That's interesting that you don't get them on your iPad sunnibel. If you look at the bottom of this screen you will see 'Learn more about in-text links on this page here'. What you see is certain words within posts in a different colour and if you are unfortunate enough to hover your cursor near them an ad fills the middle of the screen making it impossible to continue reading the post until you click the x to close it. Even then often clicking the x makes it continue and you have to click again elsewhere to really get rid of it. For example a post about garden 'clean' up will cause an ad about a floor polish to fill your screen. They have annoyed plenty of other people. Here is a link that might be useful: In text ads.

Just a quick update... First off, thanks again to everyone who posted here, your advice was very welcome. I had surprising difficulty finding some proper soil/compost/stuff/whatever for the house plants. All the local garden centres had sold out, and I still haven't got any. However, I cut back on the watering quite drastically, and now only water when the plants look like they need it. The plants look as fine as they ever did, my chilli plants are all flowering, and the flies have basically gone. We still get the odd one or two, but nothing that would make me think twice. We don't see them around the plants any more, which makes me think that the few we see are either tough ones that haven't had the decency to die since we dried out there homes, or ones that have come from elsewhere. I still intend to repot as and when I can get some soil, but it's a lot less urgent now. Thanks again.

Malcolm Manners, thank you for pointing out the distinction between the two names. I checked the internet and apparently "biological index" is the general term and the two subterms are herbaceous index and woody index. Davis in their 2004 web article "The Rose Clean Stock Program" use the term "biological index". I am interested in any literature comparing the 2 subterms for rose virus testing. I did find the following for Rubus: "Transmission to herbaceous indicators CRLV, ApMV, BRLV (and indeed TSV in general) can be transmitted by inoculation of sap to herbaceous test plants and can usually be detected in this way. Grind rapidly growing leaves from Rubus plants to be tested in a small volume of 2%, nicotine solution with a little celite as abrasive. Gently rub this sap extract on leaves of young, soft, rapidly growing plants of Chenopodium quinoa and/or Cucumis sativus. Keep test plants in aphid-proof glasshouses at about 20°C and observe for symptoms over about 3 weeks, Symptoms caused by these viruses in inoculated leaves should be apparent in 4-10 days. BRLV and ApMV are probably best detected in very young cucumber cotyledons, but all viruses should induce symptoms in C. quinoa. All four viruses should become systemic in C. quinoa, but some strains of tobacco streak virus (BRLV is a strain of TSV) are not systemic in this host. Woody indicators While the nepoviruses and ilarviruses could be detected by grafting Rubus to woody indicators, there is no purpose in doing so for the alternative methods are much superior. In the case of RLCV, however, this is the only method of detection. Graft scions of test Rubus plants to Rubus phoenicolasius (wineberry) which develops particularly severe symptoms. In general, R. idaeus can also be used. Symptoms may take 2-12 months to appear after graft inoculation. The two strains of RLCV (alpha and beta) are both detected." http://74.125.93.132/custom?q=cache:IolSYfkHYSoJ:archives.eppo.org/EPPOStandards/PM3_PROCEDURES/pm3-31-e.doc+rubus&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=google-coop ------------------------ "Rubus is a large genus of flowering plants in the rose family, Rosaceae" from ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rubus ). Here is a link that might be useful: link for rubus indexing

It is unfortunate that misinformation continues to be repeated about glyphosate. Denmark has not banned glyphosate, nor have "many European countries". Denmark at one point thought that some of the monitoring they were doing showed that glyphosate could move into agricultural field drainage water in autumn but once they looked at their data and related it to the methodology they used, they enacted no ban whatsoever. As the Danish Environmental Protection Agency specifically stated: http://www.egeis.org/home/main/Evaluation-GlyphosateDEPA.PDF "Against this background, the Danish Environmental Protection Agency believes that no unacceptable risk of pollution of the groundwater is associated with the currently approved agricultural use of glyphosate. The Agency thus does not consider that the updated state of our knowledge provides any technical grounds for the imposition of restrictions on the autumn application of glyphosate." Used properly, glyphosate will not pollute drinking water nor will it have adverse effects on humans. Once applied, it binds tightly to soil particles and is not herbicidally active. If it is applied to hard surfaces such as sidewalks it can move offsite of course. It can also move if there is active soil erosion carrying soil off site. It is of very low toxicity, and breaks down completely into natural constituents over time. It is of equal or lower toxicity than most household products such as detergent, soaps, shampoos, cleaners etc. and far less toxic than some of the "alternatives" often discussed such as bleach, kerosene, high strength vinegars and so on. There is so much misinformation being repeated on the web that it is difficult to get reliable information. This link provides an published overview of the available literature. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology Volume 31, Issue 2, April 2000, Pages 117-165 Safety Evaluation and Risk Assessment of the Herbicide Roundup and Its Active Ingredient, Glyphosate, for Humans http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=1401479