We would like to respond to Dr. Edward Gilbreth’s Aug. 16 article titled “Exaggeration of hunger data.”
It is obvious that Dr. Gilbreth did not take the time to investigate the hunger/obesity paradox that exists in America. When people are not given access to nutritious food, they can still be hungry and malnourished, even if they are overweight.
The phrase “poor food choices” makes it seem as if a low-income family has a choice between nutritious food and non-nutritious food that causes obesity.
The problem is that nutritious food is expensive, and “junk” food is the least expensive, so obesity can be a poverty problem. We need to make nutritious food an actual choice for parents and their children living below the poverty line.
According to the Journal of the National Medical Association, food insecurity exists when people, due to economic constraints, lack access to enough food to fully meet basic needs at all times. They fear running out of food, and reduce the quality of their diets or reduce the quantity of food they consume.
Another factor that contributes to obesity among the hungry is overeating when food is available, and the physiological changes that occur to help the body conserve energy when diets are inadequate. The body can compensate for periodic food shortages by becoming more efficient at storing more calories as fat.
Dr. Gilbreth misses the point completely. Whether one in six or one in 100, no person in America should go hungry. According to the Henry J. Kaiser Foundation, the average monthly food stamp benefit per person in South Carolina is $131.38. That is about $4.30 a day, less than $1.50 per meal, which cannot provide sufficient nutrition for growing children.
Volunteering regularly at a food pantry, we see the face of hunger and it is heartbreaking. We, who are trying to feed the hungry, are not overstating our case.
Jill S. Levy
In response to the Aug. 21 letter to the editor titled “True conservatives respect choice,” the writer states: “If ‘conservative values’ means restricting choice, then the values that these people [conservatives] impose on society as a whole can only be described as creating a space where freedom is lost.’ ”
Please, note what “conservative values” really mean. They mean that life is to be valued and held sacred. The writer worries about restricting choice, but choice is not picking out a new car or deciding what to order from a dinner menu. We are talking about a person’s life. When others use the catchy phrase that one should have the freedom to choose, why not include the freedom to choose to kill an innocent victim?
Why not really state what is going on when one aborts a child?
Real conservatives respect life.
River Landing Drive
As the region moves forward to prohibit texting and the use of devices for similar reasons, our legislators move to the side saying it is “unenforceable.” Numerous communities, counties and states, however, have had laws in place for several years.
Would it kill anyone here to discuss with other states’ law- makers and law enforcement how they handle the regulations they have in place?
No. But it certainly may kill loved ones if they keep deferring action.
I wish I worked for the Charleston County Airport Authority. With the news of its major change in policy, I am delighted that I can now work from home three days a week, and just tell the folks in the office to call if they need me.
Even better, I can get a job teaching at Trident or one of the other state colleges, or substitute those days at one of the county’s schools, and draw two public salaries for working the same day. (Actually, I believe state law prohibits drawing two state salaries for working the same hours/days but it’s OK with the airport authority).
Of course, it’s possible that the new director is planning to put in the three eight-hour days he misses during the week by working two 12-hour days on the weekend.
It would be an interesting legal challenge if a group of the authority’s employees tried it. (Although they would all probably be immediately fired).
Windmill Creek Road
I applaud Frank Wooten for his column concerning the state of South Carolina continuing to fly the Confederate flag. I also wonder why people attack positions such as his but whine about their right to celebrate their heritage. No one’s right to celebrate one’s heritage or culture is at stake, never was and never will be.
What is at stake is the continuing insult that flying this flag poses to a considerable segment of our state’s population. Now, if you don’t care about how other citizens feel about the flag or why they feel so, then you are relegated to the fringe groups that have brought disgrace to this flag since the end of Reconstruction — groups that argue that the Civil War had nothing to do with slavery.
You do not have to be a member of the group that wants the flag taken off our Statehouse grounds to understand that the continual flying of this flag is an ongoing “slap in the face” to those who want it removed. It’s also a continual embarrassment to our state but it does put us in the company of Mississippi.
My views have nothing to do with any boycott. It’s a matter of state pride and reputation.
If you celebrate the history of the Confederate flag, please continue to do so. Pray to it, sleep with it as your cover, fly it from your car or truck, make clothing out of it, do anything you want to because no one is keeping you from celebrating that “sacred” symbol of defeat, the symbol of an act of treason against the United States, a symbol that was not allowed during the period when South Carolina was under martial law during Reconstruction.
Nicolas C. Lempesis
E. Ashley Avenue
I agree that texting while driving is dangerous. While we are addressing this issue, let’s include other dangerous distractions. For example, small children. Nothing can be more distracting than a toddler screaming in the back seat. Fast food: It’s impossible to pay attention to your surroundings while attempting to dip one’s french fries in ketchup.
Oh, and passengers. Friends telling a good joke, spouses arguing about directions, co-workers debating office politics. All much too distracting.
Foster’s Glenn Drive
‘The Hit’ overdone
Enough! Without a doubt, Jadeveon Clowney is one terrific and outstanding football player who deserves all the adulation he is receiving.
That being said, I think if I hear one more time, or read one more article about “the Hit” I’m going to throw up.
I’ve been following college football for more decades than I care to admit and have never seen one play garner more publicity than this one.
If I recall correctly, the ball carrier did get up and walk off, so how bone crushing could it have been? Picturesque? Undoubtedly. The hit of the century?
I think maybe not.
My memory has faded somewhat, but I can still recall the hits of a defensive back named Jack Tatum from Ohio State/Oakland Raiders, an All-American and Hall of Famer, who would hit you like that more times than not.
Jadeveon has a way to go to reach that level of play. Will he attain that level? Quite possibly. But until then, please, give “the Hit” a rest.
Grey Marsh Road
Notice about comments: