I write this to disassociate myself completely from the Questions About the Pharmacy Scheme posed by my colleague Carmel Micallef on October 25. I write this moreover, to express my complete astonishment at seeing my photograph accompanying his perceived obstacles and limitations to the successful implementation of the Pharmacist of Your Choice Scheme.

I fully endorse the freedom of the press philosophy and the fundamental right of all and sundry to put their thoughts to paper.

What I cannot, and do not accept is the arbitrary decision taken by The Times to annex my photograph to views regarding the pharmacy of your choice scheme which are diametrically opposed to my own.

The Times acquired this photograph in the context of the launching of this scheme in the village in which I practise as a community pharmacist.

I spare no efforts in giving my patients a professional service, and consequently consider a submission as preposterous as this in its content a complete antithesis of my own views regarding the value of this scheme.

Furthermore I question the journalistic ethics and integrity of a newspaper which publishes photographs of individuals in the context of sensitive issues of public concern without obtaining their prior consent. I thought better of The Times!

Editorial note: The Times regrets the inconvenience caused by the choice of photo, which was intended to depict the pharmacy of your choice scheme in operation and not to associate the views of the pharmacist shown in the picture with the contents of the letter.