Asda price? £527 - for two pork chops (From Thisisdorset)

tricky1007 wrote:
Yeah Asda fault for the woman not reading what the amount was before putting her card details through! If she had no reading glasses go through a normal till if her eyesight is that bad without them, although my guess would be she could see it fine, just trying to get some freebies out of Asda

uvox44 wrote:
that's not the real price though- the real price is the suffering of highly intelligent animals just to feed our totally unnecessary and unhealthy appetite for meat, meat-bad for your health, bad for the environment, bad for the animals you eat, a real lose-lose industry.

chicken_madras wrote:

uvox44 wrote:
that's not the real price though- the real price is the suffering of highly intelligent animals just to feed our totally unnecessary and unhealthy appetite for meat, meat-bad for your health, bad for the environment, bad for the animals you eat, a real lose-lose industry.

are you mad? How do you think humans are supposed to get a good natural source of iron?

uvox44 wrote:
that's not the real price though- the real price is the suffering of highly intelligent animals just to feed our totally unnecessary and unhealthy appetite for meat, meat-bad for your health, bad for the environment, bad for the animals you eat, a real lose-lose industry.

The Liberal wrote:
Why on earth, with today's technology, does it take two days to reimburse her? Either Asda or the bank is profiting from this delay.

uvox44 wrote:
ok thanks for the replies norwood and co- the first point about iron- where do you think the animals you eat (ie herbivores like cows ) get their iron - same place as I do , from the ground via the plants that grow in it, dark green vegetables are full of iron .
Point two - the idea that having teeth proves were are meant to eat meat is actually quite funny , because then you have to ask why cows have teeth, why rabbits have teeth , why horses have teeth - are they all meant to eat meat? Perhaps someone should tell them all those years of eating only plants have left them stunted and weak - but that seems improbable as horses and cows are hardly small , weak animals are they? If you look a bit deeper Norwood and look at the TYPE of teeth herbivores and carnivores have you will find they are VERY different , with good reason , flat teeth in a siddeways moving jaw are designed for chewing/grinding plant material , sharp canine teeth in a jaw that clamps down is designed for ripping and tearing of flesh- guess which type of teeth you have?
There are at least 5 or 6 other anatomical / physiological characteristics that prove were defintely aren't evolved to eat meat , at least not as out primary food source- but if you still don't believe me then please tell me why i'm not dead as i haven't touched a shred of meat since 1983 and feel just fine , thanks, in fact a lot more fine than a lot of people i know who do eat a lot of meat- answers on a postcard please?

uvox44 wrote:
and as for asking any doctor , i think you will find even the most old fashioned doctor would at the very least advise cutting back on the amount of meat eaten(especially red meat) - but if you have an open mind on this subject please do yourself a favour and look at the work of Neal Barnard - he has studied the health advantages of not eating animal products (and there are many) in great depth- on and yes , he is a medical doctor...

uvox44 wrote:
that's not the real price though- the real price is the suffering of highly intelligent animals just to feed our totally unnecessary and unhealthy appetite for meat, meat-bad for your health, bad for the environment, bad for the animals you eat, a real lose-lose industry.

Pounder wrote:
Surely if someone is taking over £500 worth of goods to the self-checkout it should be flagged anyway?

uvox44 wrote:
that,s an interesting idea HRH- are there any links to research on this please? Barrhumbug- far from being bitter i am very happy as a person , thanks - i just don't like seeing unnecessary suffering,sorry if that offends you. As this a discussion forum i don't find it inappropriate to put forward my views on things-again sorry if that offends you. Maybe you are the bitter one - you certainly seem to have a lot of hostility from the general tone of your post.

uvox44 wrote:
ok thanks for the replies norwood and co- the first point about iron- where do you think the animals you eat (ie herbivores like cows ) get their iron - same place as I do , from the ground via the plants that grow in it, dark green vegetables are full of iron .
Point two - the idea that having teeth proves were are meant to eat meat is actually quite funny , because then you have to ask why cows have teeth, why rabbits have teeth , why horses have teeth - are they all meant to eat meat? Perhaps someone should tell them all those years of eating only plants have left them stunted and weak - but that seems improbable as horses and cows are hardly small , weak animals are they? If you look a bit deeper Norwood and look at the TYPE of teeth herbivores and carnivores have you will find they are VERY different , with good reason , flat teeth in a siddeways moving jaw are designed for chewing/grinding plant material , sharp canine teeth in a jaw that clamps down is designed for ripping and tearing of flesh- guess which type of teeth you have?
There are at least 5 or 6 other anatomical / physiological characteristics that prove were defintely aren't evolved to eat meat , at least not as out primary food source- but if you still don't believe me then please tell me why i'm not dead as i haven't touched a shred of meat since 1983 and feel just fine , thanks, in fact a lot more fine than a lot of people i know who do eat a lot of meat- answers on a postcard please?

uvox44 wrote:
that's not the real price though- the real price is the suffering of highly intelligent animals just to feed our totally unnecessary and unhealthy appetite for meat, meat-bad for your health, bad for the environment, bad for the animals you eat, a real lose-lose industry.

uvox44 wrote:
ok thanks for the replies norwood and co- the first point about iron- where do you think the animals you eat (ie herbivores like cows ) get their iron - same place as I do , from the ground via the plants that grow in it, dark green vegetables are full of iron . Point two - the idea that having teeth proves were are meant to eat meat is actually quite funny , because then you have to ask why cows have teeth, why rabbits have teeth , why horses have teeth - are they all meant to eat meat? Perhaps someone should tell them all those years of eating only plants have left them stunted and weak - but that seems improbable as horses and cows are hardly small , weak animals are they? If you look a bit deeper Norwood and look at the TYPE of teeth herbivores and carnivores have you will find they are VERY different , with good reason , flat teeth in a siddeways moving jaw are designed for chewing/grinding plant material , sharp canine teeth in a jaw that clamps down is designed for ripping and tearing of flesh- guess which type of teeth you have? There are at least 5 or 6 other anatomical / physiological characteristics that prove were defintely aren't evolved to eat meat , at least not as out primary food source- but if you still don't believe me then please tell me why i'm not dead as i haven't touched a shred of meat since 1983 and feel just fine , thanks, in fact a lot more fine than a lot of people i know who do eat a lot of meat- answers on a postcard please?

MisterE wrote:

uvox44 wrote:
that's not the real price though- the real price is the suffering of highly intelligent animals just to feed our totally unnecessary and unhealthy appetite for meat, meat-bad for your health, bad for the environment, bad for the animals you eat, a real lose-lose industry.

Hmm... just a shame they're so darn tasty! Bacon sarnie here I come - yum yum!

uvox44 wrote:
that's not the real price though- the real price is the suffering of highly intelligent animals just to feed our totally unnecessary and unhealthy appetite for meat, meat-bad for your health, bad for the environment, bad for the animals you eat, a real lose-lose industry.

uvox44 wrote:
that's not the real price though- the real price is the suffering of highly intelligent animals just to feed our totally unnecessary and unhealthy appetite for meat, meat-bad for your health, bad for the environment, bad for the animals you eat, a real lose-lose industry.

uvox44 wrote:
that,s an interesting idea HRH- are there any links to research on this please?

Barrhumbug- far from being bitter i am very happy as a person , thanks - i just don't like seeing unnecessary suffering,sorry if that offends you. As this a discussion forum i don't find it inappropriate to put forward my views on things-again sorry if that offends you. Maybe you are the bitter one - you certainly seem to have a lot of hostility from the general tone of your post.

BarrHumbug wrote:
@ uvox44 - As grazzer pointed out, these comments started out talking about the reported story, that was until you pulled out your soapbox and started preaching your views and that's exactly my problem, preaching.

I have no problem with anybody's views, opinions, religious beliefs, whatever. But when someone takes a completely unrelated story, or certainly one with a very tenuous link, remember this was about an incorrectly priced barcode, out of the hundreds of thousands of products in Asda's it just happened to be a pork chop, and twists it around to suit their beliefs and then preach about it, then yes, to be honest it does offend me.

If your happy being a vegetarian then i'm happy for you but please don't chastise everyone else just because they haven't made the same dietary choices as you.

bmthlad69 wrote:

MisterE wrote:

uvox44 wrote:
that's not the real price though- the real price is the suffering of highly intelligent animals just to feed our totally unnecessary and unhealthy appetite for meat, meat-bad for your health, bad for the environment, bad for the animals you eat, a real lose-lose industry.

Hmm... just a shame they're so darn tasty! Bacon sarnie here I come - yum yum!

Yep all this talk about meat makes me very hungry.
I'm off for a bacon sarnie as well

uvox44 wrote:
hmmm interesting that when you don't agree with what someone posts then they are "PREACHING" but no doubt if they are posting something you agree with then that would be ok. I am merely putting forward a viewpoint for discussion but it seems to have touched a few nerves for sure - wonder why that is - guilt i expect. Of course we are all free to eat what we like but at least have the intelligence to think about where your food comes from and the true cost of it . A special note for Penhale (because he/she is after all very special, in some many ways) - just for the record I am educated to degree level, not that i set much store by formal qualifications anyway

penhale wrote:

uvox44 wrote:
hmmm interesting that when you don't agree with what someone posts then they are "PREACHING" but no doubt if they are posting something you agree with then that would be ok. I am merely putting forward a viewpoint for discussion but it seems to have touched a few nerves for sure - wonder why that is - guilt i expect. Of course we are all free to eat what we like but at least have the intelligence to think about where your food comes from and the true cost of it . A special note for Penhale (because he/she is after all very special, in some many ways) - just for the record I am educated to degree level, not that i set much store by formal qualifications anyway

There are those on here who preach the pitfalls of driving cars, there are those who hate wind farms, tree huggers preach about how we are all dammed because of the environment being damaged by our actions, tree huggers want wind farms but not on there own doorstep, all of the above and more are quite often labeled as nutters, your ranting and preaching really confirm that belief.
You say you are educated to degree level, I find that hard to believe, the art of annoying people.

uvox44 wrote:
that,s an interesting idea HRH- are there any links to research on this please?

Barrhumbug- far from being bitter i am very happy as a person , thanks - i just don't like seeing unnecessary suffering,sorry if that offends you. As this a discussion forum i don't find it inappropriate to put forward my views on things-again sorry if that offends you. Maybe you are the bitter one - you certainly seem to have a lot of hostility from the general tone of your post.

stubrit2 wrote:
Right. I have no problem with people being vegetarians if that's what they want to be. However, when you try to tell other people they're morally wrong, then I have a problem, especially when you're argument is quite frankly wrong. Animals are not either herbivores or carnivores. There's also such a thing as an omnivore (bears and pigs come to mind), which is what humans are. Yes we have lovely flat teeth for grinding plant matter etc. but we also have sharp teeth for ripping meat (or do you not have canines like the rest of us?), so let's put the "eating meat is unnatural" argument to bed shall we? I would think it's healthier to not eat meat, than to not eat veg but that doesn't mean that not eating meat is healthier than eating meat. Whatever diet people choose is up to them, but please, don't try and insist that "meat is murder" or that "vegetarians are mad hippies". Let's just respect each other choices and move along.

Imaximus wrote:
I eat meat...and I eat veggies....Once i even ate a lego head but i was only 4 then....how did this meat v veg debate start? I shall blame the imax and dog walkers for this poor ladies plight....Oh hang on....its her fault for not reading the display. *yawns

The Liberal wrote:
Why on earth, with today's technology, does it take two days to reimburse her? Either Asda or the bank is profiting from this delay.

norwood70 wrote:

uvox44 wrote:
that's not the real price though- the real price is the suffering of highly intelligent animals just to feed our totally unnecessary and unhealthy appetite for meat, meat-bad for your health, bad for the environment, bad for the animals you eat, a real lose-lose industry.

The fact is animals eat other animals. Animals that are farmed and killed for food are on the large part well kept and killed in a humane fashion. If they were in the wild they would struggle to keep themselves nourished and many would be ripped to shreds by other animals for food! Do you think a fox would take the time to make sure a chicken dies peacefully before it eats it?? If anything an animal has the prospect of a better life on a farm than to fend for itself!!

You only have to compare cancer rates between meat eating countries in the western world to those in 3rd world countries where meat is often too expensive to eat and the figures are scary.

penhale wrote:
A story about a shopper overpaying on her bill has been hijacked once again by preachers of doom.
We all know that certain thing we do are bad for us but we do them anyway, smoking, drinking, driving, mountain climbing, horse riding, going to Afghanistan, all highly dangerous to our health but we choose to do them so keep your preaching to yourselves, it's not needed, we already know the pitfalls of what we do in every day life and we do not need to be preached at by do gooders every day of the week, now I'm off for a lovely bacon sarnie followed by a Benson & Hedges and perhaps a pint of larger and to top it off maybe a 90mph drive up the spur road to get a few speed cameras working, there, that should bring a load more preachers out tonight.

Adrian XX wrote:
I support uvox44 though I do not agree with him.

On the issue of vegetarianism - has there been a single randomised controlled trial showing that red-meat (or any meat) eaters are less healthy? No.

There have only been epidemiological studies, often much-reported in the popular press. The point is that in all these studies, subjects are self-selecting: they decide to eat meat. Such studies are based on questionnaires and are often very poorly designed. Did the researchers adequately control for smoking, weight, exercise, attitude to health generally, type of red meat (did they lump together those who eat fray-bentos meat pies with those who only eat fresh meat?), cooking method and a multitude of other factors? Even a good-quality epidemiological study can only prove association, never cause.

Some meat eaters are disgustingly unhealthy, but so are some vegetarians.

I don't trust Neal Barnard: he is a psychiatrist who works for and is heavily involved with PETA. The Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine is just a front for PETA to try to make them sound more credible. They are involved in promoting some highly dubious research - some people might be interested to read this article: http://bit.ly/PDzEzQ which details one example of a very poor study.

Finally, I would say that it quite possibly to eat meat without causing any animal suffering at all. In fact, most free-range pigs, sheep and cattle suffer very little. They would not exist if it were not for human food production, so I don't see anything wrong with breeding them and killing them instantly for food.

KatieBrook wrote:
Waitrose did a mistake with my card in Parkstone and 60 pounds were taken by mistake and phoned me and then gave me a 100 Pounds - Asda Cheap as always . By the way this sort of story is why i dont buy papers now ! Some **** goes along to the local paper and then its printed ! He looks like a Asda person as well !! Bit Thick i expect

Bournefre wrote:

The Liberal wrote:
Why on earth, with today's technology, does it take two days to reimburse her? Either Asda or the bank is profiting from this delay.

I agree - how on earth can something like this happen in this day and age?
I'm never going to fly with Ryanair again!

loopymoo wrote:
Funny how she left her reading glasses at home so couldn't see the balance amount on the til (which is rather large), but somehow managed to notice the error on her receipt which is in much smaller writing........

Miss Opinionated wrote:

Adrian XX wrote:
I support uvox44 though I do not agree with him.

On the issue of vegetarianism - has there been a single randomised controlled trial showing that red-meat (or any meat) eaters are less healthy? No.

There have only been epidemiological studies, often much-reported in the popular press. The point is that in all these studies, subjects are self-selecting: they decide to eat meat. Such studies are based on questionnaires and are often very poorly designed. Did the researchers adequately control for smoking, weight, exercise, attitude to health generally, type of red meat (did they lump together those who eat fray-bentos meat pies with those who only eat fresh meat?), cooking method and a multitude of other factors? Even a good-quality epidemiological study can only prove association, never cause.

Some meat eaters are disgustingly unhealthy, but so are some vegetarians.

I don't trust Neal Barnard: he is a psychiatrist who works for and is heavily involved with PETA. The Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine is just a front for PETA to try to make them sound more credible. They are involved in promoting some highly dubious research - some people might be interested to read this article: http://bit.ly/PDzEzQ which details one example of a very poor study.

Finally, I would say that it quite possibly to eat meat without causing any animal suffering at all. In fact, most free-range pigs, sheep and cattle suffer very little. They would not exist if it were not for human food production, so I don't see anything wrong with breeding them and killing them instantly for food.

they don't die instantly. They suffer. They get scared, cows have even been known to cry.

Chickens are dragged through electrified water upside down, which may or may not stun them. Some sows, sheep and pigs have been known to be butchered still alive. They are suspended by one leg, on a chain , upside down (think of the weight of a cow) and left to bleed out. All this and more is considered acceptable. Don't get me started on live transport or the myth of 'freedom farms'. The majority of your meat comes from intense factory farming. Millions upon millions of animals who never see the light of day or feel the breeze on their face. Instead they are confined to concrete cells where they cannot turn around or lie down. Go google it. Learn about the practices that supply supermarkets with 'cheap meat'. Think about the SENTIENCE of these creatures. Cows have friends, pigs like to huddle and play football. Then decide, with all the relevant facts if your greed is still worth more than their life.

I suspect for may it will be, humans skill at denial and selfishness in unlimited.

Boredofthiscountry wrote:

The Liberal wrote:
Why on earth, with today's technology, does it take two days to reimburse her? Either Asda or the bank is profiting from this delay.

So you think it's just Asda that it takes that long from, go to any shop for a refund and it takes several working days for the money to go back to your account, not just Asda!

uvox44 wrote:
that's not the real price though- the real price is the suffering of highly intelligent animals just to feed our totally unnecessary and unhealthy appetite for meat, meat-bad for your health, bad for the environment, bad for the animals you eat, a real lose-lose industry.

TheDistrict wrote:
Once again I read this story with some interest as it happened to me sometime ago, but was sorted immediately. What has it a nerve is the comments from uvox44, which has already been pointed out, has nothing to do with the story. (I wonder what comments he or she would have had it been a bottle of washing up liquid).
.
Healthier eating by being a vegetarian might be the answer for some but to use a non relevent story to air ones views, and to force vegetarianism onto others is very wrong.
.
Vegetrianism is dangerous, specially if a carrot is placed somewhere other than the normal entrance......lol
.

fifty shades of brown envelopes wrote:

TheDistrict wrote:
Once again I read this story with some interest as it happened to me sometime ago, but was sorted immediately. What has it a nerve is the comments from uvox44, which has already been pointed out, has nothing to do with the story. (I wonder what comments he or she would have had it been a bottle of washing up liquid).
.
Healthier eating by being a vegetarian might be the answer for some but to use a non relevent story to air ones views, and to force vegetarianism onto others is very wrong.
.
Vegetrianism is dangerous, specially if a carrot is placed somewhere other than the normal entrance......lol
.

You are not funny


Discusting post


Sums you up

I will report this post later.

Boredofthiscountry wrote:

KatieBrook wrote:
Waitrose did a mistake with my card in Parkstone and 60 pounds were taken by mistake and phoned me and then gave me a 100 Pounds - Asda Cheap as always . By the way this sort of story is why i dont buy papers now ! Some **** goes along to the local paper and then its printed ! He looks like a Asda person as well !! Bit Thick i expect

So if you're an Asda person you must be a bit thick? is that what you're saying, I'm guessing most Asda people would be able to write a sentence properly, " An Asda person, not a Asda person"! Waitrose MADE a mistake with your card, not did a mistake, £60 was taken by mistake, not were taken! See not all thick!

uvox44 wrote:
that,s an interesting idea HRH- are there any links to research on this please? Barrhumbug- far from being bitter i am very happy as a person , thanks - i just don't like seeing unnecessary suffering,sorry if that offends you. As this a discussion forum i don't find it inappropriate to put forward my views on things-again sorry if that offends you. Maybe you are the bitter one - you certainly seem to have a lot of hostility from the general tone of your post.

uvox44 wrote:
that,s an interesting idea HRH- are there any links to research on this please?

Barrhumbug- far from being bitter i am very happy as a person , thanks - i just don't like seeing unnecessary suffering,sorry if that offends you. As this a discussion forum i don't find it inappropriate to put forward my views on things-again sorry if that offends you. Maybe you are the bitter one - you certainly seem to have a lot of hostility from the general tone of your post.

Miss Opinionated wrote:
http://www. guardian.co.uk/comme

ntisfree/2011/jul/07

/cows-best-friends

Just one of many easily accesible articles explaining animal behaviour. And just because you 'don't believe animals are sentient' doesn't mean it's not true. As I said, do your own research. There is a wealth of evidence that animals are intelligent, feel pain and experience emotions in EXACTLY the same way as humans. We evolved the same way after all, it would be arrogant to assume they respond to external stimuli in a different manner. To claim that would almost be like making them inferior to us to justify their use and abuse... Oh wait....

Where we are different animals is our capacity to reason and make informed choices rather than just respond to events with no thought involved. In light of that, it is interesting to note that in experiments, many monkeys chose to starve to death rather than inflict pain on fellow monkeys, even strangers. Humans on the other hand, pressed a button even when they believed they person on the receiving end may die. For no reward and under no threat. Just because they were told to.


Life, per se, may have no intrinsic value but it is a responsibility of being alive, if you have a choice, to minimise and eliminate the suffering of those around you. For me that includes animals. I understand that people have a choice, what frustrates me is the refusal to exercise intelligence and compassion. Open your eyes, see how much better off we would all be if our lives were not based around violence, cruelty and murder.

don't let the myths and half-truths promoted by the meat and dairy industry put you off

Dorset Logic wrote:
I bought some crisps and a star bar from my local shop along with some top deck once. They undercharged me by 5p.

We laugh about it now.

hammer wrote:
I am boycotting the Asda petrol station at Canford Heath because they are now making it compulsory to remove your motorbike helmet before putting the fuel in your motorbike and also when you pay! I am sure they will not ask the yobbos in hoodies and baseball caps to remove their attire before getting petrol! The staff there are also very rude!

hammer wrote:
I am boycotting the Asda petrol station at Canford Heath because they are now making it compulsory to remove your motorbike helmet before putting the fuel in your motorbike and also when you pay! I am sure they will not ask the yobbos in hoodies and baseball caps to remove their attire before getting petrol! The staff there are also very rude!

canfordcherry wrote:
How many people use these 'express' tills and don't check their reciepts, there must be some, makes you wonder how many times Asda and all the others have got away with it in the past! Where was the person who should have been at the monitoring station? They are paid to watch transactions occur or are they only looking out for 'shifty' characters trying to steal by not scanningitems?

uvox44 wrote:
that's not the real price though- the real price is the suffering of highly intelligent animals just to feed our totally unnecessary and unhealthy appetite for meat, meat-bad for your health, bad for the environment, bad for the animals you eat, a real lose-lose industry.

Telscombe Cliffy wrote:
I'm not veggie, but give me those Linda Mc Cartney sausages over those greasy tastless so called 'taste the difference ' supermarket mystery bags. Only a quid for six and healthier/tastier. Meat generally in supermarkets has gone down in quality/taste over the last five years or so.