Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Many people use mouthwash for work overtime and after a meal because it is more convenience than the use of toothbrushing. Most of people buy mouthwash are youth. Most of people believe that mouth is clear after using mouthwash and smells nice, more comfortable than toothbrushing. Surely, compared with traditional toothpaste and toothbrush, oral hygiene product mouthwash has advantages such as using conveniently, saving time, however, mouthwash can take place of toothbrushing? Mouthwash is safe?


http://www.zetadental.co.uk/blog/mouthwash-is-safe-not-sure/

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/43433-mouthwash-is-safe-not-sure/
Share on other sites

Thank you for raising this very important issue that clearly affects a lot of Dulwich residents. I would suggest highlighting this issue to the council and stressing that it should be part of their manifesto and that we see clear action taken going forward. Not only could the use of mouthwash seriously affect the dental hygiene of Dulwich residents but any continuation of use without any formalised action could seriously affect the moral fibre of Dulwich and it?s future as an orally hygienic part of London.


If the council refuses to take any action on this I suggest we organise a peaceful rally to Westminster and maybe get other concerned localities to join forces with us. If you need any assistance please let me know as I have experience campaigning serious issues (such as the deodorant spray versus Roll on campaign of the early 2000s and the Shampoo and Conditioner 2 in 1 vs separate bottles debate a couple of years ago ? both inconclusive sadly) and can make some rather fetching placards and outfits (Mouthwash bottle outfit and a toothpaste tube outfit with gladiator style pugil sticks is an immediate idea).

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Thank you for clarifying, James. So why would anybody want to take this on as a franchise if it is staying in this building? If it is now to be a sub office, does that mean that much of  the space could be used as a different kind of business altogether, with just part of it being used as a sub Post Office? Because if it is all to remain solely for Post Office business, (albeit as a sub Post Office it won't be providing all the services which it currently does) I can't see who would want to take it over? If it isn't profitable as a Crown office, how could it be  profitable running just as a sub office, even if staff are being paid less and it's opening for longer hours? Because presumably all the other overheads such as rent will remain the same?
    • Girobank was genuinely innovative, regarding the addressed customer base (significantly the previously unbanked) - but this would have been an ideally outsourced operation to an existing bank which already had the operational systems (and the regulatory experts) to manage a bank for someone else at marginal cost. The Post Office - when you consider the issues over the Horizon software - never originally designed by ICL/ Fujitsu for the application it ran - is a very good reason why the Post Office being involved in banking was long-term a bad idea.  To get back to the topic of this thread, the Horizon debacle is still not over (the software system is still in place) - most of the wrongly penalised sub-postmasters are still out of pocket - I'm not sure I would be leaping to take on the franchise being offered in Lordship Lane.
    • Otherwise in Bellenden Road are brilliant! They’ve made me stage dresses, restructured vintage finds and are working on remodelling my late brothers huntsman tweed suit for my modern husband! Not cheap and rents have meant they are moving premises at mo.
    • Penguin, I broadly agree, except that the Girobank was a genuinely innovative and successful operation. It’s rather ironic that after all these years we are now back to banking at the Post Office due to all the bank branch closures.  I agree that the roots of the problem go back further than 2012 (?), when the PO and RM were separated so RM could be sold. I’m willing to blame Peter Mandelson, Margaret Thatcher or even Keith Joseph. But none of them will be standing for the local council, hoping to make capital out of the possible closure of Lordship Lane PO, as if they are in no way responsible. The Lib Dems can’t be let off the hook that easily.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...