Slashdot Mirror


Is That Sushi Hazardous To Your Health?

pdclarry writes "A recent study by scientists at the American Museum of Natural History and Columbia University found that a piece of tuna sushi may not be tuna at all: 'A piece of tuna sushi has the potential to be an endangered species, a fraud or a health hazard,' wrote the authors. 'All three of these cases were uncovered in this study.' The study, published in PLoS ONE examined 68 samples of tuna sushi purchased from 31 restaurants in Manhattan (New York City) and Denver, Colorado. Some of these were from endangered species, others were not as labeled, and some were not tuna at all. Of these last, five samples labeled as 'white tuna' were from a toxic fish, Escolar, which is a gempylid species banned for sale in Italy and Japan due to health concerns. 'It can cause gastrointestinal symptoms ranging from mild and rapid passage of oily yellow or orange droplets, to severe diarrhea with nausea and vomiting. The milder symptoms have been referred to as keriorrhea [i.e. flow of wax in Greek].' Fraud in sushi is not new; Slashdot also reported study on mislabeling in 2008. This new study shows that some sushi can actually make you sick. The study was also covered by Wired."

55 of 554 comments (clear)

  1. Technically... by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 5, Informative


    If we're just talking about the tuna, then it's Sashimi.
    Sushi is vinegar rice, topped with other ingredients, such as fish.
    </pedantic>

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    1. Re:Technically... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But the English language does, and it's in Oxford.
      Bonus points for those getting the puns.

    2. Re:Technically... by Kelzar · · Score: 4, Funny

      Why can't we all just get along? It doesn't have to be this way! Can't it be both? Just like a whale is a fish and a mammal?

    3. Re:Technically... by tjstork · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Most good Japanese restaraunts have the difference between Sushi and Sashimi on page 1 of their menu, and more Americans than you think know the difference.

      --
      This is my sig.
    4. Re:Technically... by ArundelCastle · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Sushi, and other words, are defined by how people use them. And in the US that means rice and raw fish wrapped in seaweed for 99% of the population. Then english language, unlike C, does not have an ansi standard. It's all fluid.

      You flurbing pizzats and your fempy ticrans. Can't even warrup a mekci bommits.

    5. Re:Technically... by turbidostato · · Score: 5, Informative

      "The title asks if the sushi is hazardous, but the story is only about the fish"

      The story is not even that: is a non-story. Eating a mislabelled piece of raw fish might produce disease. Well, yeah...

    6. Re:Technically... by causality · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Slack language is a cause and/or result of slack thinking. For example, single TV episodes advertised as "all new" or the Dodge Ram commercial that states the truck is "all brawn, all brain" - sigh.

      What about ManBearPig? In the episode he was described as "half man, half bear, and half pig". So he's 1.5 individuals!

      And I definitely agree about the slack thinking. There is nothing quite like a disciplined mind that serves you well with efficient and effective action. Minds become that way by not yielding so easily to the temptation to cut corners and exhibit laziness and it starts with the tiny insignificant things first. Think of all the native English speakers who cannot correctly use words like "loose"/"lose" or "they're"/"there"/"their". It shows that they still struggle with basic usage of their native language, the sorts of issues that they should have worked out back in elementary school. It's noteworthy that foreigners who learn English as a second (or third) langauge tend not to make these mistakes.

      Having said that, I'll add that It's okay to have a hard time with something. Not everyone is a great writer or a good speaker and we all have something we're not very good at doing. What's not okay is when an excuse is made for it. The original mistake is just a simple error, like spilling the milk or working an equation incorrectly and getting the wrong answer. It doesn't make you a moron and it doesn't make you a bad person. It's the kind of error that anyone could potentially make because they're human.

      The excuse, on the other hand, is cowardly in a sense. It attempts to justify or dismiss something that is clearly incorrect, and all of this to avoid the process of saying "ah-hah, I made a mistake there. Now I know what to do differently in the future." I suspect that they think they are showing weakness or acting "inferior" if for even one moment they say "hey, you're correct; you are right and I had that wrong." The obsession over preventing the perception of inferiority at all costs, including the cost of accuracy, is why I call this cowardly. Nowhere in this can you find the security of knowing that you are who and what you are, whether or not anyone else thinks so.

      By and large, people who make those grammatical mistakes are full of excuses. It's the reason why they keep making the same mistakes and their writing does not gradually improve with usage over time the same way that other skills would. You would expect a blacksmith to make a higher-quality knife after 20 years of experience than anything he made when he first started out. So why do native English speakers fail to correctly apply rules of grammar that they should have learned and mastered as children?

      The blacksmith has a boss who expects a certain level of job performance, and if he is not internally motivated by an appreciation of his craft then this external motivation will spur him to improve his work. The average Slashdotter who reads and posts for leisure has no external motivation. The only reason why he'd try to get things right is because he values excellence. When you value excellence, you don't see yourself as a static person who scrapes by on the path of least resistance. You see yourself as a dynamic, growing individual who gradually learns more and becomes better at everything you do, whether or not anyone is looking, whether or not anyone is impressed, and whether or not you would have been penalized for a lesser effort. It's an internal thing. The reason to become a better speaker and a better writer is simple: you speak and write on a daily basis, so your life (and quite possibly others) is enriched by being able to do these things well. It's also hard to really enjoy doing something when you struggle to achieve even basic competency.

      The antithesis of this is a form of laziness with perhaps some elements of apathy. In that case, you're not really convinced that it's worth doing at all because yo

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    7. Re:Technically... by Shikaku · · Score: 3, Funny

      It's a party in my mouth and everyone's throwing up.

    8. Re:Technically... by Joe+Decker · · Score: 5, Informative

      Technically, Oxford's lexicographic philosophy is more descriptivist than prescriptivist. Their stated intent is to document, record and communicate the language they find through actual usage. Thus, Oxford, while the gold standard of English lexicography (more so British usage than American, but it's pretty strong in either case) is not to be confused with an "ANSI standard." It's an entirely different thing, a better analogy might be the SIbley Guide.

    9. Re:Technically... by Bobb9000 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why exactly do you think that, if you've studied language, you must necessarily give up on linguistic prescriptivism? This is the same problem I have with the more glib moral relativists - I accept that there is no "objective" standard, but that doesn't mean that I can't make prescriptive statements, it just means they're backed up by me, as opposed to nature or God. While the GP's views on the primacy of certain dictionaries may or may not be reflecting a less-thought-out view of language, it's far from "simply false". And nobody who has actually studied philosophy could make this mistake. :-)

      --
      Bobb9000 - raised by the wolves,
      Oxford education as phrased by the wolves.
    10. Re:Technically... by pjt33 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think the point of the story isn't that eating mislabelled raw fish might cause disease but that a lot of raw fish is mislabelled.

  2. Keriorrhea by pinkj · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I can finally be a lot more accurate about my bowel movements whenever I call in sick or I'm late for something.

  3. Yuck! Sushi! by Cornwallis · · Score: 3, Funny

    Eating sushi is almost as disgusting as eating raw fish!

    1. Re:Yuck! Sushi! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Cavemen discovered that cooking meat was a good idea some millennia ago and we've been doing it since then, but some people never got the memo because they were on an island or something.

    2. Re:Yuck! Sushi! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      So why don't you eat actual Sushi instead of Sashimi, with something like chicken if you don't like raw fish?

      The more you know...... the less food you'll hate over pure ignorance.

      Somehow raw chicken just doesn't do it for me.

    3. Re:Yuck! Sushi! by nacturation · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So why don't you eat actual Sushi instead of Sashimi, with something like chicken if you don't like raw fish?

      The more you know...... the less food you'll hate over pure ignorance.

      Don't you think the GP knows the difference given that he specifically claims that sushi isn't as disgusting as raw fish, thereby putting them clearly into different categories?

      The better your reading comprehension...... the more able you'll be to hear that whoosh sound.

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    4. Re:Yuck! Sushi! by adamchou · · Score: 3, Informative

      I'm certain you're joking about the salmonella in common chicken. However, chicken sashimi does exist and is safe, if you get it from the right chicken

  4. META comment: PLoS ONE by blind+biker · · Score: 3, Informative

    PLoS ONE, if you didn't know, is a public-access scientific journal publishing enterprise. No more use/abuse of scientists as creator of content AND reviewers of content (who both do this for free) and then only releasing the articles for profit, for the next 100 years. I am thoroughly disgusted by this business model which takes the work of us scientists, gives nothing back and then profits from it. Fuck that.

    PLoS ONE, I wish you luck. Please do crush the Natures, Sciences and Elseviers of this world. Pretty please.

    --
    "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
  5. Re:Oh, so that's what happened. by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 5, Funny

    "It can cause gastrointestinal symptoms range from mild and rapid passage of oily yellow or orange droplets"

    "Tubgirl Tuna", they call it.

  6. Possible none issue soon by WindBourne · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Just recently, Tuna was able to be bred. Prior to that, Tuna pretty much had to be caught in the wild. It would be nice to see DECENT aquaculture come to fruition.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:Possible none issue soon by drizek · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Aquaculture still doesn't solve it. You still have to catch all the fish you need to feed the Tuna.

      Humans should stop eating meat altogether, but if people can't manage that then at least stop eating top level carnivores.

    2. Re:Possible none issue soon by Nethead · · Score: 5, Insightful

      ...then at least stop eating top level carnivores.

      Not to worry, I don't eat humans on Atkins.

      --
      -- I have a private email server in my basement.
    3. Re:Possible none issue soon by wisty · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Or perhaps we should go for IVM (in-vitro meat)?

      I bet that the first commercial use for IVM will be feeding tuna, and other carnivorous livestock. That will fund the technology until it's ready for actually eating. As a bonus, we could clone rare (or maybe even extinct) species, and eat them too!

    4. Re:Possible none issue soon by WindBourne · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Actually, the idea is to breed the fish and then release millions upon millions of fingerlings into the various oceans. The real problem is how we got here and what will change. Basically, countries need to change. For example, the Atlantic tuna is about collapse. The reason is that overfishing is being done. By who? Well, America and Canada have STRICT limits on Canadian/American fleets which are checked pretty thoroughly. We also have foreign ships here that are under restrictions. Most are Chinese and Japanese. The japanese ships will dock at our ports, be checked, and then take the whole load back to Japan. OTH, The Chinese ships come in, drop off their max allowed load, and then show up back in China with a full load. IOW, they are taking another load on their way back (illegal, but easy enough to pull off from what I have heard). But that is not the full issue. EU has been horrible about putting restraints on their taking of the Tuna. And those nations that do, simply look the other way when the ship is over.

      What needs to happen is that ALL OF THE NATIONS that have fisheries need to protect these. It can not be so half ass anymore.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    5. Re:Possible none issue soon by Dunbal · · Score: 4, Informative

      It would be nice to see DECENT aquaculture come to fruition.

            Yikes, aquaculture is hard enough to do with fresh water fish. You want to do it with salt water fish? Good luck...

            It's one thing to have a salt water aquarium, at a zoo or for a hobby (read: slavery). But aquaculture involves raising fish at incredibly high densities in order to be profitable. These high densities mean that the slightest little change - in dissolved O2, pH, temperature, nitrites, ammonia, etc will kill your fish. Now you want to add salinity which not only has to be kept within limits but corrodes your pumps, pipes and valves, increasing the chances of breakdowns?

            No thanks! Have fun!

            PS: Fish die really really quietly, and they love to do it in large quantities. I know whereof I speak, I promise...

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    6. Re:Possible none issue soon by welcher · · Score: 5, Insightful

      As it happens, saltwater aquaculture is widely practiced from Norway to Chile. It basically involves putting a cage out in the sea and growing fish in it.

      Of course, there are lots of reasons not to encourage most fish-farming like the fact that it requires huge amounts of wild fish to be caught, mulched and processed to be fed back to the "desirable" fish species that is being farmed. That is, fish farming uses more fish than it creates, thereby exacerbating the chronic overfishing problems that plague the seas.

    7. Re:Possible none issue soon by WindBourne · · Score: 3, Informative

      It really does not matter. Multiple large fisheries are about to collapse all over the world in the next couple of years (due to overfishing). When they do, it is possible that the world will lose a significant chunk of food.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  7. Buyer Beware! by Chicken_Kickers · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I currently live in an inland city, hundreds of kilometers from the the nearest ocean. This is why I refuse to eat sushi at the restaurants here since the fish will not be very fresh. I am a microbiologist, so I don't even eat that much sushi anyway since I know what sort and how many bacteria will grow on uncooked fish. Regarding fake or poisonous fish, ask around first before you eat at any restaurant (not only for sushi). I am sure that bad reputation will spread very quickly. There are many websites and blogs that do restaurant reviews. Alternatively, you can make your own sushi as it is not very hard to do. If you can make a sandwich, you can definitely make sushi.

    1. Re:Buyer Beware! by jrumney · · Score: 4, Informative

      In many Western countries, the health authorities specify that fish served raw must be frozen first to kill certain types of parasite, so what you get in the middle of the country probably doesn't differ much from what you get on the coast. If you go to Japan, they rely on the chefs being trained to recognize and remove the parasites, so you get much better tasting fish and much higher chance of contracting food poisoning due to an untrained chef.

    2. Re:Buyer Beware! by Keebler71 · · Score: 3, Informative

      You say you are a microbiologist... have you ever heard of flash-freezing to kill parasites? I'm a pilot... have you ever heard of air cargo?

      --
      "It takes considerable knowledge just to realize the extent of your own ignorance." - Thomas Sowell
    3. Re:Buyer Beware! by TubeSteak · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I currently live in an inland city, hundreds of kilometers from the the nearest ocean. This is why I refuse to eat sushi at the restaurants here since the fish will not be very fresh.

      I remember reading this years ago:
      http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/08/nyregion/08SUSH.html?pagewanted=all

      Food and Drug Administration regulations stipulate that fish to be eaten raw ? whether as sushi, sashimi, seviche, or tartare ? must be frozen first, to kill parasites. "I would desperately hope that all the sushi we eat is frozen," said George Hoskin, a director of the agency's Office of Seafood. Tuna, a deep-sea fish with exceptionally clean flesh, is the only exception to the rule.

      It seems once a year, someone re-discovers the amazing fact that uncooked fish should not be served fresh.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    4. Re:Buyer Beware! by zippthorne · · Score: 3, Interesting

      When you make your sandwich, it doesn't matter much if your uncooked meat slices (most luncheon meat is "cooked" by injecting it with salt and spices) are a little thick or wide. You just try to get roughly the right total amount and balance it off with veggies.

      When you make sushi, if you don't get juust the right size, the texture is all wrong. Something that should be sublime and delicious becomes a disgusting gag inducer. Even the taste seems different. Inexperienced or American* sushi chefs can easily make that mistake, and home chefs all the moreso. (*"American" cuisine being of the "it's not the highest quality, so lets give them more of it" bent more often than it ought)

      And then there's Fugu, which is extra difficult because a little bit of toxin is part of the experience.

      I don't know how "sushi chef" compares to "executive chef" in terms of preparation difficulty, but it's definitely way above "sandwich artist" on the scale of difficulty.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    5. Re:Buyer Beware! by raddan · · Score: 3, Informative

      Freezing only kills some food-bourne pathogens. Parasites are only a part of the story. Camphylobacter needs to be frozen for extended periods of time to see a significant reduction in bacteria count-- probably not long enough from the time the ship catches and freezes the fish to the time it is served. There's a reason why (at least in Massachusetts) all raw food comes with a little warning on the menu.

      It's not like this is a new thing, or surprising, though. People have been catching all kinds of nasty things from raw seafood, like Hep A from oysters, for a long time.

    6. Re:Buyer Beware! by royallthefourth · · Score: 4, Funny

      You'll have to pardon my prejudice if I don't take culinary advice from someone named TubeSteak

  8. Colorado and New York by ninjackn · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Considering that Colorado is surrounded by land on all sides and New York is about as far away as possible from the pacific ocean (while staying in the US) i'm not surprised the tuna sushi you get there is a bit off.

    --
    [FUCK BETA 2.6.2014]
    1. Re:Colorado and New York by LordKronos · · Score: 5, Informative

      If only there were an ocean closer to New York. It would be even better if that ocean had tuna of its own. Best of all would be if the tuna there was one of the most delicious varieties around, such that it was the most used tuna for sushi/sashimi. Wow...one can dream.

  9. Endangered species? No by Hadlock · · Score: 3, Informative

    The chances that the fish you eat in sushi is an endangered species in a sushi bar is roughly the same as if you go to any other seafood restaurant. There are a lot of fish in the sea (no shit sherlock) - assume that 0.01% of fish are endangered. Now imagine dragging a net behind your boat. In theory at most 0.01% of all fish in your net will be endangered. Let's look at this more closely: Endangered fish are likely to exist in much smaller quantities, so while there might be 500 tuna per square mile of ocean, there might only be 1 of super-endangered-deliciousfish. Secondly, super-endangered-deliciousfish (SEDF) may only exist in the Bahamas, while the fisherman may be trawling off the coast of Georgia for Tuna, where Tuna are known to be abundant. Your likelyhood of catching a SEDF is highly unlikely.
     
    In any case the fish is dumped in the boat's hold on ice, and then sorted out when they get back to port. Fish are already partially ready for consumption at this point. It's not like fisherman go out in the forest and hunt individual endangered fish with rifles where they can see them. Making most any argument about endangered fish in a commercial fishing situation is completely retarded. The only argument for this is situations where opportunistic overfishing occurs in specific areas like when salmon swim upriver to lay their eggs, and this is already highly regulated.
     
    Also this article came out almost a year ago in the NYT this is old news(!)

    --
    moox. for a new generation.
    1. Re:Endangered species? No by deboli · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not exactly true. Fish schools are specifically targeted by trawlers, found by sonar and fished out. There is not much by-catch in these nets contrary to indiscriminate trawling or using longlines or gill nets. Bluefin Tuna, for example is only found in the Mediterranean and the chance of catching a endangered species that lives in the Arctic is zero. Of course Bluefin is already endangered and there lies the crux of the problem: We generally overexploit all fish stocks and should declare large areas of the oceans at no-fishing zones to recover fish populations and become sustainable in the long run.

  10. Better take the alternative by houghi · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Back to good old American Hamburgers. At least nobody ever got sick or died eating those, right?

    Or in other words: People do stuff with food that might be harmful. There is no reason to take out Sushi in particular.

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  11. great timing by Eil · · Score: 4, Funny

    I just sat down at the computer for dinner with my spicy tuna roll and this is the top story on the Front page. Thank you Slashdot, for ruining my appetite yet again.

  12. Re:Escolar by jrumney · · Score: 5, Informative

    The poison in Fugu (the only poisonous species that is eaten in Japan) is localised and easily removed by the specially trained chefs who are licensed to prepare it. Escolar has its oil spread throughout the flesh, so for people who are sensitive to it, it is unavoidable.

  13. Re:Tuna sushi by amRadioHed · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yuck, can can you possibly compare tuna sashimi with canned tuna? I hate that canned crap but tuna sashimi is heaven. Especially a piece of nicely marbled toro.

    --
    We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
  14. Re:Fire goooooood. by amRadioHed · · Score: 3, Funny

    Your lose.

    --
    We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
  15. Re:So technically by j_166 · · Score: 3, Funny

    That's OK, you should see how the Japanese butcher our words.

  16. Re:So technically by wisty · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Butchering words is how languages grow and develop.

  17. Please, no. by QuoteMstr · · Score: 3, Interesting

    PLoS charges scientists to get published. A big part of what caused the economic collapse is that rating agencies started to hand out AAA ratings to securities that didn't deserve them, and they did this because the issuers of these securities were paying the rating agencies. This PLoS ONE's business model is the same thing. PLoS ONE receives more money when it publishes more articles.

    Doesn't this just scream CONFLICT OF INTEREST to anyone else?

    Please, I'll take Science and Nature any day.

  18. Skip tuna altogether? by Fencepost · · Score: 3, Informative

    I've taken to pretty much completely skipping the tuna when I'm getting sushi - not because of concerns about which fish I'm getting, but because of mercury levels. Since commercial tuna are very large pinnacle fish, they tend to accumulate significant amounts of mercury - much higher than is found in smaller fish such as salmon. There's a nice little article about mercury levels in tuna sushi in NYC from early 2008: High Mercury Levels Are Found in Tuna Sushi (NYTimes January 23, 2008)

    --
    fencepost
    just a little off
  19. Re:So technically by LordLimecat · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And if you go into any restaurant and ask for sushi, you will be getting rice. This entire argument is stupid because its a japanese word used in japanese restaurants, and it follows the proper japanese meaning. However much american consumers may wish the meaning to change, theyre simply going to get the incorrect dish if they use the incorrect word.

  20. Re:So technically by wrook · · Score: 4, Informative

    In Japan sashimi is always served in sushi restaurants. A person may say, "Let's go eat sushi" and then at the restaurant end up eating only sashimi. But at a banquet sushi is almost never served. Sashimi on the other hand is virtually always served. A person would never say, "I went to a banquet and ate sushi" meaning that they ate sashimi.

    Historically, sushi is a snack food. It's kind of an all-in-one meal since the rice is included in every bite. In a way you can think of it as a sandwich. In western culture, bread was once seen as the most important part of a meal. With a sandwich, you eat the bread with the meal. But you can also eat bread separately with the meal. You can eat a roast beef sandwich, but it would be strange eat a piece of roast beef and call it a "sandwich" simply because you bought it in a sandwich shop.

    I understand your point about US usage of words being different. But I think you miss a lot of the Japanese food culture by confusing the terms. There is a lot of sushi that doesn't contain sashimi. In Japan, eating in a sushi restaurant is one of the easiest ways to accommodate vegetarians since there is a large variety of vegetarian sushi. On the other hand, sushi is not actually a very important part of Japanese cuisine. Sashimi is *far* more important. I couldn't imagine eating a high class meal without having sashimi. By understanding the importance of the different kinds of food, I think you will gain a better appreciation for what is one of the world's great cuisines.

    But, as always, YMMV.

  21. Re:So technically by Splab · · Score: 3, Funny

    How much is a gigabyte then?

  22. no more "toxic" than Olestra by jipn4 · · Score: 3, Informative

    The fish contains indigestible fats; as such, it has about the same effect as eating large amounts of Olestra: it's laxative and leads to oily "leakage".

    "The US FDA has warned consumers about potential mislabeling of oilfish [same thing applies to Escolar], but has concluded that any laxative side effects that occur are uncomfortable at worst and pose no health risk."

  23. Re:post by sticky_charris · · Score: 5, Informative

    I ate some Escolar on holiday in Poland. It is also known as butter fish or something like that. In Poland it wass omething like Maszlanka? I had two very large fillets (smoked) and was told nothing about any side effects. It was delicious - very soft meat and very meaty. I ate it all and then when I got up the next day (early) I got ready to go for a jog. I was wearing very small running shorts. Basically this fish causes a reddish oil to build up in your gut and it seems to be able to leak out whenever it wants. A small early morning fart whilst jogging is enough to empt about two egg cup fulls in one go. It has no smell luckily. I was running in the woods when this happened so I immediately got behind a tree and let the rest of it go, and then cleaned off my legs with some ferns. It lack of odour is quite surprising, given where it has been, and it comes out completely separate from other solids. I didn't know at that point that the fish was to blame. So I bought more on the last day at the Baltic, and took it pack to my in-laws house in Wroclaw. I had some for lunch the next day in their home. That night I was ready for bed, and was sitting naked on the bed, which had been lovingly made up by my mother in law (new white linen all round). My gut had been fine since that earlier incident and for a moment I forgot where I was and let out some gas that felt like it had been building up all day. I felt a dampness, and suddenly the world seemed to close in around me, as I realised what may have happened. I jumped to my feet and saw *loads* of bright red oil all over the white sheets. Sweat just literally started sprouting out of my head as I thought about what to do next... sleep in it? Go and wake the in-laws? At this point (three years ago) I wasn't yet married even, and I had to sleep separately from my (then) girlfriend. They were all asleep already. I ended up sleeping on the other side of the bed. I woke up late, to find my girlfiend standing next to the bed with a look of horror on her face. Why she later married me I have no idea. Needless to say, I haven't eaten any of that nasty but delicious fish ever since.

  24. Re:post by frenchgates · · Score: 4, Funny

    There has to be some kind of award that this post deserves. (Not to mention the girlfriend.) Mod this up. Is there an 'amusingly horrid' designation?

    --
    Syntax error: loose != lose, affect != effect, then!=than
  25. Magic by jDeepbeep · · Score: 5, Funny

    Because that's just what any employer wants to hear, more details about their employees' bowel movements!

    I've found there are two magic words, that when said together, sequentially, cause the listener to not care any further why you are going to not make it in to the office today.

    Word 1: Explosive
    Word 2: Diarrhea

    --
    Reply to That ||
  26. Re:post by BaronHethorSamedi · · Score: 4, Funny

    Or how about '-1, Too Informative'?