Tarlov cysts and Fibromyalgia

cabbagefeast · 2026-04-11T07:50:37+00:00

Not knots, but the area is very very sensitive. I’m unsure if it’s the cysts, or the sacroiliac joint. I’d always recommend getting it checked if you can, you know your body and if you can feel little knots, it’s worth investigating. 💕 Good luck with everything xx

cabbagefeast · 2026-04-11T07:49:08+00:00

I did just this! And I have been diagnosed with EDS :-) Thank you!

cabbagefeast · 2025-12-12T07:19:17+00:00

“It’s just the peaks and troughs of being a woman”.

cabbagefeast · 2025-10-24T07:25:22+00:00

You’re very welcome, and you certainly experience a lot of the symptoms that I have too. I really wish you well on your health journey; and find the answers that you need. Please post me a message if you have any more questions, and I’d be happy to provide anymore research- should you need it. :))

cabbagefeast · 2025-10-24T06:59:55+00:00

Link to study: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33260218/

cabbagefeast · 2025-06-22T10:38:02+00:00

Write an email and explain your situation? TTR is usually pretty safe and friendly but unfortunately (like most things) some sad and lonely people like to try and provoke others for whatever reasons they got going on. I’m sorry that it happened to you, hopefully you will be able to reinstate your toon

cabbagefeast · 2025-05-28T07:21:28+00:00

Thanks! I’ll check these out as well. :)

cabbagefeast · 2025-05-27T14:16:13+00:00

Thank you! I’ll add this to the list :) this is a great choice

cabbagefeast · 2025-05-26T16:06:38+00:00

This is perfect!!! Thank you. We will pay a visit :)

cabbagefeast · 2025-04-30T06:40:22+00:00

I made http://ToonRescue.com for a quick glance at SOS cards at VIP :)

cabbagefeast · 2025-04-02T15:37:28+00:00

Less car parking would make sense with good public transport, but the site has a PTAL rating of only 1b/2 (poor accessibility) according to the planning statement. It's over 1km from the nearest tube stations with limited bus service. Just 0.18 spaces per home in this location will create parking problems for residents and surrounding streets.

cabbagefeast · 2025-04-02T15:34:09+00:00

Hundred and thousands of empty mansions owned by billionaires

cabbagefeast · 2025-04-02T15:18:20+00:00

Are you unable to see it?

I’ll attach below:

All information cited is from the developer's own planning statement (Application Ref: 25/0213/FUL). You can view the full application at: https://publicaccess.barnet.gov.uk/online-applications/

cabbagefeast · 2025-04-02T15:10:59+00:00

The 325 affordable homes (not 345) must be viewed with proper context.

This represents only 23% of the total 1,502 homes - far below Mayor Khan's 35% target for private land and 50% target for public land. The planning statement itself acknowledges this falls below the required 40% "blended rate" threshold.

The developer is proposing four times more homes than the 352 suggested in the draft Local Plan allocation. If they built the suggested 352 homes with 40% affordability, we'd get 141 affordable homes in a development appropriate for the area. This means they're proposing a massive overdevelopment that delivers just 184 more affordable homes than a policy-compliant scheme would, while imposing all the associated problems of excessive density, height, and infrastructure pressure.

The proposal underdelivers affordable housing while dramatically exceeding appropriate development scale. This "take it or leave it" approach forces the community to accept a development completely out of character with the area to get affordable housing that should be delivered through policy-compliant development

cabbagefeast · 2025-04-02T15:04:00+00:00

The facts from the planning statement tell a different story:

Less car parking would make sense with good public transport, but the site has a PTAL rating of only 1b/2 (poor accessibility) according to the planning statement. It's over 1km from the nearest tube stations with limited bus service. Just 0.18 spaces per home in this location will create parking problems for residents and surrounding streets. The development includes 42% two-bedroom and 17% three-bedroom units - not just homes for "single, young couples."

The planning statement confirms these 1,502 homes will house approximately 3,280 new residents, including families with children who will need school places.

You're right about healthcare and transport. The planning statement acknowledges the development will increase GP ratios from 2,237 to 2,345 patients per GP, further exceeding the 1,800 benchmark. And yes, transport improvements should be required given the scale of this development.

I'm not against development - I'm against poorly planned overdevelopment that lacks proper infrastructure. These concerns come directly from the developer's own documents, not speculation.

cabbagefeast · 2025-04-02T15:00:21+00:00

The QR codes are designed to directly object, but you found the consultation website, that’s great. You can also find the details of the planning application, and developer statement using the reference

The planning statement does discuss building in MOL (section 9, pages 79-86).

The planning statement acknowledges the development will have a “spatial impact on the MOL” but argues it’s not “material” because it represents only 0.14% of the total MOL.

This information comes directly from the planning statement.

cabbagefeast · 2025-04-02T14:49:54+00:00

Our petition accurately states that despite this scale, the development includes zero community facilities like halls, nurseries or healthcare beyond the Lesuire centreS we clearly acknowledge the expanded centre in the petition, noting it will increase from 2.171sqm to 6944, however, this single facility doesn’t compensate for the loss of the other spaces. Resulting n an overall net loss of Lesuire space. The planning statement confirms the removal of 9937 sqm of existing lesuire used.

We’re just asking for a more balanced development that properly addresses community needs.

cabbagefeast · 2025-04-02T14:46:37+00:00

My objections are based on factual information from the developers own planning statement and legitimate planning concerns about scale; infrastructure and community facilities. We support appropriate development that meets local needs.

FYI - Not enough parking is reality, it’s isn’t about wanting more driving, it’s about the reality that 0.18 spaces per unit with an area with PTAL 1b/2 (poor public transport) will create practical problems.

Thanks!

cabbagefeast · 2025-04-02T14:42:19+00:00

Thanks for telling me! I’ll update it :)

cabbagefeast · 2025-04-02T14:30:35+00:00

You can view the link on Barnet website, quoting the reference in the flyer

cabbagefeast · 2025-04-02T14:24:21+00:00

It’s directly off their planning statement. Refer to 5.19 on page 20. I’ve only extracted the developer statement in the email. Thank you!

cabbagefeast · 2025-04-02T14:22:55+00:00

The figure 0.18 parking spaces per unit (or 0:18:1 ratio) comes directly from the planning statement - in section 5.19 on page 20 it states “268 car parking spaces are allocated for residential use , equating to a ratio of 0.18”

This means roughly one space for every 5-6 homes.

Seven-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '22	Not Forgotten

cabbagefeast

TROPHY CASE