Sir; Is it morally acceptable, or professionally ethical, for animal rights' activist teaching packs to be used in classrooms to indoctrinate four to six-year-olds to believe that it is wrong to drink milk and wrong to eat meat ­ especially when the moderate majority of parents are unaware their offspring are being manipulated by this devious violation of the teacher/pupil bond, a safeguarded bond protected by legislation? The words of a South Pacific' song remind us: "Children have to be carefully taught what to hate, by the time they are six or seven or eight." Yet Animal Rights Foundations are doing just that to our children. The question for child health and the food industry is what will be the effects of this in 10 years' time? Will there be an even greater erosion of the milk and meat markets as "brain-washed" consumers turn away from animal-based protein. Will the highly profitable veggie product market flourish beyond expectation? Why bother having a "balanced diet" message if teachers can ignore it. And they do. Education show organisers permit animal rights' groups stand space to hand out free action teaching packs, and the numbers of teachers queuing at these stands is an eye-opener. Moderate parents are trying to raise awareness of what is happening before it is too late. They have asked the Department for Education and Skills to intervene to protect children from extremist material produced by well-funded activists. The bottom line is that parents are within their rights not to want teachers telling children that it is wrong to drink milk and wrong to eat meat. That the DfES has so far failed miserably to stop this abuse of the teacher/pupil bond is worrying. Stephanie Spiers Chair of the Trustees Milk For Schools {{LETTERS }}