Fear the flu
Re “State Ebola policy is smart, but we need national Rx” (Editorials, Oct. 31): I took my family to get our flu shots recently. We don’t quarantine people who spread a virus that kills thousands of Americans every year, the flu. In fact, they go to work every day. Why aren’t the politicians screaming about that?
John Moore, Sacramento
Use science as a guide
Sign Up and Save
Get six months of free digital access to The Sacramento Bee
I am disgusted that the California Public Health Department has joined the fear-mongering Ebola crazy train with a mandatory 21-day quarantine for people who selflessly travel to West Africa to help with the Ebola effort. Using science to guide our actions is necessary, and this quarantine is not scientifically based.
Science tells us that vaccinations prevent tens of thousands of deaths, yet the state allows many residents and their offspring to remain untreated. Science tells us that tobacco kills tens of thousands each year, yet we allow smoking to be a personal decision. Science tells us that ATV accidents kill and paralyze hundreds each year, but they go unregulated. Science tells us that guns kill dozens of residents each day, yet they continue to be misused.
I plead with our elected officials to get the state back to a fact-based status and not join the other states that are using fear.
Anita Brady, Redding
Hoarder needed help
Re “Hoarder defense used in Galt man’s murder trial” (Our Region, Oct. 29): Some may dismiss psychologist Robin Zasio’s diagnosis of hoarding disorder as a defense for murder in the case of accused killer Joseph Francis Corey. But I personally felt relief that more attention is being given to this largely misunderstood affliction.
With the recent spotlight on the Veterans Administration health system, exposing its excessively long wait times and chronic mismanagement, and given that Joseph Francis Corey was a Vietnam veteran, I would question if his mental health was ever adequately addressed. Perhaps if it had been, he could have received the therapy or medication he needed long before he snapped.
He is clearly someone who needed professional help. Where exactly did he slip through the cracks?
Donelle Swain, Sacramento
Drug policies are skewed
Re “Stop insanity of pain meds” (Letters, Oct. 27): As a nurse, I have not seen a more nonsensical rule than the one that recently took effect regarding hydrocodone-combination products. The pseudoephedrine rule of 2006 comes close, though.
Once again, the needs of the very few hold more weight than the needs of the many and logic is turned on its head.
Not immediately, but soon we will witness a rise in heroin use, as it will be easier to acquire than legal Norco and patients in pain will do that which is easiest.
It is too bad that so much power rests in a small entity created by President Richard M. Nixon. It is more profitable for a few, but not for the many.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration and Drug Enforcement Administration should have better things to do than examine the urine of a 75-year-old, or pretend to hold a medical license with the power to treat and prescribe. Big Brother, thanks for micromanaging pain and suffering. Bye to privacy and respect.
Robin Mitchell, Carmichael
Measure L is balanced
Re “Sacramento’s ‘strong-mayor’ plan very different from Fresno’s” (Viewpoints, Oct. 30): I’m disappointed in former Fresno Mayor Karen Humphrey’s attack on Measure L. The former mayor apparently doesn’t know Sacramento or Measure L very well.
If she did, she’d know that the reforms were specifically recommended in more than six years of public meetings, where Sacramentans weighed in on what they wanted to see in Measure L.
Provisions such as Measure L’s term limits on the mayor or the council’s ability to override a veto, are products of what Sacramentans said that they wanted to see on the ballot.
I’m also alarmed by the article’s attack on Measure L’s sunset clause, which says if Measure L passes, the voters get to decide after six years if we want to keep it. If we’re going to ask voters to make this change, why shouldn’t they have the right to review and reaffirm it after a trial period?
Jeff Bister, Sacramento
No need to fear strong mayor
Re “Sacramento must separate Measure L from the mayor” (Editorials, Oct. 30): As a former member of the League of Women Voters, I’m disappointed league leadership has resorted to scaremongering against Mayor Kevin Johnson rather than focusing on the provisions of Measure L itself.
I believe a clue as to why the leadership chose to be personal rather than factual occurred at a City Council meeting Oct. 15, 2013. The video surprisingly shows one of the representatives suggesting voters are not smart enough to understand this measure.
I find it hypocritical that the league would take this view. Scare tactics were used to keep women from voting, suggesting they were not smart enough to understand complex ballot measures.
Franciska Acosta, Sacramento
Measure L is Johnson’s play
Measure L is all about Mayor Kevin Johnson.
The proponents have said his re-election depends on getting Measure L passed. It is clear voters cannot possibly know how to vote on Measure L unless they know what Johnson has in mind to do with those new powers, and why he can’t get done what he wants to by working with the present system and its City Council.
If Measure L isn’t about Johnson, why rush to change our government structure for him?
Red Slider, Sacramento
EXTRA LETTERS ONLINE
Find them at:
HOW TO SUBMIT
Online form (preferred):
Other: Letters, P.O. Box 15779,
Sacramento, CA 95852
150-word limit. Include name, address and phone number. Letters may be edited for clarity, brevity and content.