Home · Articles · News · Letters to the Editor · Letters to the Editor 9/17/2003
September 17th, 2003 | Letters to the Editor
 

Letters to the Editor 9/17/2003

     
Tags:
YOU THINK WE EAT FUNNY?

Whether you think a raw-food diet is radical extremism or not ["Raw Power," WW, Sept. 3, 2003], the bottom line is that there is universal, widespread, unbiased and documented medical proof that vegans and vegetarians have a far lower risk of all diet-related diseases.

Yet most Americans, for some strange reason, insist on eating (or gorging) on a diet primarily consisting of dead animals and processed, adulterated food full of chemicals, pesticides, hormones, preservatives and GMOs. Then they get their stomachs stapled or have their chests sliced open and the fat scraped out of their arteries and think that's a perfectly normal way to live.

Andrew Marino
Beaverton

MEASURE 11 WORTH THE PRICE

Too bad they don't teach accounting in the liberal-arts colleges. In the Measure 11 item [WW, Sept. 10, 2003], Murmurs suffers from one-sided accounting. Murmurs complains that Measure 11 costs too much, presumably referring to the high prison-population support costs. What Murmurs neglects is the cost of not having the prisoners behind bars.

A crook must steal about $300,000 worth of car stereos to get $30,000 to live on for a year (fences don't pay much). Then they do another (maybe) $300,000 in property damage, plus the cost of time off trying to get things returned to normal. Similar problems arise for dope dealers, etc. It costs far less than $300,000 a year to house crooks in prison.

The taxpayer is far better off with the bad guys in jail. This is the reason the taxpayers vote in laws like Measure 11 and "Three Strikes You're Out."

C. N. Winningstad
Newport

HOUSEHOLD HOGS

While I encourage (and practice) water conservation, I also think it is not altogether appropriate to use "household" as the only comparative measure for your list of Hydro Hogs [Aug. 27, 2003].

For example, you state that the Millers, No. 7, live on a one-acre lot. The average Portland "household" lives on a one-sixth-acre lot, or less. So a water usage about six times the average household reflects primarily larger irrigation needs, not necessarily irresponsible use.

The diversity of families, lots, houses, landscaping, etc. throughout Portland neighborhoods is one of the city's treasures. And this diversity implies different needs for resources such as water. So please be a bit more thoughtful in your "analysis."

Sheila Mahan
Northeast 21st Avenue

 
  • Currently 3.5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
 
 
 

 

comments powered by Disqus
 

Web Design for magazines

Close
Close
Close