wilko Posted October 4, 2007 Share Posted October 4, 2007 (edited) and you point is that because you don't drink it must be food poisoning from that particular restaurant.I've heard better logic from a drunk. I know this is the internet and you can more or less say what you want but if you wrote this elsewhere it could be construed as libel. You have little or no evidence to suggest what you're suggesting. If your tired maybe it's another bout of poisoning...be careful you never know where it will come from next......if you think like that You just can't let it go and you must have the last word. Don't you have anything better to do in your life than resurrect dead threads and have a go at the OP? I thought it was only TD that did that. You were the one who made a barely disguised accusation that my diagnosis of food poisoning was more likely to be caused by alcohol than a dodgy Indian curry that had probably been stewing and re-heated for days. And all I did was advise you that we don't drink. I believe it may be your logic that is a a tad wayward here How do you know that I don't have a sample of my wife's vomit bagged and frozen in the event of a libel suit Enjoy, Raro..... Can you show me one line that if read correctly backs up your assertions? - In fact I've probably, from what I can gather from you rather obscure interpretations said the opposite. May I respectfully suggest that a stool sample from your wife would be more useful and easier to collect? Which part of.... Entering a completely empty restaurant in late afternoon Being served our curries in less than two minutes - obviously not having been freshly cooked, and probably having being stewing for hours, if not days No alcohol for months, and no other food since early morning at home within 2 -3 hours the wife was puking up and shitting like a good'n and continued to do so for the next 24 hours, The wife has never before ,or since, experienced a similar episode .....is an obscure interpretation of the source of my wife's discomfort? You are obviously a representative of the "Indian caterers food poisoning protection league of Thailand" (ICFPPLT for short), so I shall cease this ridiculous debate and let the readers be the judge of who may be correct. Enjoy your Indians Actually I meant your assertions about me...but all the same.... The quickest food poisoning usually takes about 5 to 6 hours to take hold assuming it was indeed even that strain. At no time have I said you did not get food poisoning from that food but the more you say, the less likely it seems. .....and as I pointed out earlier most food poisoning takes 24 hours or more to set in....so not very likely and you BOTH didn't get it, yet you ate the same food........ However I do think it was rather foolhardy of you to order food from a place in such circumstances where you were clearly aware of the potential risk..... ***flame removed***sbk Edited October 4, 2007 by sbk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilko Posted October 4, 2007 Share Posted October 4, 2007 Lets drop the personal attacks here please. If it continues I see no point in continuing this thread. I thought we were behaving in a perfectly civilsed manner. A little jocular maybe, but definitely civilised Anyway this aspect of the debate has surely run it's course... What say you Wilko? personally I think it's rather witty! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilko Posted October 4, 2007 Share Posted October 4, 2007 I've been called some things in my time but ....."vanquished foe" - wasn't that something to do with vampires???.......never mind....got to be off topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbk Posted October 4, 2007 Share Posted October 4, 2007 Since we couldn't mind our manners ///CLOSED/// Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts