.dropcap {float:left; color:#4791d2; font-size:75px; line-height:60px; padding-top:4px; padding-right:8px; padding-left:3px; font-family:Georgia}

Google+ Followers


Tuesday, July 12, 2016

America's One Last Hope to Have GMO Labeling? │ The Bisphenol A (BPA) in Canned Foods │ Astonishing Array of Medications Causing Sun Allergy

It was later than usual last evening when my wife Jack came home from Vancouver, just as she had said she might late last week. 

Had I not been expecting her, I would have probably had the T.V. turned off, and maybe even have gone to bed.

No doubt Mango Thai Restaurant's "Summer hours" are to blame for her lateness ─ it is now open every evening until 10:00 p.m., whereas before it had only been open that late on Fridays and Saturdays.

The other five days of the week had a closing time of 9:00 p.m.

She came to spend the night.

Fortunately, she was quite tired, and I was not forced to sit up too very late.  I think it was 12:41 a.m. when I had joined her in bed.

In the morning, when I noticed that she seemed to be getting up for the day, I waited until she had left the bedroom and closed the door before I checked the time (7:28 a.m.), and then rose and dressed.

She soon had me entangled in a very challenging on-line international money transfer with one of the financial institutions we are associated with.

Just recently, I guess she had deposited her paycheque there.

What she wanted me to do was transfer $500 Canadian to herself ─ or at least, to an account in her name ─ at the Siam Commercial Bank in Thailand.

It took a long time to finally get this done.  The biggest hurdle was accepting that even though she would normally deal with the branch in Udon Thani (city), there is no facility for choosing which branch the transfer is to be made to.

I expect that the bank simply knows by virtue of the account holder's name and account number.

I also had a problem getting myself to accept that her family home address in Nong Soong was correct.

Anyway, now I guess all we do is wait and see if her family can access the money with the ATM card they have.

The requested transfer was $500 Canadian, but the Canadian bank ended up taking $513.51 ─ there was a transfer fee of $13.50.  The extra 1¢ was to adjust for the exchange rate into American currency so that precisely $375.69 U.S. was transmitted.

Evidently Thailand isn't interested in negotiating with Canadian dollars, and instead wants the money to arrive as American funds.

I was resigned to not getting any work at all done on that new post I started on Sunday at my Lawless Spirit website, but my chance was to come.  Jack was going to return to Vancouver this morning.

She was gone by 10:30 a.m. at latest.

We'd had a little rain overnight, and it appears that the day is going to remain overcast.  The previous two days resulted in a fair bit of sunshine in the latter half of each aftenoon, but I don't see that happening today.

That bit of local grocery shopping I've been wanting to do has of course been postponed yet another day.  And I finished up the last of my ginger root last evening.

I recently began eating some raw ginger twice a day with my two daily meals, but there'll be none consumed today, alas.

Both Jack and I had fared rather poorly in the sleep department, but she had to make do.  I was able to seek a nap ─ I think I lied down around 12:34 p.m., and was in bed for something over an hour.

It's interesting that I had some sort of dream that included Vernon Driedger ─ he was a neighbour and fellow student back when I was in Grades II, III, and IV (September 1956 through June 1959) at Surrey Centre Elementary School out in Surrey.

After elementary school, I never saw him again until something like 1970 because his family had moved away to Saskatchewan. I only saw and spoke with him the once when we were young adults.

I learned years later that he died in a traffic accident in 1971.

I recall nothing of the dream ─ just that he had been in it.  I was considering getting up, but I fell back into another dream.  This time, it involved my younger brother Mark's German shepherd Daboda.

Daboda died in the early 1980s, as I remember.  He had been getting arthritic and stiff in his old age.  At the time, Mark's ex-girlfriend Jean Cooper was caring for him, for she was living in the house that she and Mark had been buying together, and she loved Daboda.

Then one morning when she was about to go to work, she went out into the backyard where he was chained at his doghouse, and he was lying there dead.

Heart-attack, maybe?

What I remember of the dream concerning him was being aware as I am today of how deleterious it is for a dog to be chained or tied up in isolation for hours on end like he was.

I also seemed to possibly be aware of how he was going to die.

I was pleading with God for a financial miracle so that I could take the poor old guy and allow him to live out what time he had left in some wilderness or country setting where we would have no nearby neigbours or traffic ─ he would never be tethered again for however long he lived.

This was when I started truly rallying to get up from my nap, but I was deep into the emotion of that tearful plea to God.

I knew I had been dreaming...yet another part of me was still fixated upon elderly, still-living Daboda and that emotional plea with God.

It was quite heart-wrenching.  I loved that dog.

In real life in a similar vein, I also wanted to do something similar with my ailing father, but that was also never to be.

And in my mother's final years, I had hoped to be able to finally realize this chance to share a loved one's end of life, but she died before I retired.

She lived all alone in Keremeos, and was found dead in her living room, lying half on a chesterfield and the floor.  Supposedly, an aneurysm (in the brain?) killed her less than two months from her 90th birthday.


Earlier this year ─ it was April 17 ─ my younger brother Mark initiated my youngest step-son Pote into the joys of mowing the lawn.

Normally, older step-son Tho had that duty, but he had gone away for a couple of days, as I recall.

I took seven photos of the occasion through the living room picture window.  I only realized a day or two ago that Google had animated those seven photos.

This was some of the action in our front yard:


Apparently there are still those Americans clinging to the hope of defeating legislation that will deny them the right to know what products have GMO ingredients.

Personally, I think the general populace is too apathetic to fight for that right.

And of course, even when people are very concerned, there are those who cannot bring themselves to make direct contact with their political representatives.

I know that as much as I would hate to never be able to know which food products harbour GMO ingredients, I am not about to be telephoning my political representatives.  I am just too socially isolated.

Besides, my political representatives are NOT the people I voted for ─ nor would I likely be voting for them in a next election.  So what bargaining power would I have even if I dared to make a direct call?

This is the latest (last ditch?) desperate call for action on defeating the Deny Americans the Right to Know (DARK) Act:

We Can Still Stop the DARK Act!
The DARK Act, the bill to Deny Americans the Right to Know about GMOs, could get a vote in the

TAKE ACTION: Call your U.S. Representative at 888-754-9091 to tell him or her to vote against the DARK Act (S.764). To send an email click here.

Here are some talking points you can use when you call:
House as early as Wednesday.
S.764 would kill Vermont’s law that labels GMO foods as ‘produced with genetic engineering.’ Vermont's law is working. GMOs are being labeled. Food prices are staying the same. The labels are being used nationwide. S.764 wouldn't require words on the package. It exempts nearly all GMOs from labeling. It would take at least 2 years to take effect. And, it’s essentially voluntary because there would be no enforcement for non-compliance. Even House Agriculture Committee Chairman Mike Conaway says the "bill is riddled with ambiguity and affords the Secretary a concerning level of discretion.”
We can stop the DARK Act by blocking this vote!

After last week’s Senate vote, Monsanto thinks we will stop fighting for the GMO labels that tell us if a food is “produced with genetic engineering.”

The organic traitors, including Just Label It, were more than ready to “give up” (as if this outcome wasn’t what they always wanted; the companies that control them sell a whole lot of GMOs they don’t want to label).

It’s too soon to throw in the towel, so we’ll keep fighting. Here’s how we could still win this:

Run out the clock. Labels with the words “produced with genetic engineering” started appearing around the country even before Vermont’s mandatory GMO labeling law officially took effect on July 1.  Every day that this law remains in effect is a victory for our movement. Congress has a lot of work to do, and very few legislative days to accomplish it. This week, the House has only three days to pass the DARK Act. If they don’t do it now, they have to wait until September.

Make the DARK Act toxic. Every politician has causes they want to be known for. There isn’t a single Member of Congress who has made getting rid of GMO labels their cause. That’s because, among their Democrat, Republican and Independent constituents, support for the right to know is nearly unanimous. With elections for all 435 House seats this year, it’s a tough time for politicians to go against the nine out of 10 Americans who want GMOs labeled. If politicians fear having to answer to angry constituents when they go home to campaign, they may not want to have to vote on the DARK Act.

Send a message to the President. When H.R. 1599 (the House version of the DARK Act) came up for a vote last year, most (138) Democrats voted No, but 45 Democrats voted Yes. It would be a lot more difficult for President Obama to sign the DARK Act into law if it had overwhelming opposition from House Democrats. If you take one action today, it should be to contact your Representative. But, if you want to do more, it’s not too soon to sign this MoveOn.org petition (already has over 106,000 signatures) and this WhiteHouse.gov petition (triggers an official response from the President once it hits 100,000) asking President Obama to veto the DARK Act.

Let’s flood Congress with calls and make this the bill they don’t want to touch!

Call your U.S. Representative at 888-754-9091 to tell him or her to vote against the DARK Act (S.764).
I wish that there were enough Americans to at least sign those petitions, if do nothing else!

I'm Canadian, yet I signed both of them.


Here is more on this extremely important topic:

It's being called "highway robbery, Monsanto style."

At the end of last week, 63 U.S. Senators voted for the
Roberts-Stabenow Act -- a fake "labeling" bill that will keep you guessing about which foods in the supermarket are GMOs.

It was a happy day for the biotech bullies that are out to rule our food supply. And it's now made another big step towards Obama's desk.

As I told you at the end of June, this zombie version of the DARK Act is a giant hand-out to Big Food and companies like Monsanto.

And the clock is ticking away towards it becoming the law of the land.

When the DARK Act (for Deny Americans the Right to Know) was defeated three months ago, I knew it was just a matter of time before it resurfaced in another disguise.

And it did.

This time, however, it's called the Roberts-Stabenow GMO labeling bill, proposed by Sens. Pat Roberts (R-Kansas) and Debbie Stabenow (D-Michigan). That was what passed 63-30 under the dark of night last Thursday.

And perhaps one of the most scandalous parts of this food fight is how the mainstream media is covering it.

I'm talking about headlines that read: "Senate backs bill to label genetically modified food," or "U.S. Senate passes GMO labeling bill," (and that was the New York Times!).

But nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, the new pet name for this bill is "the labeling law without a label."

That's because this bill was designed to keep you from knowing which foods contain GMO ingredients.

For example:
  • Any "labeling" of GMOs would be hidden behind an electronic bar code. To crack it, you would need a smart phone that's set up with a code reader and an app to translate it all.
  • No one from the USDA, or anywhere else for that matter, will be checking to see if a manufacturer is complying. But why should they, because it would all be on the honor system! That's right, there would be no penalties for non-compliance and no enforcement.
  • The bill would exempt corn and soy, the biggest GMO crops out there. That's a loophole the likes of which we've never seen before.
In reality, this is nothing more than a scheme to derail Vermont's GMO labeling, a real labeling law, which went into effect on the first of the month. I'm sure Big Food and Monsanto executives were practically having a meltdown when that was passed.

As I said, 63 U.S. Senators voted for this corporate ploy. But there were 30 who didn't. Among them is Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) who said that she "can't support" a bill that allows voluntary labeling of genetically modified salmon.

Or Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), who called it an "attack on consumers' basic right to know what is in their food."

But there were other big surprises -- supporters of the bill that made for some very odd bedfellows.

They include the Environmental Working Group, the head of Whole Foods Market, and the yuppie CEO of Stonyfield Farm, which makes organic dairy products.

The Organic Consumers Association said that this group helped cut a "backroom deal" to smooth the way for the bill to pass.

The bill is now going back to the House, which last year passed its own version of the original DARK Act, and then straight to President Obama's desk.

That means we still have some time (and not much) to stop it. Contact your House reps and tell them to oppose the Roberts-Stabenow bill.

Tell them we all deserve better than this massive handout to Big Food masquerading as a labeling bill.
  • "Highway Robbery" Organic Bytes, Organic Consumers Association, July 8, 2016, organicconsumers.org
rodalesorganiclife.com: 11 Reasons to Laugh at GMOs


I knew that bisphenol A (BPA) is commonly within the linings of canned food products, but I never had any notion of just how much might actually taint the food being contained in that can.

Look at this:

You can't walk through the supermarket these days without seeing an army of bottles, cans, and food packages claiming to be "BPA-free."

But how much BPA is still getting into our food -- and how can you tell what you should (and shouldn't) buy?

It turns out that dodging BPA is just as big a problem now as ever.

And whether or not we get a whopping dose of the dangerous chemical can all depend on which foods we choose.

So if you're trying to steer clear (at least as much as possible) of BPA, there are three important things you need to know before your next trip to buy groceries.

BPA is one of those health issues that should have been solved already.

Campbell's Soup says they're taking it out of all their cans (more on that in a minute), and other companies have made similar claims, too.

Case closed, right? Well, not exactly.

A just-out study from three major medical schools found not only that consuming canned foods can expose you to large amounts of BPA, but also which ones are the worst offenders.

For example:
  • Canned soup was found to contain the highest amounts of BPA, zapping soup-eaters with 229 percent more of the chemical than those who had consumed no canned foods.
  • Canned pasta was next on the list, upping your urine concentration (how it's measured in the body) of the chemical by 70 percent.
  • Canned veggies and fruit came in third, increasing your exposure by 41 percent.
So what is it that makes soup, which just happens to be the most commonly purchased canned food item, such a toxic BPA stew?

The lead author of the study, Jennifer Hartle of Stanford University School of Medicine, thinks it has a lot to do with the fact that soup "need(s) a long heating time" when processed to "get all the contents to the same temperature." (Commercial soups are cooked after canning).

Also, BPA "moves into solids," she said. So if you're having a can of mushroom soup or one containing pasta, it could make for a bigger BPA dose.

And more bad news for lovers of soup -- and convenience -- came to light this spring when six nonprofits in the U.S and Canada found that two out of three canned food items tested positive for BPA.

The chemical, which is used to coat the inside of can linings, was found in 100 percent of the Campbell's and Target brands, and 88 percent of the Walmart ones. All told, 62 percent of private-label cans -- ranging from Dollar Tree to Trader Joe's, were found to contain BPA.

Remember, we're talking about something that has been linked to breast and prostate cancer, type 2 diabetes, obesity and asthma. On top of that, last year I warned you about how BPA is suspected of triggering early puberty in young girls.

Despite these findings, you don't have to stop eating soup or dust off the crock pot and start making it from scratch. By just following these three simple tips next time you go shopping, you'll be slashing a big chunk of BPA out of your family's diet.

Tip #1: Only buy canned food from manufacturers that specifically state they no longer use BPA. Campbell's Soup now says it won't be BPA-free until sometime in 2017, although the company has been promising this since 2012.

Tip #2: Other options include buying soups and broths in those paper cartons called "aseptic containers" which contain no BPA. Glass containers work, too.

Tip #3: When it comes to fruit and veggies, choose fresh or frozen varieties over canned. That's especially easy to do now with lots of delicious produce being in season.
 joemohrtoons.com: Canned Spinach Killing Popeye


I never imagined that there were such a variety of medications that can make a person allergic to sunshine!

Ellen hadn't been outside very long -- just a short walk with her dog to pick up the mail.

Soon after, however, she started to feel a burning and stinging on her neck and face. By the next morning, it looked like a really bad sunburn.

The painful reaction Ellen thought was a sunburn was, in fact, caused by the sun, but also by a drug she was taking.

She had what's called a "phototoxic" reaction. And it was triggered by the antibiotic ciprofloxacin (or "Cipro," for short).

There are actually many drugs that can make you extremely sensitive to the sun and leave you with the worst burn of your life.

And with most of the dog days of summer still ahead, it's important to know how to stay safe.

Certainly, nothing ruins a family picnic or day at the beach more than a nasty sunburn.

And with lots of drugs, it won't take much sun to give you a burn.

Some antibiotics may say on the front to avoid sun exposure, but unless you get, and read, the full book-length label for a big group of other meds, you wouldn't know they carry the same risks.

There are actually two types of drug photosensitivity reactions. One, called photoallergy, is just that -- an allergy to sun exposure that's triggered by a medication. Ultraviolet light can change a drug's properties so much that your body will start producing antibodies to it.

And the symptoms of a photoallergy, which can include a rash that may appear in places that weren't even exposed, often don't show up for several days.

But by far the most common type of drug-related sun-sensitivity is just what Ellen had -- phototoxicity.

It's like a severe burn, and it can happen soon after taking a med.

With phototoxicity, the medication becomes "activated" by the sun, and in turn damages the skin. It can even result in the same blistering and peeling that you get with a bad sunburn. And continued use of a drug that produces this kind of reaction can cause your skin to thicken and even darken.

On top of drugs, certain cosmetic creams may also make you extra sensitive to the sun's rays. And ironically, these are so-called wrinkle treatments containing alpha hydroxy acids advertised for "younger-looking skin."

In fact, the FDA has "recommended" that manufacturers of these products put a "sunburn alert" on the packaging. And that extra sensitivity can last up to a week after using one of these products!

Now, aside from the ciprofloxacin I mentioned, other antibiotics that can cause a photosensitive reaction include doxycycline, levofloxacin, ofloxacin and tetracycline.

Along with these antibiotics, other classes of drugs include antiarrhythmics, antifungals, antihistamines such as Zyrtec, high blood pressure meds (including diuretics), statins like Lipitor and Zocor, and a host of anti-inflammatory meds like Advil, Aleve and Celebrex. (See the link below for a more complete list).

If you're taking one or more of these drugs, the best advice is to cover up with long pants or a skirt, long sleeves and a hat when you go out. And experts say that the best sunscreens to use are ones with zinc or titanium oxide which won't irritate you skin with excess chemicals.

For a more complete list of drugs that can make you sun sensitive, check out the FDA's page here.

And if you must shun the sun while taking certain meds, don't forget to take a daily vitamin D supplement.
  • "Drugs that cause sun-related skin reactions" Worst Pills Best Pills Newsletter, July, 2016, worstpills.org 
I refuse to link to a website reference that demands the visitor to be a subscriber before access to articles is allowed.

Here's some further information on the two types of photosensitivity ─ a brief report from July 21, 2015:


Here to close today's post is an entry from my journal of 41 years ago when I was 25 years old, and living in a basement housekeeping unit in New Westminster.

I was renting my room in a house located on Ninth Street at Third Avenue.
SATURDAY, July 12, 1975

I arose about 6:10 a.m. very bleary-eyed indeed; I recently dreamed of tenderly caressing the undersides of Cathy's toes and having her in turn use them to caress the behind of my ear; a very stimulating experience, even if fantasy.

The day appears mostly sun.

I am going to leave about 9:45 a.m. and drop in on Alex to check for mail (to see if I shall order a Howard book or the novel Malevil), then hike over to Mark's from where I'll call Bill re our dining together.  I shall leave a note to this effect on Bill's car.

No problem here.

I passed so close to a rat foraging in an isolated dandelion clump after starting along Scott that I could have stomped on it; but I passed by and it never knew.

Alex was working on his lawn when I arrived; he said mom was shopping, having returned from Reno last night.

No mail, but I waited till she came home before going to Mark's.

I received $1 from her as part payment for a Greenpeace ticket when I order mine; I fear we have 3 Olympic tickets beginning 345 including Mark's, and possibly a fourth.

I bought a $9.10 money order for Malevil (only to later discover after talking to Bill he has the book in paperback, and it is not at all as I'd hoped; I'll save the order, and add another to it when I finally send for books from the next Donald Grant flyer).

I got to Mark's and found no one home; I tried Bill's number, but got no answer; I was there but 5 minutes when he pulled in.

He got some shoes, then we fed; 'twas beautiful!

Thereafter we went past Dairy Queen hoping to use the Burns free coupon for a second milkshake we each have, but did not care for the line-up.

At the Bluebird I maddeningly blew $1.75 on a lousy Game.

For tomorrow eve, Bill bought 2 dozen beer to take to Nell's; he left it with me in my fridge.

He works a 2:00 a.m. shift now.

After getting home I remained, lying down a few hours, digesting unconsciously.

I exercised a full system later.

Note:  mom gave me a 1/10 pint bottle of Gilbey's vodka.

I was nearly finished reading at 10:30 p.m. and thus ready for bed when came a noisy Cathy & Mark; I let them in, and was told to come on out and get drunk.

She was in a delightfully playful mood, and both were obviously already lit.  So I prepared; then was told Charlie & Bruce were outside in a car waiting.

So out we went, and climbed into Charlie's car; next stop, Nell's (who was really gone).

It seems that my fate was of no concern to Mark & Cathy, for they nearly left without coming in.  But they were persuaded, and stayed some while.

When they finally did decide to depart, I tried to scram as well; but Alan turned out to live a mere block from me on 4th Ave, and insisted I go home with he, Marie, and daughter.

What rotten luck ─ I feared he would be conveniently situated and offer me such a ride.  He's a nice guy, and strongly reminds me of Darryl Spencer; his interest in psychological problems was disturbing however.

But I did go home with him.

I am now expected to associate, but plan on avoidance natheless.

Joey & Eva were at Nell's too, and all but Bill were lit.  My Bill phoned or was phoned, and I exchanged a few words with him. 

I bedded nearly 2:50 a.m.  
"Cathy" was my younger brother Mark's girlfriend of the time, Catherine Jeanette Gunther.  It seems to me that I had just recently written of some other dream involving her toes; and according to my journal, I had the real life experience of rubbing her feet maybe a week earlier while partying at my Aunt Nell Halverson's home off in Surrey.

Maybe that real life experience generated this particular dream.

I adored Jeanette, and thought that there was no one lovelier.

My mother Irene Dorosh lived out in the Kennedy Heights area of Surrey; and since her home was my main mailing address, I tried to hike there at least twice a week for mail.

The past week, though, she had been off to Reno.  Nevertheless, I had checked for mail Monday through Wednesday while her husband Alex was away at work. 

It was a fair walk to their home from where I was living ─ it would take about 1½ hours at a good clip.

The house no longer exists, but its address was 12106 - 90th Avenue.

Since I hadn't checked for mail the previous two days, I was going to drop in on Alex this day, and then hike over to my younger brother Mark's home ─ he and Jeanette were renting a house located on Bentley Road in Whalley.

Often on weekends, my old friend William Alan Gill and I would get together and visit a smorgasbord ─ we were both prodigious eaters.  So I left a note on his car there in New Westminster and continued on to see Alex.

The foraging rat was somewhere along Scott Road (120th Street) in Surrey.

When I came upon Alex doing yard work, I had not known that my mother was already back from Reno; so I hung about and waited for her to return from shopping.

The book I almost mail-ordered was Robert Merle's Malevil.  I had considered instead some unspecified book by Robert E. Howard, but had decided to buy the money order for Malevil.

My conversation with Bill prevented me from mailing for the book.

Donald M. Grant published some superb collector's hardcover books in the fantasy genre.

Anyway, I had my reunion with my mother.  She gave me the tiny bottle of vodka, and a dollar towards the purchase of a Greenpeace Lottery ticket.  

I had also recently been getting involved with the more expensive Olympic Lottery tickets.  Of those, I was disappointed to find that the ticket numbers of a few I had already bought all seemed to lead with the same three numerals:  "345."  I would have preferred a greater variance in ticket sequences.

After leaving her and then hiking to my brother's home ─ the house was very near to 108th Avenue & King George Highway ─ I found no one home, so I phoned Bill.  Unbeknownst to me, he was already on his way there.

Apparently we had a fabulous smorgasbord feed, but would have desserted upon two milkshakes apiece if the line-up at Dairy Queen had not thwarted our plans.

I have no idea now what a "Burns coupon" was, though.  

The "Bluebird" was apparently a store in New Westminster that I now no longer remember.  It was there that I suspect that I may have bought a 'girlie' magazine ─ such is what I think Game was.  I wasn't happy with it, at any rate.

Bill must have taken us to the government liquor store and bought the two dozen beers that he left with me when he dropped me off.

I generally became incapacitated after eating at a smorgasbord and pretty much needed to sleep it off.

Yet thereafter, I managed whatever was "a full system" of exercises.

Then just before my bedtime, along came Mark and Jeanette ─ that young lady was irresistible when she was in one of her joyously playful moods.  I would have complied about going out with them for some drinking, not immediately realizing what was about to happen. 

They were not driving ─ a good thing, I guess.  Instead, they had been passengers in Charlie Little's car, one of the friends of my Aunt Nell's household.  Bruce there in the car with Charlie was one of her sons, and thus my cousin.

At that time, Nell and the others in her large household were living on 64th Avenue in Surrey, not too far from Newton Junior High School.

So it was to there that we drove.

And then Mark and Jeanette were only going to get into their own car and leave ─ they had no intention of staying to drink.  She had enticed me out with her seductive ways, only to let me be dropped off at Nell's 'party house.'

Had I known this was in store, I would have declined her and Mark.

But at least they did get pressured into staying for awhile.

It seems that Al and Marie Varga (and daughter) were visiting at Nell's.  I knew they lived somewhere in New Westminster, but I had no idea that they were in residence so near to my room.

I meant to leave with Mark and Jeanette, and perhaps hike home from their place in Whalley.  But Al Varga was high-pressure where persuasion was involved.

I felt with no option but to submit.

I didn't really know them, and I was not interested in being forced into a social entanglement I did not want, and so near to my room.

I mentioned "Joey & Eva" as being at Nell's.  The couple sound remotely familiar, but I cannot dredge up anything more about them.  The "Bill" who wasn't drinking at Nell's was probably Charlie Little's younger brother.  

Such were the parties at my Aunt Nell's ─ and Bill and I were going to visit the following day with his two cases of beer?  This would have been extremely welcome, for liquor sales were unavailable here on Sundays back then ─ the house would have probably been very dry.
Post a Comment