Letters to the Editor
Lynx
Published Letters: 1595 Editor's Choice: 126
-
Wrong?
[Read the article: Ask the pilot]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The only reason I can see that he should have left things where they were would be so other people could see them. Personally, I'm with the other poster who said they hope their skeleton is found by someone and kept as a keepsake. I'd far prefer that to having mine lie in a field somewhere.
The argument can be fairly made that these things were lost to appreciation to anyone but Mr. Smith anyway. The ceramic insulator pegs were buried in muck and the jawbone was in an open cemetary that seems rarely, but freely visited and was not an active archaeological site. The only people that would benefit from these things would be possible future archaeologists. Maybe. Both of these sites are of dubious archaeological value anyway as they're still open to the elements decades or centuries or millenia after their last use.
-
fuzzynormal
[Read the article: Turn out the lights, Michigan]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Not for nothing does the owner of Ford also own the worst football team in the NFL.
The owner of Ford owns the Falcons?
-
mandolin
[Read the article: Naughty nuns excommunicated]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]or that a good deal of work in contemporary physics calls into question various parts of his theoretical work
Actually, very little in contemporary physics calls into quesion any parts of Einsteins theoretical work. More physical evidence for General Relativity is found every day. Unless, of course, you go for people like the Time Cube nut. (www.timecube.com He's crazy, but funny)
-
Practical
[Read the article: Girlhood, interrupted]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Until the research has gone beyond "may contribute", her "prectical" suggestions are anything but. Breast Feed? Why? What's the risk of passing the chemicals and hormones that you injest into your kid through your breast milk? Is that a greater or lesser danger than anything formula may contain?
Eat Organic? Define "Organic" first. Then tell me specifically which chemicals in non-"organic" foods cause a problem.
Educating the public more about what endocrine-disrupting chemicals are (and where they're found). Sure, education is always good, but before it'll really help, there needs to be science behind the warnings or you're just miseducating.
Exercise and healthy eating habits. Sure, that makes sense without this specific issue though.
Breast Feed and Eat Organic sounds more like pushing a political agenda than actual sound advice about keeping puberty from happening early. It is like the whole innoculation nonsense you published earlier. People are still delaying or forgoing inoculations because of mercury concerns? Most vaccines aren't made with mercury any more. The preponderance of scientific evidence comes down against that as a cause anyway and even then the concern was receiving too many doeses in too small a time frame. At this point, it is mostly people being afraid and looking for something to blame. That's what this is sounding like. Get the evidence then act, don't just guess or you're as likely to cause harm as help.
-
there is nothing which needs to be proven
[Read the article: King Kaufman's Sports Daily]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Huh, who knew? You heard it here first folks (from Mikes Pace, I don't want to take credit for it), there is nothing which needs to be proven.
-
May may may
[Read the article: Girlhood, interrupted]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]the logical chain is that being breastfed may reduce the chance of childhood obesity, and a lower rate of childhood obesity may reduce the incidence of early-onset puberty.
There's too many "may"s in that chain. Better diet and exercise are likely better preventatives of childhood obesity than breastfeeding and should rank higher on the list if that's the goal.
It doesn't look like hormone consumption through breastmilk by infants is really part of the issue at all.
But if hormone consumption is supposed to be part of the problem, shouldn't that be part of the issue? There hasn't been enough science done to really start making recommendations like the ones made in these articles and that's my point. Do the science or you might as well be telling pregnant women to swing a dead dog over their heads three times in a graveyard on a full moon.
-
Sarah1983
[Read the article: Girlhood, interrupted]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Therefore, it is wrong to label it as a "political agenda," which implies that it only benefits corrupt politicians
No, actually it doesn't. Political agendas are not just about corrupt politicians. Good politicians also have agendas and they are certainly political. Also, non-politicians can also have political agendas, from PETA, NOW and MoveOn.org to Limbaugh, Reactionary Churches and the NRA.
However, the main group I'm referring to here that has an interest in promoting breast-feeding is the LaLeche League. There are others, I'm sure, and these groups strongly promote breast feeding as the ONLY right way.
If there is solid scientific evidence that says breast feeding has a direct, causal relationship to preventing early onset puberty, then sure, advocate that. Currently there is not and I doubt there will be. Bottle feeding has been going on for generations longer than the incidence of earlier onset puberty. Unless there has been a recent, drastic, accross the board change in formula content, the patterns don't match.
-
And there you are
[Read the article: Girlhood, interrupted]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]See, Sarah1983, they even have a slogan. Juliebird posted it: "breast is best".
The jury is still out on all the effects she lists as there are studies showing the effect and there are studies showing no effect. Until there is better evidence it is just a political movement. Heck, a political movement can be against the formula companies as easily as one can be for them.
-
Anonymous 09:08
[Read the article: We paved paradise]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Wow Parking = healthcare. That's one of the biggest stretches I've seen. And so totally wrong too! You must be proud.
First, no-one is talking about FREE healthcare.
Second, you don't think the insurance industry is providing many of the distortions you list? If not, you didn't really bother to think about this much. And if that's the case, why would anyone pay attention to your rediculous postulations anyway?
-
Slatts
[Read the article: We paved paradise]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Ach, it's enough to make one envy the Amish
But most Amish use less technology than most of society precisely because they do this cost-benefit analysis with every single new thing to come along. The only reason to envy the Amish here is because they have more experience analyzing this kind of situation.