I found it in English
blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/janetdaley/100018432/newsflash-hole-in-ozone-layer-a-good-thing/
(Aberracion Life's getting very complicated, but a lot of fun., Wed 2 Dec 2009, 7:49, 1 reply, 16 years ago)

Just read her biography at the top of the page
then read the title of that article. Now think.

It's hardly a balanced piece is it.

The title alone makes it a fairly worthless piece of journalism, as does the sloppy writing in the first paragraph (i didn't read any more of it) regardless of the effect of the shrinking of the hole in the ozone layer, it's presence in the first place (the cause of which was vigorously denied by people with a vested interest in CFC production) clearly wasn't very good in general as it does lead to more UV radiation getting through which has lead to more skin cancer. Any journalist who reduces the effects of anything to "good" and "bad" or in the daily mails case to "causes cancer" and "saves you from cancer" is shit journalism.

Don't get your scientific opinions from newspapers, in may cases they are totally incapable of reporting science in a way which is even factually correct.

Read scientific papers if you want to form an opinion based on facts, Ben Goldacres Bad Science website is very good in terms of providing links to good sources of info, be aware that he is a bit of a lefty so again, there isn't a totally balanced viewpoint, but at least he backs up any opinions with actual evidence.
(Bazongaloid, Wed 2 Dec 2009, 8:08, Reply)

Oh, well
As I said, that's what I found in English. If you want, I can post the scientific version I read in Spanish yesterday. Will that make you happy?

I still think they only play with our fears, same as they do with the terrorism, to make us think and act. And I don't like it.
(Aberracion Life's getting very complicated, but a lot of fun., Wed 2 Dec 2009, 8:13, Reply)