..otherwise I think I'll make very sure I'm nice and clean, thanks.

I assume she's talking about ladies' proceedings that require that they sit down unlike men, as opposed to the Second Function? I don't know about her but I'd use more than one sheet during the cleaning period after that particular movement; perhaps it's my diet?

You know that bit where the magician pushes a handkerchief into his fist ?

1 square of bog roll eh - I don't think so.

"[SNIP]I think we are an industrious enough people that we can make it work with only one square per restroom visit, except, of course, on those pesky occasions where two to three could be required."

Please, nice lady, pray elaborate on this ? Can we factor the

sex of the person also, in order to refine the analisys

(no pun, here :-) ?

Good point, also, Lester, on the CDs, probably not, indeed,

made of "recycled bog roll and algae-derived bioplastic" LOL.

While toilet paper is normally made of bio-degradeable matter.

I'm sure that the lentil-rich diet of a right-on hippy will produce the kind of precise, perfectly formed poop that justifies one sheet, but what about the rest of us? Our rich, bourgeois diets will have us folding the sheet multiple times to get the maximun use of the limited surface area.

Whatever happened to "one up, one down and one to polish"?

im sorry, but i find it had to keep my 'bog roll' usage to below 5 or 6 sheets, after 'those pesky occasions'

who counts out their sheets anyway? roll some off, fold it over, all done as they say!

How about a 'dining sleeve' on the left arm, and a 'toilet sleeve' on the right. Just don't get them mixed up.

One must remember that, in the part of Missouri where Ms Crow was raised, they relied on old Sear's catalogs or corn cobs...

Something smells? It’s not the fancy cheese either. Ho, it’s my finger!!!! What a load of S#*t. Another lunatic from Hollywood or Nashville who has lost touch with reality. Yea, ladies may be able to wipe the front with “one sheet”, but I’m not even going to think about the backside.

Using only 1 square will save the planet? how about not flying round the world playing gigs with her entourage? sanctimonious stick insect. Most Americans need half a bedsheet just to cover their ass let alone wipe it....

... the savings lie in your hands.

I prefer to splurge on 100% recycled sandpaper.

Clearly Miss Crow has a substantially different diet to the average Reg reader... 3 sheets for a 12 pint curry?

I think not.

Would be more than happy to use just one square to wipe away all of my mess but only if it had Cheryl Crow's face embossed on it.

When visiting a beach, you see the toilet paper everywhere... Dolphins and birds drown after getting stuck in toilet paper abandoned by fishermen everywhere. That nearly-indecomposable material traps animals and clogs drains everywhere! Also as it's made from non-renewable sources like fir trees and recycled cloth, we should be tough on toilet paper and tough on the causes of toilet paper.

Remind me never to give her a hand, anyhow, knowing what origami skills she probably has used just recently.

Printed on some wartime writing paper, and an old joke about bog paper.

The eco-friendly types don't do themselves any favours when they start spouting junk like this.

The amount of roll you use doesn't exactly come very high up the list of enviromental threats, if's not like it's made from rainforest hardwoods, just plain, lowgrade farmed timber. And it probably is going to end up as fertiliser eventually, so it's a pretty enviro-friendly & carbon neutral lifecycle overall.

Personally I think she should worry more about the drive she makes to the mall in an SUV to get the roll in the first place than how many sheets it takes to wipe your arse.

But in any case, how could you ever possibly get away with only one sheet? Or even the (luxury!) of 2 or 3?

I suspect the answer will only ever be found by re-adjusting to a new state of personal hygiene, or by also becoming one of the enlighted eco-warriors and existing on nothing but air and sunlight...

How does:

Grow trees -> make paper -> use paper -> bury paper -> replant tree

compare with

Boilwash cloth napkin -> rinse -> dry -> use -> repeat

in the environmental footprint stakes?

I vaguely remember a discussion with someone, several years ago, in which the subject started off with reusable alternatives to sanitary towels and tampons, and moved on to choosing one's diet on the basis of "how it came out the other end" so as to minimise the use of toilet paper.

I lost touch with her shortly afterward, but still sometimes wonder if she got anywhere with the idea?

Sheryl can do whatever she wants, but personally I don't care to have all this stuff forced on others.

I hate those stupid dryers in bathrooms, they never actually dry your hands, and either your holding up a line trying to get them dry or your just picking up more germs by touching something on the way out with those damp hands.

And I'm sorry, my grandpa actually carried around one of those old time handkerchiefs and I would never resort to using one of those unless it was a state of emergency. I really doubt wiping your mouth on your sleeve a dozen times would be much different.

How about just ensuring they recycle that paper eh?

I'm dumb dtruck by the brilliance... why pollute the world by washing a small cloth napkin, when with a bit of ingenuity and divaesque attention seeking, you can wash an ENTIRE SLEAVE? It'll probably catch on.

Sadly, much like the results of the office canteen, this crap can't be dealt with by a single piece of paper.

I'm amazed that such an obvious Michael extraction should get such a lot of publicity. It's both here and on the BBC.

We may at last be seeing what it was about her that caused Lance Armstrong to just ... back ... away ... sloooowly ...

Leaving aside any feelings (positive or negative) you may have for Sheryl Crow, this is just disgusting. Dirty, filthy, disgusting. Can you imagine going to a restaurant and seeing people wipe their mouths on their sleeves? Hey Sheryl, there's this thing called hygiene. Look it up. Let's not even think about the health implications. And maybe the rich have different toilet paper than us low and middle class people, but one square does virtually nothing. Does she never wipe her ass? I'd love to see her use one square (or even "two or three") if she has diarrhea. But you guys really left out the best (and most disgusting) part of that blog:

"When presenting this idea to my younger brother, who's judgement I trust implicitly, he proposed taking it one step further. I believe his quote was, 'how bout just washing the one square out.'"

I've got an idea for how Sheryl Crow and her brother can reduce their carbon footprints: stop breathing.

she may but she's certainly going to increase her methane footprint! When combined with the increase in carbon dioxde from her helpful emissions, wouldn't we be better to reduce her to a base carbon level and her footprint to the size of an urn?

I have to say, I've read her blog post three times (and that's more than it really seemed to merrit), and I can't work out whether or not she was joking. The blogosphere seems to be taking her seriously, but I wonder...

1) Take one sheet.

2) Fold into quarters.

3) Tear off the corner - keep safe

4) Unfold, place finger through hole and do what's required.

5) Clean under fingernail with corner from (3) above.

That's how it's taught in the forces - easy!

Alternatively, we should all be able to save paper by using both sides...

Maybe Sheryl doesn't realise that we don't all live rock and roll lifestyles and may not have access to a bidet when one sheet just isn't enough...

As for hand-dryers - why are there always fewer dryers than sinks, and fewer sinks than toilets in public conveniences?

And my Mother always told me it was rude and unhygienic to wipe my face on my sleeve!

Seriously! Sheryl, you've got millions and, obviously, too much time (or something else) on your hands. Time to get off your butt seeing as its cutting off circulation to your brain.

If I remember correctly, it was Sisqo or however that terrible wanted his 'name' spelt, who was once giving a tour of his house of MTV's Cribz. He pointed at the bidet in his bathroom, and said something to the effect of, "I don't know why, but this bathroom got two toilets!" Much to my dismay, he did not describe the "baby-sized" bathtub jutting out from the wall. Or how difficult it was, post grogan dropping, of course, to get the pulpy mass down the drain of that extra toilet. Ain't hollywood grand!?

...does that mean I'm killing penguins?

They're already talking about outlawing incandesecent light bulbs and its not a stretch to see this extended to toilet paper next. These Hollywood celeb types want to take away all the luxuries of 21st century living!

Personally I'm off to Costco to buy a trailer load full of Toilet Paper and Light Bulbs before they get their way.

1 square today - no squares tomorrow - hoard it while you can!

perhaps she should stick to repeating and repeating the same tired lines and wipe up with those. her sickening lyrics are enough to cause a bowel movement, which repeat every 4th word every other line of lyrics. talk about calling the bowl brown Cheryl, 0800-get-alife springs to mind!

I recommend penguins.

They're self cleaning, unless you get a particularly large winnet stuck in their feathers; but that can usually be picked out if you let it dry for an hour, thanks to their natural oils.

The beaks can be useful for that hard-to-reach itch, too - just remember to tape them closed first or you could get a nasty nip somewhere unreachable.

but pardon me if I don't shake her hand.

Lager and vitamins..........crap once a week and you can use 7 sheets

The next day's output is certainly not a "three squares" job. Let me tell you...

Well maybe she's missed the point here.

Could it be that her ideas for saving the planet are best confined to being written on one square of bogroll?

And of course it's our duty to flush it away afterwards.

...and your left hand.

That's how it's done in many parts of the world. Why use one square at all? It certainly makes you remember to wash your hands!

Just remember to eat with your right hand.

Does she advise use, pray, how many squares are appropriate for cleaning up after a little homebrew hand-shandy? I find I can't get away with less than twenty to fourty sheets these days (trajectory dependent).

Perhaps Ms Crow should encourage her audience to use their hairshirts for this purpose.

The Arabs of old used to go into the desert, do their business and scrub up after with sand using their left hand only. Then they ride away on their camels which have a single hump. Tough guys, these Arabs and completely eco-friendly too.

...if only more people knew how to use those three seashells.

I just got back from a small village in india (visiting in-laws - yep i'm a lucky SOB).

When I got to the family home in Madaphur after flying for 9 hours I naturally needed a number two and duly sat down on the bog to do my business.

When I finished I looked over and - WTF - no bog roll......Screamed at the wife (who was obviously used to this) and she came to the door and said "there's a tap on the wall - turn it and wash your butt then wash your hands".

One of the most horrifing moments of my adult life - in the end I kicked up a stink (pardon the pun) pulled off the t-shirt i was wearing (a primark cheapo plain white shirt) wiped, then quickly burned the item concerned and vowed not to poo for the rest of the visit. An achievement considering the amount of curry I ate out there.

..if you want to stop global warming, gather up all the arse-hat entertainers who couldn't even spell "ecological science," lock tehm in an air-tight vault, and pump out all the air.

What idiots like Crow don't grasp is that what the world isn't as simple a place as their tiny brains make it out to be.

In this case, wood contains carbon. Using wood products not only locks up the carbon, but encourages the growing of MORE trees on tree farms.

Every time you wipe, or use a napkin, you are REDUCING potential carbon dioxide.

She's stupidly confusing the old "save the forests" myth with the new "humans cause increased greenhouse effect" myth. IF we want to reduce greenhouse gasses, we can help do so by cutting (and therefore growing in their place) MORE TREES, not fewer.

Of course Crow probably has this delusion that we need trees to make O2 out of CO2. But, of course, 90% of all O2 production occurs in the oceans. Trees actually consume O2 and produce CO2 at night...and the bacteria between their roots consume produce so much CO2 that it makes up for what little bit the trees consume during the day. The only way trees do ANYTHING regarding greenhouse gasses is that they lock it up in their wood. So the more wood you grow and discard, the more you "reduce" greenhouse gases.