsty conspiracy mongers over on the alt left \u201cnews\u201d site have written a DEVASTATING BLOG POST about what Brooker\u2019s show should and shouldn\u2019t have said about the Labour leader and other politicians.
The piece takes issue with an Ant and Dec pun Brooker makes in an aside about Corbyn being unable to recognise the presenting duo: \u201cIf you think that\u2019s tough, try getting him to recognise Ant n\u2019 Semitism.\u201d
Your mole\u2019s chuckles at this quip at the time could be heard in neighbouring burrows.
But The Canary was not amused. \u201cThe quip cements a fabricated smear campaign from media pundits, the pro-Israel lobby, Conservative MPs, and Blairites who all have a common enemy: Corbyn,\u201d it moaned, before going on to complain that Brooker dared mention \u201c Traingate \u201d \u2013 that beautiful time in August when Corbyn sat on the floor of a train for a little bit and then Virgin produced some CCTV footage suggesting there were seats available.
This Twitter conversation between the writer of the cutting-edge investigation and Brooker is particularly revealing, with Brooker at long last admitting: \u201cWe originally planned a 25min pro-Corbyn musical number but our shadowy Blairite handlers insisted we scrap it.\u201d
@wrightismight I don’t understand the question. What do you mean by „agenda“?
\u2014 Charlie Brooker (@charltonbrooker) January 3, 2017
@wrightismight We (that is, the show) have free reign. BBC never suggests or requests anything be specifically covered \/ ignored.
\u2014 Charlie Brooker (@charltonbrooker) January 3, 2017
@wrightismight We originally planned a 25min pro-Corbyn musical number but our shadowy Blairite handlers insisted we scrap it.
\u2014 Charlie Brooker (@charltonbrooker) January 3, 2017
The Canary argues Brooker should have made more jokes about Theresa May, although it does admit: \u201cNo one is asking political items to be \u2018pro-Corbyn\u2019.\u201d
So, as some baffled commentators have been asking , what kind of digs would it accept at the Labour leader\u2019s expense? Here are a few suggestions:
How many Jeremy Corbyns does it take to change a lightbulb?
None. Jeremy Corbyn inspires change from within.
*
What\u2019s the difference between Jeremy Corbyn and Owen Smith?
Principles!
*
Why did Jeremy Corbyn cross the road?
Because the trains had all been privatised.
*
Why did the chicken cross the road?
There was a coup against Jeremy Corbyn on the other side!
*
How do you tell the difference between Jesus and Jeremy Corbyn?
The MSM only crucified Christ once.
*
Knock knock.
Who\u2019s there?
Jeremy.
Jeremy who?
Is that the Blairite commentariat pre-September 2015 at the door?
*
Jeremy Corbyn walks into a bar. The barman asks: \u201cWhy the long history of campaigning against all forms of racism?\u201d
*
What\u2019s black, white and red all over?
Jeremy Corbyn\u2019s favourite newspaper!
*
Doctor, doctor \u2013 I feel like Jeremy Corbyn!
So do I. It\u2019s time for a real alternative to the neoliberal consensus.
*
An Englishman, a Welshman and a Scotsman walk into a bar. \u201cWhat\u2019ll it be?\u201d asks the barman. \u201cWe all want the same thing,\u201d they reply in unison. \u201cA Labour leader who supports a wider discussion about devolution policy across the whole of the UK.\u201d
\u201cJeremy Corbyns all round then!\u201d
*
What do you call a man with two left feet?
Jeremy Corbyn when he\u2019s kicking the establishment!
You’re welcome, Charlie.
If you\u2019ve been struggling to come up with a suitable New Year resolution, may I suggest a determined plan to drink more? That might sound superficially attractive (depending on what kind of New Year you had) but I should make clear from the outset that it\u2019s water, not alcohol, that I have in mind.
Ensuring adequate hydration has certain benefits, medically speaking. A good fluid throughput reduces the chance of urinary tract infection, and helps prevent attacks of gout and kidney stone formation in people prone to these conditions. If we\u2019re short of water, the bowel will reabsorb every last drop from what doctors euphemistically term the \u201cstool\u201d, which can lead to constipation. And our kidneys function best when there is plenty of water around \u2013 they respond to dehydration by concentrating urine to conserve body water, but in doing so they can sustain damage through metabolic stress.
Aside from these medical aspects, there may be softer benefits. As the body starts to dehydrate, water within cells is drawn out into the circulation. The resultant cellular water loss can affect function in a variety of tissues. Athletes\u2019 fluid balance has been the subject of extensive research, and even mild levels of dehydration measurably reduce physical performance. Studies of brain function have shown conflicting results, but overall it appears that mild to moderate dehydration impairs concentration and the ability to think through complex tasks. Headache is a common symptom of water depletion and, although it\u2019s not a miracle cure, studies show that the severity and duration of headaches can be reduced by optimising hydration. So frequent swigs from a bottle of water may help ensure we\u2019re in top condition to tackle our day.
Beyond this, water is a critical ally in the fight against the modern plague of obesity. Quenching our thirst with pretty much any other drink freights in energy along with the H2O, adding to our overall calorie load. There is also some suggestion that we readily confuse thirst for hunger. This might sound daft, but both sensations are mediated by the same region of the brain, and our highly adaptable brains rapidly forge associations between behaviours and the biological drives that they satisfy. All foodstuffs contain water, so it has always been possible to ease thirst by eating; but many of the fluids we consume nowadays are highly calorific, so we often sate our hunger by drinking. As a consequence of these crossed wires, we may be taking substantial excess energy into our bodies when all we\u2019re after is some H2O. Anyone wanting to tackle an expanding waistline should respond to apparent hunger pangs with a good drink of water. If twenty minutes later you no longer crave food, then what you were experiencing was thirst.
As we age, our sense of thirst diminishes, and many elderly people completely lose the cues that ordinarily prompt fluid intake. Of itself, this increases susceptibility to urinary tract infection, but dehydration is also a frequent and severe complication of otherwise minor illnesses such as flu or gastroenteritis in this age group. The rapid downward spiral of low blood pressure, kidney failure and mental confusion frequently leads to hospital admission, or even death. We assume that if someone isn\u2019t thirsty then they\u2019re not short of fluids, but the most important advice I give elderly patients is to ensure that they drink regularly, even if they don\u2019t feel like it.
If you are interested in increasing your own daily water intake, get yourself a bottle to refill from the tap, rather than adding to the mountain of plastic waste we produce. How much to drink varies according to individual circumstances, but two litres over 24 hours should be fine \u2013 three at a push. The best gauge is your urine colour: pale straw is what you\u2019re looking for. Darker suggests you should drink more, but if you\u2019re constantly peeing stuff that\u2019s as clear as Evian then you\u2019re overdoing it. And with that, I wish you a happy, hydrated new year.<\/p>\n

\n

\nSimilarity rank: 0\n<\/div>\n

Sentiment rank: 0<\/div>\n

\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n