Sacha muttered:

On 24/4/05 1:30, in article , "Magwitch"
wrote:

Sacha muttered:

On 22/4/05 11:37, in article , "Magwitch"
wrote:

snip

I sometimes wonder why people don't consider the _mental_ health risks they
impose on children, with their paranoia and hysterical phobias.

Try Googling and see how many children are hospitalised by hedgehog/fox poo
per annum, why don't you? MRSA is a much more serious threat, and more
prevalent in hospitals than back lawns.

Like someone said, "rake it up".


You're being pretty silly, as well as rather unnecessarily rude in an
oblique fashion. Judith has posted here on and off, for years and is not
only one of the more intelligent and helpful posters - not to say one of the
funniest - she is one of the least hysterical people I know. And I can
assure you that she almost certainly knows more than you do about
administration in hospitals which may be why she wants to know if something
is a potential health hazard.

I don't think so. For the last 6 years I've worked on antibiotic resistance,
only this week a study published that showed that young children exposed to
multiple childhood infections have a 50% lower risk of leukaemia, because
their immune systems have been 'primed' to cope and are healthy.

If well-meaning, but misguided carers try to eliminate *every* instance of
what is perfectly ok in a natural habitat, they are storing up problems for
their kids. I repeat, give me an example of *one* child whose health has
been compromised by hedgehog excreta, please.


I am not arguing with you about the dangers of animal excreta. I am telling
you - *telling* you - that Judith asked for ID of animal excreta,
*precisely* so she could discover whether she should be worried or not!
If you're such a hotshot in the health industry, I would think you would at
least be able to read a question and unveil its meaning, properly. AND
perhaps you noticed that I said that Judith almost certainly knows more than
you do about administration in hospitals, not antibiotic resistance.
And you then broaden your 'argument' to suggest that Judith wants to impose
a mental health risk on her grandchild, which is not only ridiculous but
insulting. I am well aware that children's immune systems can be
compromised by over-zealous hygiene practices and I believe strongly that
children should not be coddled and wrapped in cotton wool. Nonetheless, I
don't know of one parent or grandparent of my acquaintance who would be
happy for a child in their care to come into the house with clothes or hands
or feet, or all three, smeared in any kind of animal excreta.

Tsk tsk... I'll consider myself thoroughly told ‹ *told* ‹ off. I'll pass on
your thoughts to my nieces who seem to be permanently covered in animal
excreta of one kind or another (horses, dogs, chickens, ducks) and warn them
how dangerous it all is, if they'll listen...

Small point, we took our dog (a gentle Labrador) for a walk in the grounds
of a local stately home recently and not only were most of the kids dressed
in totally unsuitable clothes for a country walk (pink sandals and white
socks... in January), but they all seemed totally freaked out by the sight
of a dog.

I honestly cannot remember being that neurotic as a child, my parents would
have told ‹ *told* ‹ me not to be such a wuss.