"tert in seattle" > wrote in message
...
> writes:
>
>>She can't have too many of them in stock. She must have gotten them from
>>someone else, I'm darned sure she didn't can them herself. And for all I
>>know, she might have meant that she bought fresh beans instead of frozen.
>>She's not always precise about cooking terms. But I'll find out, for sure.
>>I'd like to blame it on something specific that I can avoid in the future
>>rather than being afraid of eating there every time. And there's no way to
>>avoid eating going over there.
>>
>>I may just go the easy route and join some religion and/or cult with
>>strict
>>dietary restrictions that would preclude eating anything she cooks. Or
>>maybe
>>one with a lot of fasting. Sure, I'll come for dinner. Bread (that I made)
>>and water, please.
>
> The problem here as you probably know is that you can't do a proper
> investigation without all the data. I'm curious why you think it's so
> hard to tell them their food makes you sick.
Some people aren't going to handle that sort of news very well. Or, they
aren't going to believe it, and it's just going to go nowhere.
If I were them I'd want
> to know just as badly as you do what caused it.
If it was me, I'd want to know, too. This is a situation that requires a
little more finesse in having the conversation because of who it is.
And if they get all
> defensive and hurt feelings when you tell them their food made you sick,
> and not care that they're wreaking havoc on their guests' guts due to
> incompetence, well, ****em.
If they were casual friends, avoiding dinners there would be easy enough.
But when it's a relative, the situation changes a bit.
But you better make sure you have a good
> case. Make sure it wasn't something else.
>
That's why we didn't say anything the first time. Now it's getting a little
suspicious. But we're still going to approach the subject carefully. It
could still be an odd coincidence.
Donna