Letters to the Editor
voice of reason
Published Letters: 29 Editor's Choice: 10
-
What were the veterinarians wearing?
[Read the article: The beef over pet food]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The careful description of each raw feeder's outfit seemed to be saying something... but what? I could not crack the code. Perhaps a description of the veterinarians' outfits could have shed some additional light on the debate?
Sorry to see such a silly article on the topic. I don't feed raw but know a lot of people who do. It might surprise you to learn that:
-Many of them feed some of their dogs raw and other dogs kibble or some other diet.
-Many - most in fact - own mutts. Some even work in animal rescue.
-Some are vegetarian themselves, others eat all kinds of meat.
-They will tell you there is no one right diet for all dogs.
-None of them has ever suggested to me that I should feed my dogs raw.
-
When did pharmacists become enforcers of sexual mores?
[Read the article: No refills for you]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Actually, I believe historically, some MDs and pharmacists only filled birth control scripts for married women. Premarital sex was considered wrong, so no BC prescriptions for single women. I hope we're not going back in that direction but it sure does seem like it if pharmacists are going to start making moral evaluations before dispensing drugs.
Why is it inherently more responsible to take BC before conception and not after? This is not about the notion that Plan B prevents implantation of an already fertilized egg - if that were the issue they'd refuse to prescribe it to anybody, not just refills.
It's certainly more expensive to take Plan B than to be on regular birth control. It's less pleasant and a bit more nerve-wracking, but those are simply disadvantages of one approach over another - there are many BC methods, some more reliable, some less reliable, some more pleasant and some less pleasant. This is the only one that pharmacists seem to be making a fuss over.
-
Seriously, you applaud testing everyone 13-64?
[Read the article: What else we're reading]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]For a disease transmitted through sexual contact and sharing if IV drug needles? When being drug-free, celibate, or monogamous lowers your risk to zero and practicing safe sex lowers it to nearly zero?
This makes no sense medically or fiscally. Test those at risk. Don't put the rest of us through an exercise in waste and potential confusion over false positive results.
-
Hilarious!
[Read the article: Old school]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I was also born in 1959 and found this piece hilarious. I can't believe how seriously and personally all these comments took the piece.
And to get serious myself for a moment, yes, the baby boom generation has been defined as 1945-1964 for as long as I've ever heard of it, because generations are supposed to be 20 years and ours started at the end of WWII. It's not what we had in common socially or spiritually but the fact that there was a high birth rate (the "boom" in having babies). My whole childhood they were building new schools and additions to schools because people were having bigger families and there were more kids. The rest is a bunch of marketing and sociological hooey.
Thanks Debra for the laughs!
-
Well Said, Mr. Raut
[Read the article: Why I defend "terrorists"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]From what I understand Mr. Stimson has had to apologize for his words and has been rebuked by over 100 law school deans. Also, keep in mind that those detainees receiving representation are only a small fraction of those being held. It is indeed the shame of our nation.
You hit the nail on the head, the government does not want hearings because they're afraid it will shine a light on the fact that people, some of them innocent, have been thrown in a hole for years, with no end in sight. The longer they delay, the worse it will look when it's finally over.
The sadder subtext of Stimson's remarks was the idea that "reputable law firms" exist to preserve the bottom line of corporations, and had better not bite the hands that feed them by defending the wrong clients. So much for the rights of individuals. And I think he believed it when he said it, no matter how much he's backpedaling now.
-
Sanjaya is Howard Stern's Avatar
[Read the article: "Idol" slayer?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Subversive? Please, this is Howard Stern's power trip, his fantasy that he's so popular he can bring down American Idol. He wants to "win" American Idol with Sanjaya representing him, it's just another pissing contest. He's just selling a different brand, one called "subversive".
Why is American Idol oppressive? Nobody has to watch it, or vote or buy albums, and yet people do. It's not easy to make something that popular. If shoving corporate advertising and hype down peoples' throats were all it took to create a hit show, there would be a lot more of them on TV but instead we have dozens and dozens of cancelled programs every season, a few modest successes and very few actual hits.
Want to rebel? Go to the opera. That'll show 'em.
-
Sloppy reporting, sloppy comments
[Read the article: The truth about cat and dog food]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The article and many letter writers do not make any distinction between pet food quality in terms of high nutritional value, and quality in terms of not being tainted.
Purina, Pedigree and other grocery store brands are like Wonder Bread, Twinkies or Kraft Macaroni and Cheese. Are they going to make you sick because the ingredients are tainted? Probably not. Does that mean they make for a better quality diet than higher-fiber whole wheat bread, fresh fruit or grilled chicken breast with homegrown tomatos and asparagus?
Pet food brands vary immensely in nutritional quality.
Natural Balance and other higher-end pet foods provide much better nutrition to your pets. There is simply no comparison. The problem is not in their formula, but in the ingredient sourcing of the company that manufactures the food for them.
Also, to those who point to Natural Balance, Eukanuba etc. and say that the recall "mostly" involved high-end foods, look at the list again. A large percentage of those brands are the cheapest grocery-store generic pet foods.
The article was one of the most confused and haphazard pieces I've read on the subject. If you are really interested in learning more about the pet food industry and how to find quality foods for your pets, get a subscription to the Whole Dog Journal.