Letters for April 19, 2012

He’s no victim

Re “Rush to judgment” (Cover story, by David Waddell, April 12:

For an unfortunate incident that resulted in a successful arrest and conviction of the person responsible, the author sure does a lot of whining. I find your treatment of Mr. Sayavong as some sort of victim incomprehensible, and you don’t even address Mr. Aguilar’s actual guilt. Whatever happened to personal responsibility?

Matt Wolfe
Butte Valley

Passionate about Paul, pro and con

Re “Two sides of Ron Paul” (From This Corner, by Robert Speer, April 12):

Just before Ron Paul appeared in Chico, I received an email from one of my brightest former students expressing happiness about the eminent arrival of one of his personal heroes. I was chagrined to read how much he liked Ron Paul for all the reasons you mention in your column. I hope that former student read your piece, and that others do as well. Paul has some good ideas to offer, but as you make clear, he’s got some abominable ones, too.

On the facing page, I also appreciated the guest comment by George Siler [“Protecting vulnerable children”], especially after the stuff you’ve been publishing that makes the people who do the hard work of Child Protective Services seem like minions of a totalitarian state. My wife worked in the field of Child Protective Services for several years, and I can tell you that there are few more demanding jobs or assigned duties where you’re going to be damned if you do and double damned if you don’t.

Jaime O’Neill

Listen to the videos of Dr. Paul talking about personal liberty and read the Constitution, please! Dr. Paul is the only candidate who will work to keep your God-given rights that the corporation acting as our government is taking away daily. Also, please listen to Sui Juris on KZFR Wednesday nights at 6 p.m.; you will be enlightened. Blessings!

Leslie Holmes

Making meat safe

Re “Slimewatch, cont.” (The Greenhouse, by Christine G.K. LaPado, April 12):

The concept of science being able to solve all of our woes, as in the case of pink slime and the meat industry, is something I find rather scary. Perhaps we could just take cattle out of feedlots and place them in grass pastures, where they belong. This would change the PH of the animals’ digestive tracts, thereby killing off pathogenic bacteria.

This would also remove the pollution problems and animal-welfare issues that our conventional meat industry suffers from in light of its use of confinement animal-feeding operations (CAFOs).

Then, if we could have multiple small harvest facilities throughout the country and on-farm harvest of meat animals, we would really be light years ahead by going backward just a bit. Pink slime is an easy way for the meat industry to cover for its shoddy practices. Purchase grass-fed and pasture-raised meats directly from the farmer and bypass the pink slime.

Carol Albrecht
Chapter Co-leader

Chico/Butte Valley ChapterWeston A. Price Foundation

If we as a nation consumed less beef, which would be better for our health and the health of the planet, we could afford to purchase higher-quality, sustainably produced beef that was unadulterated with processed meat scraps treated with ammonium hydroxide.

Since the likelihood of this occurring in the near future is fairly remote, and since we insist on paying $2 per pound for ground “beef,” if the ground “beef” contains lean, finely textured beef or “pink slime,” we, the consumers, should be informed of this fact.

In an article in the San Francisco Chronicle dated April 1, 2012, Marion Nestle, professor in the Nutrition, Food Studies and Public Health Department at New York University, writes: “Do we want LFTB in our food? Or do we and our children deserve better? Serving healthy and delicious food is a way to show respect for our culture, food, children and schools, and to invest in the future of our nation. Perhaps the best solution to the pink slime dilemma is simply to label LFTB as an ingredient. This would give individuals and schools the opportunity to decide for themselves whether culture or cost is the more important value in food choice. An even better idea: Let’s produce safe meat in the first place.”

Thank you, Marion, for these timeless words of wisdom.

Debra Abbott

No way, Safeway

Re “Safeway says no” (Newslines, by Tom Gascoyne, April 12):

I have been buying food for years from Safeway, but GMO pesticides are killing bees. I love bees and everything they give to us, so I am not going to buy food from Safeway anymore due to this. Please, Safeway, think about no chemicals and bees’ lives on this planet.

Sage Pantega
Fort Bragg

Two nights ago I went to Safeway for convenience. I asked a worker where all the organic and gluten-free foods were (I couldn’t find any), and he replied, “Well, there is a Jewish section, I think.”

I have dietary restrictions (most likely caused from our overly modified and pesticide/chemically enhanced foods), and Safeway has the most limited selection of organic and non-modified options.

Thanks for the article; I’m done with Safeway for good.

Hannah Williamson

Another Measure A

Once again, we get to exercise our democratic freedom and decide on a matter of legislative policy. On Tuesday, June 5, voters who reside in Butte County will be asked the question, “Shall the Medical Marijuana Cultivation Ordinance, Ordinance Number 4029, be adopted?” If passed, there will be no medical marijuana allowed on less than 0.5 acres in Butte County.

What about the lawful patient who wants to grow a few plants on a third of an acre? Under the proposed law, the maximum acreage required to grow 99 plants is 160 acres. Are we trying to create a monopoly for rich landowners and force all the little people to buy their medicine from them? And if six plants could go on 0.5 acres, wouldn’t it take roughly 50 acres to grow 99 plants?

The Board of Supervisors needs to work on developing a more reasonable ordinance that is less likely to be challenged in court. How can we make criminals of lawful citizens when we can’t even fund our courts and jails? Vote No on Measure A.

Jessica Allen

Vacationing at Enloe

A five-day stay in the hospital is not something that any family looks forward to. It certainly was not on my wife’s or my bucket list. Yet, that’s exactly where we found ourselves following a recent medical emergency that scared the begebies out of us.

To make matters worse, we were scheduled to fly to Hawaii for a long-awaited celebration of our 25th wedding anniversary. Those plans quickly changed. Five days at Enloe Medical Center—that’s some alternative vacation.

Yet, when you’re faced with a medical emergency a good hospital, one with outstanding doctors and nurses, one with a professional and competent staff and caring attendants, can be the most comforting place in the world. We quickly discovered that Enloe is such a place. From the time we entered the emergency room to the moment we walked out five days later, we were treated with the best medical care I can imagine.

Every day, at every level, from the docs to the housekeeping crew, it was obvious that patient care was everyone’s primary concern.

So here’s our message to the Enloe family: Thank you, thank you, thank you so much. And to the community at large: Though a hospital stay may not be on your bucket list either, rest assured: If you ever need one, you have one of the best right here in Chico.

Mary and Bob Evans

Editor’s note: Mr. Evans is a member of the Chico City Council. He and his wife have rescheduled their Hawaii trip for June.

The lazy man’s source

Re “Two sides of Ron Paul” (From This Corner, by Robert Speer, April 12):

While Wikipedia is a good source to find links to various news articles on the topic of which you speak, why not just use the links it provides? It would make your column more credible.

Wikipedia is known for not being entirely factual, so using it as a source just seems like this column was written at the last minute, or the author decided to be lazy and not look too much into the facts. It could harm your reputation as a reporter. Just sayin’.

David Wangberg