bodyType

customContents

entityId

entityUuid

articlePageQuery

filter

article

articleBaseAdvertisingInfoArticle

articleListArticle

articleSeoArticle

hooksArticleAcknowledgementGateOverlayArticle

hooksTrackPageViewArticle

hooksContentInterestArticle

articleLinkingDataContent

hooksAmpRedirectArticle

articleSchemaContent

liveArticle

advertZone

sentiment

contentLock

topics

types

sections

paywallTypes

createdDate

publishedDate

sponsorType

urlAlias

moreOnThisArticles

commentCount

authorLocations

authors

corrections

displaySlideShow

multimediaEmbed

printHeadline

seriesContainer

articleSpeeches

socialHeadline

headline

images

flag

firstTopic

glossary

flattenTypeIds

image

relatedLinks

relatedNewsletters

__typename

sponsor

pdfFiles

seriesReverseOrder

series

disableOffPlatformContent

published

updatedDate

summary

subHeadline

body

keywords

readingTime

customTimezone

liveContents

SCMP Reporter

Q Will the sodium information make you change eating habits?

It comes as no surprise that the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department has released a survey that warns of high levels of sodium in Chinese food.

Hong Kong is an international city with many choices of cuisine and restaurants, so I'm sure that other foods and restaurants have similar problems.

Many western restaurants add chemicals or additives to their food to make them more delicious. Western deep-fried food is unhealthy as well.

Thai foods have too much oil that's not good for your health. I think there are no other healthy choices for  dinner or lunch elsewhere.  Maybe we can change eating habits so we don't eat food outside but  go back home to eat fresh food without additives.

Derek Chan, Ho Man Tin

The results may shock some people but not me. I won't change my eating habits because of the sodium information.

I have lunch at restaurants five times a week and generally I eat the food mentioned in the report  every two or three days.

Sometimes I eat several kinds of sauce-laden dishes and fried rice as well as dim sum when I have lunch at Chinese restaurants at least once a week.

I think this is not a problem as long as people don't have these dishes frequently.

Also, eating food with fibre is important for the health and people should not maintain good health by just avoiding dishes that are  unhealthy.

If I keep away from certain foods, I will lose the delight of enjoying a palatable cuisine. Eating is more about appreciation of food than just taking care of your health.

Therefore, I won't change my eating habits just because of these findings on the sodium content of Chinese food.

Name and address supplied

I will not change my eating habits because of the sodium information.

Many restaurant dishes have high cholesterol and low fibre. However, most people like eating them. That's why it's a highly profitable business for restaurants. So, we have found that many restaurants have unhealthy food in Hong Kong.

However, I don't have enough time to consider  choosing healthy food, especially during working hours.

Most employees have one hour for lunch. We only think about how to get food quickly, because everywhere is very crowded during lunchtime. It is hard to find a restaurant that provides healthy food, if  one exists.

Boris Chan, Ho Man Tin

Q What do you think of the city's water?

It's probably safe enough to drink as long as one boils and/or filters it first. Hong Kong's water quality is no worse than that of many other first-world countries.

The state of its source is a concern,  but we should also extend our concerns to the sources of expensive bottled water, many of which aren't as exotic or appealing as advertised. In fact, a lot of bottled water begins its life  as tap water.

Chohong Choi, Kwun Tong

Q How can animal welfare be improved?

'Most serial killers start as animal abusers.' This statement is verified by statistics that prove the link between animal abusers and murderers. Yet, how many years in  jail are these potential murderers sentenced to for their cruelty against these poor animals? Is it fair to these weak creatures that cannot protect themselves?

We were moved by the article on Pan Pan, the limbless German shepherd, published in the Post on March 17, and we hope the punishment for abusing animals will be more severe in order to protect them, and that the police will do more to arrest abusers.

Pan Pan and other abused animals have to live an entire life of suffering, never knowing the simple joy of being able to run and jump, and do simple things such as walk over to a water bowl to drink when they're thirsty, while the cold-blooded criminals are set free after a mere three months' imprisonment or simply a fine, which anyone can afford.

A brief, sadistic moment for them is a lifetime of reliance for the animal; they have the weight of guilt on their conscience (perhaps not even that), but the animal has to bear the actual consequences and navigate through life with this horribly inflicted disability.

A murderer deserves a life sentence if he kills a human being, yet he is only jailed for three months if he kills an animal. Where is the sense in that?

Why should there be such a big gap in the sentence only because the victims are different? Would people act so passively if it were a person instead who had all his limbs sliced off?

To give a lighter punishment is to say that the lives of animals are less than those of humans. This is wrong. All lives are equal; animals have feelings and emotions just like humans.

Nothing gives us the right to torture and kill helpless animals that have done nothing  to deserve such brutality. We hope the government will treat these brutal acts on animals more seriously, as this is not a minor issue.

The fact that we are willing to sit back and allow this to happen makes us not much better than the abusers themselves.

A longer sentence is definitely needed to lock up these potential serial killers before it is too late.

Tess Ma and Fiona So, Mid-Levels

On other matters ...

While the English Schools Foundation  dispute continues, it is doubtful that the majority of parents are aware of the ways in which it is affecting their children.

Only seven (out of a possible 90) Island School teachers turned up to help with the Island School Fair on Saturday.

This is the school's major annual fund-raising event. To the seven that did bother to help, we say thank you.

Teachers intend to boycott the annual 'interim week', normally held in November. This is a major event in the schools' curriculum, but it  will not take place this year if the boycott goes ahead.

Teachers are bringing their negativity into the classroom with them, informing students during lesson time that they do not wish to change over to, nor teach, the International Baccalaureate. Details of the pay dispute are also being divulged to students during lesson time.

As anyone who has one or more children in the ESF system knows, their education is an expensive business.

Unfortunately, it seems that our children are the ones ultimately paying the price because they are being taught by uninvolved, unenthusiastic, and now, seemingly unprofessional teachers. Would the ESF care to comment?

Name and address supplied



Talk back