Later On

A blog written for those whose interests more or less match mine.

Archive for December 5th, 2019

Making a whole-food plant-based meal without really thinking about it

leave a comment »

In the introduction to my long post on my diet, I made what amounts to a promise:

It takes a few weeks to get the hang of a new approach to food when you change your diet, so I would recommend you stick with this approach for two months and then take stock, evaluating it in the light of your own experience. Changing your diet is difficult because it requires revising patterns of eating that you have learned so well you use them unconsciously. Just as you don’t have to think much to get around your own town or neighborhood, the diet you already know is easy because it’s based on established dishes and established routines. And just as moving to a new city requires a lot of work and attention at first just to find your way around, moving to a new way of eating requires thought and attention to figure out a new repertoire of “standard” dishes and meals. But over time, both become easy once again as new patterns are figured out, learned, and become familiar, and easy routines again emerge. See this post.

Today when it was time for lunch, I made this dish (which makes 4 meals) without even really thinking about it. My soybean tempeh (batch 9) was finished this morning (after fermenting for a total of 60 hours), and I had put some whole rye to cooking (1 cup intact whole rye + 3 cup low-sodium vegetable broth, simmered until broth is all absorbed — about 2 hours), and that was just finishing.

I put the Field No. 10 in the oven and turned it to 350ºF to heat, and did some chopping:

1 medium red onion, chopped
4 large cloves red Russian garlic, chopped small (about 1/4 cup)
1/4 medium head red cabbage chopped

I let those sit for a while — the garlic requires it, and the red cabbage benefits as well. Then I removed the skillet from the hot oven to a hot burner, turned off the oven, and put a handle glove on the handle. I then added to the skillet

2 teaspoons Partanna extra-virgin olive oil
the onion

I sautéed that for a while, then added the garlic. After that had cooked a minute, I added the cabbage, and also

about 6-7 oz homemade soybean tempeh, diced
about 2 cups fresh asparagus, cut into 1″ lengths (from the fridge, already cut up)
1 tablespoon dried marjoram
1 tablespoon dried mint
1 tablespoon freshly ground black pepper

I cooked, stirring frequently, until everything seemed hot, then I put a lid on it — this lid, a perfect fit for the No. 10 — and turned down the heat to let it cook a while.

While it cooked, I took a package of:

Liviva Shirataki Spaghetti with Oat Bran, 400g

The package has two 200g sealed packets of spaghetti, and I used one: cut open the packet, dumped the spaghetti into a small colander, rinsed it well, let it drain, dumped it onto cutting board, and made 4 horizontal cuts and 4 vertical cuts of the pile so that I had spaghetti pieces. I added that to the skillet, stirring to mix with the veg. I let it heat for a moment with the lid on, then turned off the burner. Four meals, just like that.

What I was semi-consciously thinking as I prepared the meals was something like: “Beans – check. Intact whole grain – check. Leafy green – check (the red cabbage). Cruciferous vegetable – check (red cabbage again). Allium – check (onion and garlic both — and those and the asparagus are excellent dietary fiber that nourishes the good microbes). Antioxidants – check (with a big boose from the marjoram and especially the mint).” In other words, I was more or less running through Dr. Greger’s checklist, ticking off boxes (see below). And for one serving I used about 2 tablespoons chopped walnuts as a topping, checking another box.

And it was both tasty and filling. I just though I could have added a blended lemon as well… But the thing is, I really didn’t have to think much to prepare the meal. This is just SOP now.

The konjac noodles add good bulk without significant calories. According to Cronometer, this clocks in at 230 calories per serving, assuming 4 servings per recipe (which seems right: I had two servings, one at noon, the other at 2:00pm for dinner). However, I did top one serving with about 2 tablespoons chopped walnuts = 95 calories.

Written by LeisureGuy

5 December 2019 at 2:47 pm

Why I’m glad I quit the low-carb diet: Low-Carb Diets and Coronary Blood Flow

leave a comment »

 

Written by LeisureGuy

5 December 2019 at 12:54 pm

Posted in Food, Health, Low carb, Science, Video

Inside the Cell Where a Sick 16-Year-Old Boy Died in Border Patrol Care

leave a comment »

The US government seems to be moving with some dispatch toward an authoritarian regime. Robert Moore, Susan Schmidt, and Maryam Jameel report in ProPublica:

Carlos Gregorio Hernandez Vasquez, a 16-year-old Guatemalan migrant, was seriously ill when immigration agents put him in a small South Texas holding cell with another sick boy on the afternoon of May 19.

A few hours earlier, a nurse practitioner at the Border Patrol’s dangerously overcrowded processing center in McAllen had diagnosed him with the flu and measured his fever at 103 degrees. She said that he should be checked again in two hours and taken to the emergency room if his condition worsened.

None of that happened. Worried that Carlos might infect other migrants in the teeming McAllen facility, officials moved him to a cell for quarantine at a Border Patrol station in nearby Weslaco.

By the next morning, he was dead.

In a press release that day, Customs and Border Protection’s acting commissioner at the time, John Sanders, called Carlos’ death a “tragic loss.” The agency said that an agent had found Carlos “unresponsive” after checking in on him. Sanders said the Border Patrol was “committed to the health, safety and humane treatment of those in our custody.”

But the record shows that the Border Patrol fell far short of that standard with Carlos. ProPublica has obtained video that documents the 16-year-old’s last hours, and it shows that Border Patrol agents and health care workers at the Weslaco holding facility missed increasingly obvious signs that his condition was perilous.

The cellblock video shows Carlos writhing for at least 25 minutes on the floor and a concrete bench. It shows him staggering to the toilet and collapsing on the floor, where he remained in the same position for the next four and a half hours.

According to a “subject activity log” maintained by the Border Patrol throughout Carlos’ custody, an agent checked on him three times during the early morning hours in which he slipped from unconsciousness to death, but reported nothing alarming about the boy.

The video shows the only way CBP officials could have missed Carlos’ crisis is that they weren’t looking. His agony was apparent, even in grainy black and white, making clear the agent charged with monitoring him failed to perform adequate checks, if he even checked at all. The coroner who performed an autopsy on Carlos said she was told the agent occasionally looked into the cell through the window.

The video makes clear that CBP, the Border Patrol’s parent agency, inaccurately described how Carlos’ body was discovered. Contrary to the agency’s press release, it was Carlos’ cellmate who found him, not agents doing an early morning check. On the video, the cellmate can be seen waking up and groggily walking to the toilet, where Carlos was lying in a pool of blood on the floor. He gestures for help at the cell door. Only then do agents enter the cell and discover that Carlos had died during the night.

Officials with the Department of Homeland Security, which includes CBP, wouldn’t say whether the scenes recorded by the camera during Carlos’ final hours were shown live on video monitors, as is the case in some Border Patrol facilities, and if they were, whether anyone had been assigned to watch the footage.

The video and other records reviewed by ProPublica document numerous missteps in the days leading up to Carlos’ final hours on the floor of Cell 199. Independent medical experts pointed in particular to the decision to send a 16-year-old suffering from the flu to a holding cell rather than a hospital as a pivotal mistake. . .

Continue reading. There’s more. And watch this 5-minute video:

Written by LeisureGuy

5 December 2019 at 11:55 am

Trump nominee who is anti-IVF and surrogacy was deemed unqualified. She was just confirmed.

leave a comment »

Reis Thebault has a report in the Washington Post that illustrates the degree to which conservatives ignore factual information:

The latest of President Trump’s confirmed federal judges has been assailed by fellow lawyers for her lack of trial experience and has been lambasted by reproductive rights advocates for her vigorous opposition to abortion, surrogacy and in vitro fertilization.

And in a near-party-line vote Tuesday, the Senate approved the nomination of Sarah Pitlyk, making the conservative lawyer the newest federal judge for the U.S. District Court in St. Louis. Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) joined the Democrats to oppose Pitlyk. Every other Republican present voted for her.

Pitlyk’s confirmation is a victory for Trump and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), who have sought a dramatic and deeply consequential reshaping of the federal judiciary, installing a dizzying number of judges and energizing Republican voters.

The new appointment has also been seen as yet another mark of the influence of the Federalist Society, a conservative nonprofit organization, over Trump’s selection of judges. Pitlyk is a Federalist Society member.

Pitlyk is also the latest of Trump’s nominees to receive a “not qualified” rating from the American Bar Association, which has long reviewed the competence of nominees for the federal bench. In a Sept. 24 letter to lawmakers, William Hubbard, chair of the ABA’s Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary, wrote that Pitlyk’s “experience to date has a very substantial gap, namely the absence of any trial or even real litigation experience.”

“Ms. Pitlyk has never tried a case as lead or co-counsel, whether civil or criminal,” Hubbard wrote. “She has never examined a witness. Though Ms. Pitlyk has argued one case in a court of appeals, she has not taken a deposition. She has not argued any motion in a state or federal trial court. She has never picked a jury. She has never participated at any stage of a criminal matter.” [Emphasis added – LG]

Her experience does, however, include clerking for now-Supreme Court Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh when he was a federal appellate court judge — just like Justin Walker, another recently confirmed federal judge the ABA deemed unqualified.

But Pitlyk’s defenders shrugged off the assessment, claiming the group has a liberal slant, something ABA leaders have denied. [Whether the ABA has a liberal bias or not, the statements I highlighted are simply statements of fact, and facts that show she lacks any trial experience, which I think is a disadvantage for a judge, just as a mechanic who has never driven or worked on a car might be seen as unqualified. – LG]

“President Trump once again demonstrated a commitment to the rule of law in advancing judicial nominees who are exceptionally qualified,” Kelly Shackelford, the president of the antiabortion legal group First Liberty Institute, said in a statement. “Sarah Pitlyk has spent most of her career defending our most fundamental freedoms, including religious liberty.”

After her confirmation, Sen. Josh Hawley, a Republican from Pitlyk’s home state, praised the new judge’s “strong legal experience [?? He obviously did not read the ABA’s summary of her lack of experience — or simply ignored it. – LG], sharp intellect, and commitment to the rule of law.

“I was proud to recommend her to President Trump,” Hawley said in a statement, “and I am confident that she will serve the people of Missouri as a principled and fair judge for decades to come.”

But in a speech on the Senate floor Tuesday, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) questioned just how evenhanded Pitlyk would be.

“Pitlyk’s record is extremely troubling and raises a number of questions about her ability to be a fair and impartial judge,” Feinstein said.

Pointing to dubious claims about abortion, the senator added: “It is disqualifying for any judicial nominee to make unfounded and unsupported claims, especially in a court of law.”

Her critics have highlighted inflammatory declarations such as . . .

Continue reading.

Written by LeisureGuy

5 December 2019 at 11:16 am

Three conclusions from Pelosi’s impeachment address

leave a comment »

Jennifer Rubin has a good column in the Washington Post:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) began and ended her brief address Thursday morning by citing the Declaration of Independence and the Founding Fathers. She solemnly reminded Americans that the nation was born out of protest against an “oppressive monarch.” The framers of the Constitution, she correctly stated, were worried about a president who would abuse his powers, specifically the risk of corruption by foreign powers and misuse of his office to get himself reelected. The remedy is impeachment.

Pelosi declared that President Trump had abused his power, undermined our national security and used his office to compel a foreign power to investigate a political rival. “Our democracy is what is at stake,” she warned. “The president leaves us no choice but to act, because he is trying to corrupt, once again, the election for his own benefit.” She admonished Trump: “The president’s actions have seriously violated the Constitution — especially when he says and acts upon the belief Article 2 says I can do whatever I want. No.”

With that, she asked House committee chairs to proceed with articles of impeachment. A great many questions still remain, such as the breadth of the articles (e.g. whether they reference the Mueller report) and whether the House will draft all articles now or wait on some issues for the resolution of court cases concerning witnesses and documents Trump is blocking. Pelosi’s remarks did not mention the Mueller report nor other constitutional issues such as violations of the emoluments clause, but that does not mean such matters won’t be included in proposed articles and put up for a vote.

First, Trump will join a select group of only three other presidents who faced articles of impeachment. In Trump’s case, the facts, as Pelosi noted, are largely undisputed, and the gravity of the offenses is undeniable. Whatever bluster Trump provides, this stain will remain on his presidency, and history will judge him accordingly.

Second, Trump on Thursday yet again demanded a quick vote on impeachment. Without merely being oppositional, the House should consider adopting a deliberate pace, both to give Americans time to absorb the facts and to allow a short amount of time to see whether additional witnesses can be pried loose. The facts are there, and the danger of continued abuse is present. (Trump’s personal lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani is in Ukraine right now, continuing his search for dirt, presumably with Trump’s assent or at least knowledge.)

Third, one cannot help but notice the difference in tone between the two sides. Pelosi was . . .

Continue reading.

Written by LeisureGuy

5 December 2019 at 9:29 am

How Much Vitamin C Should You Get Every Day?

leave a comment »

Much less than I thought. Michael Greger MD blogs at NutritionFacts.org:

“For many years, the RDA [recommended daily allowance] for all vitamins were based on preventing deficiency, with a margin of safety,” but the miniscule amount of vitamin C needed to avoid scurvy, for example, is not necessarily the ideal intake for optimal health. What might the optimal intake of vitamin C be? To find out, let’s ask the body. But how? By seeing how much the body absorbs and excretes, which I go through in my video What Is the Optimal Vitamin C Intake?.

When we swallow 15 mg of vitamin C, the amount we’d get eating about a quarter of an orange, our body absorbs nearly 90 percent of it. If we instead take a supplement containing 1,250 mg of vitamin C, our body seems to realize that’s too much and clamps down on absorption at the intestinal lining level, and we end up absorbing less than half. By doing experiments where the level of intake is ratcheted up slowly, we can see when the body starts to say, “Okay. That’s enough.”

That magic level of intake appears to be about 200 mg a day. When we take up to 200 mg daily, our body absorbs it all. Above that level, however, the body tries to block further absorption, suggesting that our “intestinal vitamin C transport mechanisms… have evolved to fully absorb up to about 200 mg of vitamin C” a day.

In addition, vitamin C is reabsorbed in our kidneys back into our bloodstream to maintain our vitamin C blood levels around 70 or 80 micromoles per liter, which is what we reach at a vitamin C intake of about 200 mg a day. Even if we take ten times as much in vitamin C supplements, 2,000 mg a day, our body will just pee and poop out the excess to keep our blood levels in that narrow range of 70 to 80 micromoles per liter. Based on these kinds of data, one might “propose that 200 mg is the optimal daily intake of vitamin C…”

We can confirm that hypothesis using disease data. For example, . . .

Continue reading.

Written by LeisureGuy

5 December 2019 at 9:23 am

25% discount on Fine slant

with 5 comments

A one-day sale. The Fine slant is extremely good — but I will say that it requires using very light pressure. Fortunately, it is a very light (aluminum) razor, so it reminds you: just barely touch your face as you shave.

From an email:

The nice thing about having a superior razor is that unlike most things, you can get daily benefits out of its everyday use.

It’s just like your go-to kitchen knife or your favorite hardware tool in the garage. The “Slant” Razor is a high performer at the top of its class that just makes it look easy.  It’s the ultimate shave, period.

Special price of $75 only thru tomorrow.  ($25 off regular price)

The Fine Slant Razor 

Since the advent of the safety razor, a diverse array of inventive methods have been devised to maximize the utility of this seemingly simple tool. None, however, can match the elegant yet perilous “torqued blade approach” when it comes to sheer results.<

The Fine Slant Razor has been uncompromisingly designed and built to deliver – everything from the lightweight aluminum material and highly polished surfaces, to the precision CNC machining utilized to shape each piece, were chosen specifically to benefit the comfort and efficiency of the resulting shave.

⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ A Joy to Use
“The razor is so light and maneuverable that my shaves go by so quick…I can do a quick two-pass shave and I’m set. The razor is well-built and looks great. The fit and finish are exquisite. It glides across my skin and stubble without effort…It has become my favorite razor in my den.”

⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ A Slant to Rant About
I received the slant a few days ago.  Shipped quickly and packaged nicely.  Love the presentation of the box it came in.  Nicely designed.  The razor is light but looks aesthetically pleasant.  Handle has a nice grip to it. –Frank G.

UPDATE: And just to be absolutely clear about it, I get no remuneration of any kind — kickback, discount, freebies, etc. — for my recommendations on my blog. I’m old school and simply base my recommendations on my own experience. I don’t want to get money for them, for that would transform it into work. See: Disclaimer page on this blog and also read Punished by Rewards: The Trouble with Gold Stars, Incentive Plans, A’s, Praise, and Other Bribes, by Alfie Kohn.

I was moved to post this update after reading “What Happens When You Buy From Gift Guides” by Amanda Mull in the Atlantic.

Written by LeisureGuy

5 December 2019 at 9:17 am

Posted in Shaving

Why Taxpayers Pay McKinsey $3M a Year for a Recent College Graduate Contractor

leave a comment »

Matt Stoller writes in Big about a very different attitude toward the world than that described in the previous post:

A few days ago, Ian MacDougall came out with a New York Times/ProPublica piece on how consulting giant McKinsey structured Trump immigration policy. Lots of people cover immigration. I’m going to discuss why the government buys overpriced services from McKinsey. (Spoiler: It goes back to, of course, Bill Clinton.)

First, I’ll be doing a book talk in D.C. on the evening of Dec 10th and one in New York on the evening of Dec 18th for my book Goliath: The 100-Year War Between Monopoly Power and Democracy. There’s info below my signature with details. Business Insider named Goliath one of the best books of the year on how we can rethink capitalism. If you have thoughts on the book, as always, let me know.

In case you’re in the listening to podcast mode, I was recently on Lapham’s Quarterly podcast and Pitchfork Economics with Nick Hanauer to talk monopoly and Goliath.

And now…

As regular readers of BIG know, my basic theory of the world is that most of our political economy problems are caused by these guys being in charge of everything.

The Point of McKinsey: Charging $3 Million a Year for the Work of a 23-Year Old

McKinsey has a lot of high-flying rhetoric about strategy, sustainability, and social justice. The company ostensibly pursues intellectual and business excellence, while also using its people skills to help Syrian refugees. That’s nice.

But let’s start with what McKinsey is really about, which is getting organizational leaders to pay a large amount of money for fairly pedestrian advice. In MacDougall’s article on McKinsey’s work on immigration, most of the conversation has been about McKinsey’s push to engage in cruel behavior towards detainees. But let’s not lose sight of the incentive driving the relationship, which was McKinsey’s political ability to extract cash from the government. Here’s the nub of that part of the story.

The consulting firm’s sway at ICE grew to the point that McKinsey’s staff even ghostwrote a government contracting document that defined the consulting team’s own responsibilities and justified the firm’s retention, a contract extension worth $2.2 million. “Can they do that?” an ICE official wrote to a contracting officer in May 2017.

The response reflects how deeply ICE had come to rely on McKinsey’s assistance. “Well it obviously isn’t ideal to have a contractor tell us what we want to ask them to do,” the contracting officer replied. But unless someone from the government could articulate the agency’s objectives, the officer added, “what other option is there?” ICE extended the contract.

Such practices used to be called “honest graft.” And let’s be clear, McKinsey’s services are very expensive. Back in August, I noted that McKinsey’s competitor, the Boston Consulting Group, charges the government $33,063.75/week for the time of a recent college grad to work as a contractor. Not to be outdone, McKinsey’s pricing is much much higher, with one McKinsey “business analyst” – someone with an undergraduate degree and no experience – lent to the government priced out at $56,707/week, or $2,948,764/year.

How does McKinsey do it? There are two answers. The first is simple. They cheat. McKinsey is far more expensive than its competition, and is able to get that pricing because of its unethical tactics. In fact, the situation is so dire that earlier this year the General Services Administration’s Inspector General recommended in a report that the GSA cancel McKinsey’s entire government-wide contractHere’s what the IG showed McKinsey was eventually awarded. . .

Continue reading.

Written by LeisureGuy

5 December 2019 at 9:11 am

Mr. Rogers Wasn’t a Saint, He Was One of Us

leave a comment »

David at Raptitude has an interesting post — interesting to me because he describes well how doing some internal exercises with your mind can change your perception (and thus experience) of the outside world. Stephen Covey in his book 7 Habits of Highly Effective People: Restoring the Character Ethic talks about how perception shapes behavior — and as a corollary the only way to change behavior is to see things in a new way. What he calls a paradigm shift is when you experience such a change of view not about a single situation but about your understanding of the world and how it works. Covey believes that major and permanent changes in attitude and behavior can occur only if you make a paradigm shift. If no such shift happens, the attitudes and the behaviors—which, after all, are driven by your view of the world—will drift back to what they originally were. (I’m quoting from this outline (PDF) of the book, but the outline is no substitute for the book. More info in this post.)

David writes:

Last week, a friend and I went to see Last Christmas. It was sold out, which turned out to be a stroke of holiday good luck.

We saw the Mister Rogers biopic instead, and I think it made us kinder.

The filmmakers had recreated the show’s details perfectly. The busy piano theme that accompanies the trolley. The way Mr. Rogers changed shoes while he sang. The unexplained traffic light in his living room.

The nostalgic effect was intense. Apparently I hadn’t seen much of Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood since I was its intended audience—a sensitive five-year-old, sitting cross-legged on our brown living room rug, bewildered by feelings.

At the time, I believed Mr. Rogers was an extremely kind man who talked directly to me and wanted me to be okay. Today, I think that’s exactly what he was trying to be, and what he was. By all accounts of those who knew Fred Rogers, he was really that kind.

The movie left us both wanting to be more like him, even by a little. By the time we left the parking lot we’d made a plan: a mutual commitment to practice metta, a Buddhist kindness practice we’re both familiar withevery day for the rest of 2019.

The practice involves thinking of people you know, and silently expressing well-wishes to them. May you be safe. May you be free from suffering. These phrases aren’t said with the belief that they’ll magically protect or assist their target. Their purpose is to generate a state of deep caring and concern, making it more familiar and available to you in daily life.

It sounds lovey-dovey but it’s very practical. You’re simply strengthening one of your many emotional capacities by exercising it on purpose.

Kindness changes what interests the mind

It’s only Day 8 now, but we’re both noticing a difference in how we feel.

My practice sessions usually generate a significant feeling of warmth towards others. This warmth doesn’t stay prominent throughout the day, but it does seem to lie closer to the surface, and emerges more often.

One-on-one interactions, even transactional ones, feel like they matter more. Moments at grocery tills and coffee counters unfold less by rote and more by feel, as though each one is a unique event.

Experiences among crowds—driving, grocery shopping, queuing in a shop, having lunch at a restaurant—feel more collaborative and less competitive. Even passing strangers on the sidewalk comes with a bit of an “us” feeling.

None of this is too surprising. But I’m also noticing differences in areas I don’t think of when I think of kindness.

I write morenneatly. I move less abruptly. I place, rather than toss, my laundry in the machine. Listening effectively—following an anecdote or explanation, even on a Youtube video—seems easier.

These little changes feel intuitive and effortless. I’m not trying to be kinder to my laundry. My body just wants to move more gently. I’m not listening better because it’s a kinder thing to do. I’m just more interested in understanding.

Something you feel, not something you do

I’ve always thought of kindness as a sort of . . .

Continue reading. There’s much more, and it’s worth reading — and applying.

So (in Covey’s terms) practicing metta induces a paradigm shift, and that pushes one’s behavior into a new groove.

In the comments on the post, David points out this clip — very much worth the 7 minutes it takes to watch:

Interesting contrast to the Congress of today. Sen. Pastore (D-RI) really listens to Fred Rogers.

Be kind to the world and you will feel better.

Update: Also in the comments, a link to the article “Mister Rogers And The Dark Abyss Of The Adult Soul,” by Anne Helen Petersen in Buzzfeed, which makes the interesting and valid point that most of us are taught, as adults, to block out our feelings.

 

 

Written by LeisureGuy

5 December 2019 at 8:20 am

Posted in Books, Daily life, Health

The other WSP Monarch with Darkfall and the iKon Open-Comb — and B&M Fougère

leave a comment »

I’m don’t recall why I ended up with two WSP Monarch brushes — I think one is something and the other is something else — but both are fine brushes, and the lather from the Icarus formula Darkfall from Declaration Grooming was extremely nice, with a fragrance well-suited to the season. (We’ve had a run of dark and overcast days, so the soap leapt out at me.)

The iKon open-comb is a superb razor. I think it was the first razor that made me realize that a razor could be very mild in feel and yet very aggressive in performance. Three comfortable passes produced a perfectly smooth face.

Barrister & Mann’s Fougère Classique is a wonderful aftershave. It was a limited run, and I noticed that the first two ingredients (in order) are alcohol and witch hazel. The fragrance is very present and very good. It’s too bad that so many of the wonderful soaps and fragrances are offered only once and then vanish from the market. I wish we could bookmark those that we like and return whenever we want to replenish the supply. Still, that’s the nature of life experience: fleeting, to be enjoyed in the moment.

Written by LeisureGuy

5 December 2019 at 7:53 am

Posted in Shaving

%d bloggers like this: