Students threaten hunger strike over university fossil fuel investments

191125 occupation support People & Planet UoM

Supporters of Manchester University students occupying part of the John Owen building in a call for fossil fuel divestment. Photo: People & Planet UoM

Four students are preparing to go on hunger strike from midnight in a protest with Manchester University over its ties with the fossil fuel industry.

The group are among about 16 students who have occupied a university building for seven days.

The students, from People & Planet UoM, have called on university authorities to divest what they say amounts to nearly £12m from fossil fuel companies.

The group said it had expected to meet university authorities today to discuss the protest. But a spokesperson said they were told at 8am they would not be allowed to attend the meeting while the occupation of a board room and corridor in the John Owen building continued.

Senior university managers had offered another meeting this afternoon if the group agreed to end the occupation, the group said:

“We will not be agreeing to this unless the SU [student union] officers get written confirmation that that University of Manchester will commit to divest.”

The spokesperson said:

“In the meantime, four of our members are continuing to prepare to go on hunger strike from midnight tonight if the University fails to meet with us to commit to divestment.”

191125 occupation support People & Planet UoM2

Some of the students occupying a Manchester University building in a protest about investment in fossil fuel companies. Photo: People & Planet UoM

People & Planet UoM said on Twitter this morning that a letter from the university authorities had implied the expected meeting would happen, whether or not they were still in occupation.

“We have stayed here all weekend believing we would meet on Monday. We feel betrayed, used, and deeply angered by this development.

“Our trust in the University, which was tenuous to begin with, has now deteriorated even further. This trust can only be rebuilt if the meeting goes ahead as planned: a meeting during which a commitment to full divestment is achievable.

“We would like to engage with the University, but meaningful engagement must happen on both sides. We need the University to engage with us as we have been engaging with them, including a genuine attempt to meet our demands. This has been sorely lacking thus far.

“We urge @OfficialUoM to reconsider their conditions for a meeting. Four of us have been preparing to go on hunger strike. If this meeting doesn’t happen + does not contain a commitment to full divestment, we will start at midnight tonight, in addition to other escalation.”

University of Manchester sent us the following statement

“We welcome the chance to meet with students as long as they are raised with us through the appropriate Students’ Union representatives. We have offered to meet on that basis.

“The University recognises that students have a right to protest peacefully, providing that this does not unduly disrupt the conduct of the University’s normal business. However, by occupying the corridor and meeting room they are causing significant disruption.

“On the issue of divestment, our policy is clear and in the public domain as part of our Socially Responsible Investment Policy (SRIP). We no longer invest in companies with more than 5% of their revenue from thermal coal (the type of coal used in power plants) or oil sands (also known as tar sands).

“We sincerely hope that the students will accept our offer and we look forward to meeting them in due course.”

A near-identical statement was given four days ago to the Manchester student website, the Mancunian.

36 replies »

  1. Manchester University is in Indiana?

    The University of Manchester should remove them from their courses and their student loans should be called in. Hunger strike? They should appreciate how lucky they are. They are an insult to hungry people across the world:

    “820 million people go hungry each year. After steadily declining for a decade, world hunger is on the rise, affecting 11 percent of people globally. There were an estimated 775 million undernourished people in 2014 – a record low – but that number increased to 820 million in 2018.”

    • Hear hear Paul! I concur…

      Peter was a lunacy statement!
      ‘Hunger strikes are one of the very few ways Protestors are allowed make their point‘?!? And what point would that be??

  2. [Edited by moderator]
    Hunger strikes are one of the very few ways Protestors are allowed to peacefully make their point and bring it to public attention without the threat of arrest!
    The Establishment controls the Judiciary and the Media locally and nationally so spreading any kind of anti-establishment message is tricky as established with the anti anti-fracking injunctions involving the onshore Oil and Gas Industry at Preston New Road Lancashire and elsewhere in the UK under scrutiny as we speak.

    • Hi Peter – who is “Tresco”?

      If they are upset with their University they should leave in protest. The second one in from the left at the back may not last too long – hopefully their end of hunger strike date is not too far away….

      I wonder where they got the idea from? Good old XR?

      This is much less intrusive on the Public than the usual XR methods of street blocking. Perhaps they should all go on hunger strike instead? And send their food to the 820million who woul appreciate it.

      Richard is right – this has nothing to do with fracking.

    • Yes indeed Peter quite right,
      Its not just Manchester University. The hunger strike protest is worldwide.
      18 Nov – Day 1 UK | Global Hunger Strike For People and Planet | Extinction Rebellion

      19 Nov – Day 2 UK | Global Hunger Strike For People and Planet | Extinction Rebellion

      20 Nov – Day 3 UK | Global Hunger Strike For People and Planet | Extinction Rebellion

      21 Nov – Day 4 UK | Global Hunger Strike For People and Planet | Extinction Rebellion

      23 Nov – Day 6 UK | Global Hunger Strike For People and Planet | Extinction Rebellion

      There are reports each day including today. Its also dangerous so many are stopping today.
      Johnson refused to talk. The representative was arrested for asking. Corbyn refused to talk. The representative was arrested for asking. The only party to talk with the hunger strikers are Lib Dems and Green Party.
      People & Planet UoM have a particular gripe with Manchester University ties with fossil fuel companies. The worldwide hunger strike is to highlight the plight of people worldwide who have not enough food to eat. And not enough water to drink. That is where government efforts should be. Not fat profit for fat offshore bank accounts.
      Worldwide the hunger strike is precisely to demonstrate the worldwide situation where people do not now have enough food or water.
      The situation here will not be any better. Crop growers in UK are already suffering. Too much heat in the summer. Too much flooding in the winter. Shortages and food scarcity will follow.
      Have you noticed how the fossil fuel patrol leap on things that are potentially embarrassing for them.
      Must be an exceedingly embarrassing subject for them.

        • Greetings from the University TP.
          You didnt know did you? Not so omniscient then? And you have no answer either.
          [Edited by moderator]

          • TP? or PT?

            Answer – see post at the top:

            “The University of Manchester should remove them from their courses and their student loans should be called in. Hunger strike? They should appreciate how lucky they are. They are an insult to hungry people across the world:

            “820 million people go hungry each year. After steadily declining for a decade, world hunger is on the rise, affecting 11 percent of people globally. There were an estimated 775 million undernourished people in 2014 – a record low – but that number increased to 820 million in 2018.”


            So at least we agree there are a lot of hungry people in the world, and as John notes below, a lot more food than we currently need. The issue is how to ensure everyone gets their fair share. Thank you for doing your bit for the hungry people…..

            Perhaps the hungry people should all take psychedelic substances instead of food as recommended by Gail Bradbrook a co-founder of the Extinction Rebellion environmental movement?

      • Well, if the strike is about those worldwide without enough to eat and drink maybe the students could leave, get a job and pay some tax to allow the UK to continue to pay the foreign aid to help these people eat and drink. Maybe they could do VSO-or whatever it is called now-to go and help those without enough to eat and drink.
        What I can state for certain, such efforts would involve fossil fuel!! For example, pumps to irrigate, transport, tractors.

        Crop growers always suffer in the UK, Anaiya. Sometimes too wet, sometimes too dry, sometimes disease-and when everything is ideal, yields are good and the price drops like a stone! Ever thus. Your comments show who should be embarrassed. Do you never consider there just may be people posting on this site who have studied and operated within agriculture? Yes, you might excite a few who know nothing, but you expose your lack of reality to those that do know the subject.

        But you are not alone. I even heard someone stating there would be a spud shortage and hike in price following recent floods. Ermm-who has spuds still in the ground in mid November in England? Planting cereals for next year may be an issue, although moving from winter sowing to spring sowing can be followed to accommodate that-and has been the case for many years.


          • Thankyou Paul. An excellent link. Its not just that food production is being endangered directly in UK either. One of the seldom discussed problems is that we are in the sixth major extinction event in history. Animal and insect populations are crashing worldwide. Many of those are fundamental species. Once depleted, then all the other species that rely on them starve and die off too. And that includes us.
            Climate change impacts on food production

            UK flooding: Flood warnings remain as squally weather predicted
            Embarrassing hardly touches it.

          • Thanks for that Paul.

            The point is, that has been the case within agriculture for a very long time. Most seeds planted in the Autumn in UK are cereals or rape. If the soil is not suitable to plant in the Autumn farmers then look to plant other seeds in the Spring. Not ideal, but farming never is. “Flaming” June is the ideal time to cut hay, yet you might need to trawl through decades to find when farmers had the ideal time for that, and records over the centuries show exactly the same.

            Farmers in parts of UK who have planted in the Autumn may receive better prices next year. Those farmers who now look to plant in the Spring obviously will suffer, and the situation may be reversed the following year. How long has agriculture suffered a very high suicide rate? Unfortunately, a very long time, because it is so dependent upon such outside factors.

            Perhaps there will be less cereal being processed for bio-diesel next year in the UK? In which case, UK will need more diesel from beneath the ground. That would not be a bad thing, and for those concerned about food for other countries how about the wealthy West using cereals to fuel their vehicles when kids are starving elsewhere for the lack of a loaf of bread?

        • No MC you are wrong.
          Crops are failing worldwide. There is no accommodating wild weather swings and pollution.
          Soil exposed to UV A,B and C due to radiation through ozone holes. The sunlight now burns severely after only a few seconds. The tops of trees are dying off.
          The wrong growing methods forced on producers to get subsidies, a legacy of WW2 policies. hedge row destruction prevents insects from reaching the crops. Bees are transported and suffer overheating and suffer CCD.
          Soils depleted of nutrients due to intensive over production and too much chemical fertilisers. Pesticides that kill bees and all other pollinating insects and animal species such as bats.
          Too dry in summer. Too wet in winter. Soil cracks and crumbles and becomes compacted and unusable. The growing season reduced to just a few months each year.
          Decade long droughts and flash floods washing away soils down to bedrock in many countries. Sinkholes and deteriorating soil structure.
          Burning forests for growing land that lasts just a few years. The South American Amazon Forests are being burned at a greater rate than ever before.
          Mono cultures deplete soils and prevent natural diversity which renews soil quality. Too much ploughing destroys soil structures. Meadowland is built upon. Flood pains are built upon. Flash floods run through areas never before suffering floods, stripping off the soil.
          Record highs in greenhouse gasses worldwide announced today.
          Not such a pretty picture is it.

          • No, I am correct so you then deviated into things happening or not, elsewhere in the world. Except, I would suspect by your comments you know nothing of them first hand.

            If I look in my back yard, apart from new housing, the biggest loss of agricultural land is where it has been covered by solar farms. The one closest has opened the flood gates to even more new housing as the developers argued that if such land could be used for a solar farm it could be used for a housing estate-and they won. Previous such housing estates have immediately caused flash flooding as they have covered the land that would previously have absorbed the rain-now tiny gardens quickly covered with patios. Some agricultural land that farmers looked after in respect of drainage to assist their farming is now unmaintained in respect of drainage now it is not being farmed.

            Those areas of UK that have suffered floods recently, take a look at new houses planned. Population of UK growing by 500k per year, so new housing required. Maybe look at that as an issue?

            If you want to go farther afield, be careful. You may find some of us have been there and studied what is happening, rather than relying upon a keyboard for information. Perhaps if you visited such areas of the world you might find that the local populations, many of them now officially middle class-whatever that means-want the same as others have enjoyed. I have worked upon the realities of how 10 billion may be fed, and it can be done. Those who will have to achieve it will get on with it, whilst those who wish to create Eco-anxiety around the situation will be something they will also have to deal with. Maybe you should argue that China reverts to the one child policy? Good luck.

            “Eco-anxiety, or climate change anxiety, can cause sleepless nights, intense bouts of worry and, in severe instances, may also lead to drastic shifts in peoples behaviour”

            Interesting that this one form of anxiety now has its own definition, and can be seen in action on this site every week. Anxiety has become the worlds largest industry, so hardly surprising there is an eco version. Anxiety is a very destructive force, which is why it is now utilised for so many causes, but excuse me if I decide not to take part.

            • Another bunch of empty words from the angry old men? I do seem to upset their little worlds with ease. I should bottle it and sell it on Amazon. The one not burning i mean.
              No MC. You are still wrong. Where have you answered anything? There is a whole list of points there. Where have you addressed or acknowledged any of them. It was not me who deviated into those odd little cul de sacs of yours. That was your doing. Maybe to avoid having to address the problems that face us all.
              Do you expect any problems originating from USA, China or India or the Amazon Rain Forests or the fires in Siberia and Australia and elsewhere. Including from right here to stop at your doorstep? At the channel? At the county border even? Climate knows no boundaries. I mentioned the world right from the start. It is you who wish to restrict everything to the confines of your back yard.
              No the problems are everywhere. We cannot separate UK from the rest of the world. We are all on the same big planet. That’s why we have to start here. Now. Vainly attempting to isolate any climate change degradation from one tiny country in isolation denies the enormity of the problem. It must be really embarrassing to be so easily upset.
              Another thing. You attempt to make all sorts of spurious personal remarks about me. More deviations. You know nothing about me. You dont know what your are talking about. Provide proof.
              The only anxiety i see is in your posts. There is a fearful desperation to avoid having to address the real climate issues. So its all deviations and pointless empty here-say about nothing in particular. I have no eco anxiety, its all yours. I have no climate change anxiety, its all yours. I have no denial. That is all yours. Maybe better have some sleepless nights about it. It might do some good. You never know. Apparently, you never will.

              • I have made NO personal remarks about you, yet you call me old and angry! Good try, but it is simple to see what you are attempting-AGAIN. (We have been there before and it seems to be a defence mechanism you use a lot.)

                I explained my views about anxiety, yet is you who posted a series of pictures of individuals showing all the symptoms of anxiety to support your argument. I remain a happy individual and will let people make up their own minds without entering into areas of debate that I lack knowledge of.

                And yes, I know there are problems around the world, because I have been there and seen them. I have also spoken to people in those areas and have heard what their aspirations are. I did not lecture them their aspirations were wrong as it would have had no impact, and probably achieved physical conflict. Maybe you could persuade them better regarding reducing the 95%plus impact they already have compared to UK, and which will grow much further. If you feel that is realistic then I applaud your enthusiasm, but I recognise it is not realistic.

                When Putin states to Dr. Fiona Hill that US fracking is a threat to Russia, that means Putin would like USA to produce less oil and gas so Russia can produce more and export to them and other parts of the world. Which happens I would bet upon, but it makes no difference. The result upon climate change is just the same-or, thereabouts.

                I sleep very well thank you, and wake to view the nocturnal activities of a group of antis. By the way, please show me where I have denied climate change. I know it is easy to debate against a fictional narrative, but you will feel so much happier if you do so against a real one.

                • These are your words arent they?
                  [Except, I would suspect by your comments you know nothing of them first hand.] Personal remark. Not true. Prove it.
                  [“Eco-anxiety, or climate change anxiety, can cause sleepless nights, intense bouts of worry and, in severe instances, may also lead to drastic shifts in peoples behaviour”] That is an implied personal remark. I have no anxiety. And said so. That was your accusation. Not mine.
                  [Interesting that this one form of anxiety now has its own definition, and can be seen in action on this site every week. Anxiety has become the worlds largest industry, so hardly surprising there is an eco version. Anxiety is a very destructive force, which is why it is now utilised for so many causes, but excuse me if I decide not to take part.] That is an attempt to imply a personal remark implying anxiety again. I made no such suggestion. That is your implication. Not mine. Again not true. Prove it.
                  If those are not personal remarks in these now familiar convoluted intrigues. Then maybe better to be more careful when translating them into English. If you dont want people to take you at your word. Or implied word. Which i see is your forte. Then modify the words to exclude any such implication. Or you will be taken at your word. And it will be rebounded.
                  That pretend victim defence mechanism when challenged is self defeating. It rebounds too easily back to source. I see others say the same thing. And looking at similar previous posts. Those surreptitiously sly implications abound too consistently to be accidental. It doesn’t fool anybody to deny and act the victim.
                  Where have you denied climate change? I didn’t say you denied climate change. I said. [The only anxiety i see is in your posts. There is a fearful desperation to avoid having to address the real climate issues.– I have no denial. That is all yours.] The implication, again, as always, is yours. Or don’t you read your own posts any better than you read mine?
                  Enough of this time wasting nonsense.
                  As you say.
                  I know it is easy to debate against a fictional narrative, but you will feel so much happier if you do so against a real one. A rebound for you to savour.

                • Sorry, but your posts are starting to look foolish. My quote about eco anxiety simply repeated what is a widely accepted and stated definition of a condition. Nothing to do with you, as an individual-as far as I know. I could provide a definition of the common cold, but it would be a definition of a condition not a person.

                  But if you would like another reference:

                  Caroline Hickman-Bath researcher:

                  “Climate change anxiety affecting children’s mental health.”

                  Once you have recovered from the ageism and sexism you displayed at 7.17pm, perhaps do some research on the above?

                  (In a spirit of helpfulness, Paul is pretty astute at moderating personal remarks on this site. When he has not moderated a remark it usually is a pretty good signal that it is not personal. Perhaps start from that point and you may save a lot of time.)

                • [Sorry but your posts are beginning to look foolish.] That precisely describes your posts on this subject. And still you do not address the climate issues. Instead you dwell exclusively on personal remarks and implications of anxiety. That is your forte. That is your hang up. Not mine.
                  The rest i will ignore as it is merely self justification and not convincing at all.
                  Sexism and ageism is another of your own hang ups considering previous remarks about students. Acting the victim is another favourite hang up apparently.
                  [I know it is easy to debate against a fictional narrative, but you will feel so much happier if you do so against a real one.] Another appropriate rebound for you to savour.
                  This achieves nothing. If you cant or wont address the issues of climate change like an adult. Then I will treat this as a dont know, cant say on this subject.

                • Getting back to the subject. Its not just students.
                  26 Nov – Day 9 UK | Global Hunger Strike For People and Planet | Extinction Rebellion

                  Ed Davey meets Extinction Rebellion Hungers Strikers in London

                • I will carry on’ | Day 7 of the Hunger Strike continues | 24 November 2019 | Extinction Rebellion

                • I address climate change each day, Anaiya, as and how I feel appropriate. Not as and how others feel appropriate.

                  So, yes, I have tried two hybrid cars, and found they were poor.

                  I have installed an air sourced heat pump, and that is great and efficient.

                  I have fact checked (seems it was more difficult for some to determine whether independent, or not, but I had no problem) triple glazing versus my current aging double glazing. Not at the top of my list.

                  I am fortunate to have a large garden, so grow most of my own vegetables, and am able to plant new trees occasionally. I have plenty of bees, bats, badgers etc. etc. that visit that I enjoy and I assist.

                  I no longer have a passport having travelled much of the world in my youth, so feel no desire to do so now.

                  All my single use plastic is incinerated to generate electricity, my hard plastic separated for re-use.

                  But, I do not accept the constant false narrative by many.
                  BBC telling us spuds will be expensive due to climate change. Mine are 30p/kg, grown within the fracking “fields” of the UK! BBC tells us turkeys will be expensive due to heat and breeding performance in the summer. I managed turkey flocks in 1976 (check summer temps. then), absolutely no problem. Maybe due to the fact most turkeys are bred in UK via A.I., eggs incubated in incubators and breeding turkeys are pretty adept at dealing with hot temperatures-as they come from America!

                  I also note that for all of the declared support for XR in some places, Australia comes to mind, that when push comes to shove, environmental issues are still not the number one issue to the majority of voters. The Labor party made that mistake recently. They lost the election.

                  Many people associate with being green, and operate accordingly. Many less are Green or XR.

        • The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is the United Nations body for assessing the science related to climate change.

          Climate change could trigger an international food crisis, UN panel warns
          PUBLISHED THU,
          PUBLISHED THU, AUG 8 20194:00 AM EDTUPDATED THU, AUG 8 201910:59 AM EDT

          Change food production and stop abusing land, IPCC climate report warns
          By Isabelle Gerretsen, CNN

          Updated 1537 GMT (2337 HKT) August 8, 2019

          From Damian Kahay
          Emissions rise again
          Greenhouse gas concentrations again break records: Atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases once again reached new highs in 2018. Using data from monitoring stations in the Arctic and all over the world, researchers say that in 2018 concentrations of CO2 reached 407.8 parts per million (ppm), up from 405.5ppm a year previously. They also spotted an alarming increase in Methane. Methane is now at 259% of the pre-industrial level and the increase seen over the past year was higher than both the previous annual rate and the average over the past 10 years.”There is no sign of a slowdown, let alone a decline, in greenhouse gases concentration in the atmosphere despite all the commitments under the Paris agreement on climate change,” said WMO Secretary-General Petteri Taalas.

          The data will frame the discussion at the next EU summit where leaders will aim to endorse a plan to reach net-zero by 2050 – something already criticised as now insufficient by some scientists and campaigners because emissions have risen so much faster than hoped. While most countries endorse the unprecedented transformation, Poland leads a small group of eastern nations demanding financial assurances.

          Writing in Yale Bill Mckibbon paints the picture of the new maths on climate change. The point he makes is that with the science so stark, and national efforts to limit consumption and burning of fossil fuels so woefully inadequate, I mean – even if nations keep to their Paris pledges – efforts to ban the extraction of the stuff where-ever it is found are key. He also points to one hopeful figure. In New York 45% of emissions come from just 2% of buildings – they could be big rewards for focusing on them.
          I’m reading
          The New York Times reports on the impact of climate change and poorly structured government policies on India – and in particular – on water in India. The future will be far too much water, or too little – the paper warns – with decades of short-sighted government policies are leaving millions defenceless in the age of climate disruptions – especially the poor.

          The Guardian lists the five global frontiers where forests are being destroyed, making the point that it’s not just South America. But in South America there is a new potential driver of deforestation. Mongabey reports on the arrival of Palm Oil to the region. Four Latin American countries already fill out the list of the world’s top 10 palm oil producers, with Colombia coming in at number four, and Ecuador, Brazil and Honduras placing seventh, ninth and tenth, respectively. Mexico may soon join the list, with a plan to cultivate an additional 100,000 hectares of the crop in the coming years.

          And finally, The New Scientist asks which UK political party is greenest judging by their general election manifesto. Spoiler: It isn’t the Conservative party who won’t be showing up at this week’s climate debate.

          • This New Scientist?


            Let’s see who wins the election next month and how relevant “greenest” is to most voters. Perhaps people will consider what is actually realistic, doesn’t damage our economy, and allows us to continue to compete on a global basis? Perhaps voters will look at the rest of the world and realise that the Green Party aspirations are pointless on a stand alone basis?

            You need to add chocolate to the list of major causes of deforestation – cocoa planting in West Africa, with palm Oil is significant. I hope you don’t eat chocolate…..

            Very few people who watch Channel 4 news will be voting Conservative – but BJ may still turn up. Brexit will probably decide the election.

            Perhaps students will be voting twice again? Hopefully this time they will be founds out and prosecuted.

            • Is there more than one New Scientist? Is that the New Climate Denial Scientist? Never read it.
              I read of Dr. Gail Bradbook’s comments about psychedelics. XR is not led by any one person or individual ideology. Other than truth and get the subject of climate change out there. We all follow our own conscience. We dont need to follow. We dont need to lead. We just are. We are all the true reality of environmental receptors, just as you are.
              But it does raise an interesting issue. And that is this.
              What do you know about human physiology and psychology? Do you know how speech and consciousness suddenly originated in humans? Biology in general maybe? Because there is something you may not understand. All fauna, and flora also, are electrochemical in nature. We humans no less or no more. Our environment and how we react to it. What we consume as food and water and how we feel, physically and emotionally. Is essentially synthesised by our electrochemical nature. Did you know for example that we have organs in our brain and elsewhere that cause us to feel a particular way in every situation. The amounts produced by those organs are tiny and very pure. What ever we consume, however we feel, at every second of every day, is essentially controlled by tiny amounts of very pure chemicals.
              We would just be a mindless pointless machine without them. Did you also know that many plants produce similar chemicals. Many of those are able to fit in the chemical keys and unlock of our cells to reproduce similar effects to ones we produce ourselves. That is why we feel good eating certain things and very ill eating others. But all have an effect on us physiologically, psychologically and emotionally. Even cognitively.
              Everything we do is essentially an electrochemical action and reaction to achieve a particular result. The sex drive for example can drive animals to do the strangest things. Entire physiologies are manufactured to carry out the sexual drives. That is almost entirely the action of hormones which are neurochemical in nature. The results are physiological. Physiological. Neurochemical. Emotional. And cognitive.
              In very real fact, everything we do. Everything we consume. Everything we think and say and hear and smell. Is all a cause and a result of an electrochemical stimulus and reaction. In fact there is nothing we do or say or think or feel that isn’t electrochemical in nature.

              There is a theory, much debated, and vehemently denied. That humans only became sentient because we ate the mushrooms and plants that animals around us ate. And tripped out on some of them. Shamans and medicine men, herbalists and the original homeopathic physicians and pharmacists and doctors all practised that. Modern allopathic medicine is nothing other than that. Most of them are either plant based or emulate plant chemistry. all of them have side effects, or maybe better, just effects, that are not part of the potential required effects.
              Myths such as Saint Nicholas. Witches. Warlocks. Supernatural beings and gods. Beings that fly and produce miracles. May have had a root in the consumption of psychedelic mushrooms and plants, like those consumed by reindeer’s, cattle and so on. Alcohol and smoking weeds such as tobacco is only the accepted versions of the same thing.
              Every cup of tea or coffee has a psychological effect from its electrochemical stimulus of our physiology. The same goes for alcohol, smoking weeds, drugs all of them. And everything else we do to feel good or drown sorrows. They are all psychedelics. We ban some. We promote and profit from others. That is all.

              So, do i condemn others for taking coffee. Or tea. Or smoking tobacco. Or enjoying sex. Or getting off on being angry all the time? Adrenalin is another electrochemical psychedelic. As can be seen often here on DrillorDrop.
              Do i condemn others for trying more exotic and banned substances if it means opening the mind beyond the mundane?
              If that is the only reason. No. If its just to get high and waste their life. Yes.
              Do i condemn others for using accepted drugs because it is accepted and legal, like tea and coffee and other accepted drugs of the body and mind to feel better or get up in the morning?
              If that is the only reason. No. If its just to get high and waste their life. Yes.

              Another thing. For example. Consider fossil fuel oil and gas and the resulting contaminants and combustion pollution products. Also have electrochemical and physiological and cognitive and emotional effects on environmental receptors.
              If that wasnt so, we wouldn’t be having this discussion now.
              Maybe better to be careful not to condemn in others. what you are guilty of yourself. Whether that is accepted or forbidden is a purely matter of conjecture and law. Profit and convenience……

  3. Well said Paul.

    Can’t see any within the photo will suffer too greatly from missing some food.

    Probably not too much to study with lecturers on strike. In my day we used to take issues through the Student Union and obtain their help. But always a few who think they as individuals are too important to follow such channels.

    • DrillOrDrop covers the onshore oil and gas industry in the UK, rather than just fracking.

      The debate on whether institutions such as universities should invest in oil and gas may have an impact on UK activities.

  4. I take it non are studying for the MSc in Petroleum Engineering…, at Manchester University hahaha!! The mind boggles…

Add a comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s