Letters to the Editor
Contemplator
Published Letters: 10
-
Tim Grieve: Who was the reporter?
[Read the article: "Just call it a 'no surrender' party"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Who the reporter is is part of the story that you are reporting, and I for one would like to know who it was. Not Dino Ironbody I'm sure, but who?
-
Re date-rape drugs
[Read the article: Does sex through fraud constitute rape?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"This is messed up. I mean, if a man gives a woman a drink with a date-rape drug in it, and she drinks it voluntarily, and he doesn't physically force himself on her thereafter ... that's not illegal in Massachusetts?? So what was the difference here, exactly??"
The difference is that it is illegal to drug someone but it isn't illegal to not answer their question. The former limits your ability to use judgement, the latter gives you imperfect knowledge, that you can remedy by turning on the light, or even squinting.
-
Tired of Know-It-Alls Dumping on Scientists
[Read the article: The invisible AIDS cure]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]First of all, the first anonymous letter is clearly a troll and should probably not be responded to. Now on to my letter:
As someone who spent many a sleepless day in a lab working on developing therapeutics, I get pretty pissed off when people state that those working in the field are there for the money. From my experience, most people in the area are working there out of a genuine desire to try to do something that helps people as well as satisfy there own curiosity about the world. There are way easier ways of making money than being a scientist. Try spending 10 years of post undergraduate training while making ~minimum wage during your prime earning years just for the chance to get a “real” job, perhaps trying to develop a therapeutic against a horrible disease. Of course there are people who don’t have absolutely pure motivations, who are motivated by glory and prestige. And so $%@ what! If that drives them to work harder to develop a more effective therapeutic approach then good on them! At least they are trying! Yes sometimes things don’t work as well as one would like, but its better than nothing. I personally feel that the development of HIV protease inhibitors is a triumph of modern medicinal chemistry. From unknown disease to effective drug in ten years is pretty amazing. I personally know people who would be dead without these drugs. Yes they have side effects. Yes, figuring out how to apply them to Africa is difficult, but for the individuals taking them, they have literally given them life. What would you rather these scientists do with their lives? Teach interpretive dance? You should watch the Nova special on the people who worked on the initial vaccine attempts for HIV. The obvious passion that these people had for their work was palpable. They wanted to cure this disease! They worked very hard and failed. I guess they are part of the great stupid masses of the west who failed Africa. Don’t you realize that for any final success, there are many many more failures, but it is these failures and the understanding that derives from them that leads to the ultimate success? The dismissive way that both the successes and the failures of the scientific community are dealt with by these authors is depressing. Is there a need for a multi-factorial approach in Africa, including social aspects of the disease? Clearly. But that does not mean that you shouldn’t also pursue therapeutic approaches.
-
This must be a Fake Letter
[Read the article: I hate buzzwords! It's not "carbon," it's "carbon dioxide"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I refuse to believe that any reader of Salon is this moronic. I'm almost as moronic for responding to this obvious bait.