Kozy Shack puddings has a site that includes The History of Rice Pudding. Here's an exerpt:

"In Scandinavia, during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, rice was first introduced and served as a hot milk and rice porridge on special holidays. Leftovers were chilled, cut into thick slices, and fried."

(Note that Swedes seem to do this with most any leftover starchy food.)

Also, check out (and didn't you just KNOW there would be something like this?) The History of Candles, brought to you by the National Candle Association. (The Cliff's Notes goes like this: Tallow, beeswax, bayberry wax, whale spermaceti, petroleum paraffin, lightbulb.

This was in response to an on-line argument with the general annoying theme of "Guns don't kill people, people kill people.") Yes, incidents of this past week leave me ambiguous on the topic of gun control, but this note from Reg Harris makes one hell of an argument for at least enforcing the gun laws we already have.

-editor

I know this topic is starting to get long in the tooth, but I can't resist the lure any longer. My perspective is based on being on the receiving end of trauma via Medic. Emergency docs, and Trauma surgeons have long believed that guns played a significant role in increasing the rate of assault related morbidity and mortality (significant injury and death).

One of the best and most widely accepted studies to determine whether modifying a single variable (tight gun control vs less tight gun control) made a different was conducted at two trauma centers - here in Seattle and in Vancouver. This study looked at just the question proposed here... whether people kill people equally, but more sensationally in cases where guns are available. Seattle and Vancouver were chosen to eliminate the "American is just screwed up" variables by looking at two nearly identical cities. .

TITLE: Handgun regulations, crime, assaults, and homicide. A tale of two cities.
AUTHORS: Sloan JH; Kellermann AL; Reay DT; Ferris JA; Koepsell T; Rivara FP; Rice C; Gray L; LoGerfo J
AUTHOR AFFILIATION: Department of Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle.
SOURCE: N Engl J Med 1988 Nov 10;319(19):1256-62
CITATION IDS: PMID: 3185622 UI: 89040053

ABSTRACT: To investigate the associations among handgun regulations, assault and other crimes, and homicide, we studied robberies, burglaries, assaults, and homicides in Seattle, Washington, and Vancouver, British Columbia, from 1980 through 1986. Although similar to Seattle in many ways, Vancouver has adopted a more restrictive approach to the regulation of handguns. During the study period, both cities had similar rates of burglary and robbery. In Seattle, the annual rate of assault was modestly higher than that in Vancouver (simple assault: relative risk, 1.18; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.15 to 1.20; aggravated assault: relative risk, 1.16; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.12 to 1.19). However, the rate of assaults involving firearms was seven times higher in Seattle than in Vancouver. Despite similar overall rates of criminal activity and assault, the relative risk of death from homicide, adjusted for age and sex, was significantly higher in Seattle than in Vancouver (relative risk, 1.63; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.28 to 2.08). Virtually all of this excess risk was explained by a 4.8-fold higher risk of being murdered with a handgun in Seattle as compared with Vancouver. Rates of homicide by means other than guns were not substantially different in the two study communities. We conclude that restricting access to handguns may reduce the rate of homicide in a community.

Because of the tight control of variables between the two cities the only significant difference between the two cities was the tighter gun control in Vancouver, BC vs. Seattle, WA. The study conclusion, from a trauma care perspective, suggested a clear relation between tighter gun control and decreased violent trauma and death.

This was naturally just one study, but it was very well done.

In the interest of full disclosure... Although I was in private practice when this study was done, I was still on the teaching staff at the University of Washington and occasionally was a staff attending at some King County Health Department clinics at Harborview Hospital (where the Seattle portion was conducted) during the study. Although I was involved with some studies, but I NOT affiliated with this one, and have no vested interest in it other than what we can learn from it.

all the best,
Reg Harris, MD (just in case anyone forgot)

Throwing in another interesting abstract sent in by Reg... with some things to think about when you toy with the idea you might feel safer with a gun around the house.

TITLE: Protection or peril? An analysis of firearm-related deaths in the home.
AUTHORS: Kellermann AL; Reay DT
SOURCE: N Engl J Med 1986 Jun 12;314(24):1557-60
CITATION IDS: PMID: 3713749 UI: 86230707
ABSTRACT: To study the epidemiology of deaths involving firearms kept in the home, we reviewed all the gunshot deaths that occurred in King County, Washington (population 1,270,000), from 1978 through 1983. The medical examiner's case files were supplemented by police records or interviews with investigating officers or both, to obtain specific information about the circumstances, the scene of the incident, the type of firearm involved, and the relationship of the suspect to the victim. A
total of 743 firearm-related deaths occurred during this six-year period, 398 of which (54 percent) occurred in the residence where the firearm was kept. Only 2 of these 398 deaths (0.5 percent) involved an intruder shot during attempted entry. Seven persons (1.8 percent) were killed in self-defense. For every case of self-protection homicide involving a firearm kept in the home, there were

1.3 accidental deaths,

4.6 criminal homicides, and

37 suicides involving firearms.

Hand-guns were used in 70.5 percent of these deaths.