Letter from R Eades (September 2) is so right - our hospitals and doctors are overworked, people are getting sicker not "better", and we need to take responsibility for the food we put into our mouths.
Inflammation, colds, flu, virus can be helped, leaving room for those who really need "services".
Right soil conditions, right food into our bodies - not toxins which make us sick. So no packet foods, let's get back to real food from the garden.
Calcium is a neutraliser to our acid system, hence health in body.
D PORT, Whanganui
Heartland challenge needed
It's about time the New Zealand Rugby Union introduced a challenge shield/cup into the Heartland competition.
Let's be realistic, the present system of allocating a Ranfurly Shield challenge to the winners of the Meads and Lochore Cups at the early part of the following season is ridiculous.
It is not fair on the two challengers who are amateur players, while the Shield holder teams are semi-professional with more resources and a larger pool of players to select from.
Due to the "window" to play these early challenges, Heartland teams do not have time to prepare for a meaningful challenge.
In this era of professional rugby, the Ranfurly Shield does not have the huge impact it once had in the all amateur days. A Heartland Challenge Shield will create more interest.
I hope this letter receives a favourable response from the rugby community of New Zealand.
JAMES OLNEY, Whanganui
Without a title
Sexism is alive and flourishing in the Chronicle, and September 14 provides a good example.
There is a lovely article about Sarah Laing, a "critically acclaimed" author of international repute.
Throughout the article she is referred to as "Laing". How rude and disrespectful can you get? Is it not possible to either use her title Ms or Mrs or use her christian name?
In the other two articles on the same page, both about men, their title is used throughout. Why the difference?
Ms Laing has worked very hard to get the international recognition she thoroughly deserves, what about giving her the respect she deserves.
J PAVARNO, Whanganui
EDITOR'S NOTE: Nothing sexist about it. It is a style convention of most newspapers that writers, artists, actors, sportspeople, the accused and convicted in court, and - yes - journalists do not get an honorific (eg Mrs, Mrs, Ms) and are referred to only by their surnames.
Some good points
Ken Crafar (September 13) presents his case for "limited term politicians" versus "career (or professional) politicians" and I agree with him.
Surprisingly, Ken touches on the need for a written, legislated constitution, just like every other Western democracy except us, Israel and Great Britain.
The later, at present, has a constitutional crisis, wrestling with Brexit-enabling proposals
that will extend some of the reserve powers of their head of state, the Queen, to government ministers.
K A Benfell opines on the adverse press accorded Donald Trump. He does not appear to grasp that it is illegal to continue to harass people because of their colour and, even more so, when the highest court in your land orders you to cease and desist. I cannot agree with him.
I agree with G R Scown that no rational consideration supports the Christian fundamentalist dogma that their religion is the font of morality.
However, his "the only good thing to come out of religion is faith" is without any qualification. Accepting something without proof defines gullibility and I think he conflicts faith with trust. Trust is a two-way, reciprocal state, while faith has no qualifications.
H NORTON, Kaitoke
STV doesn't work
Steve Baron has obviously convinced himself he is an interlectual (sic) and is on to something with this STV lark.
If he is an interlectual (sic), then he is probably in the 10 per cent who might understand STV, so it is not much good to the rest of us.
In the 1950s many of our university professors believed communism solved a perceived problem of inequality - it failed after creating a lot of pain. STV seems to be in the same vein - a good idea that doesn't work.
G R SCOWN, Whanganui
I wrote a letter about the predominance of Maori in prison., and John Archer wrote a reply, saying Maori are four times more likely to get a prison sentence than a pakeha on a similar charge.
Yes, he will if he has little or no income from which to pay the appropriate fine. That would be so for any such offender.
Then John writes about the invasion of Waikato. Yes, various events took place in the 19th century that should not have happened. These are being examined and compensations being decided upon in the courts.
John's argument seems to be that Maori are saying: "Your ancestors gave my ancestors a hard time so why should I take any notice of the laws you people have imposed upon our land?"
Such an argument is silly because there is a great big new world to live in these days.
I have had the privilege of being a friend to many inmates in prison. From time to time I get a warm greeting: "Hey Tom, are you still going out to the prison? Remember me?"
It is great to meet men who are really getting on their feet - getting education, getting jobs, getting married and making a whole new life.
One man said, "You know Tom, you and I go back a long way. It's taken me 18 years but I think I'm getting it sussed now."
TOM PITTAMS, Whanganui