The biggest myth
I wanted to make some comments about J. Tobias Beard’s article on “Everything you know is wrong—Taking apart some of common wine myths” [The Working Pour], in the September 9,2008, issue of C-VILLE.
We have been deceived about alcohol the way we were deceived about tobacco, by both the media and the studies themselves. The myth is actually that wine/alcohol can possibly be healthy. According to our government, in 2000, wine is a class “A” human carcinogen, along with asbestos, arsenic, tobacco, etc., and “any” alcohol increases the risk of cancer. The “French Paradox” was disproved years ago by the World Health Organization (WHO) because of faulty data, and the presence of alcohol in the body negates nutrients. For references check jrussellshealth.org.
Equality and safety for all
Thank you for highlighting the plight of those of us who choose alternate means of transportation [“Pedal vs Metal," September 9, 2008]. This city can be commended for its effort to be health conscious and environmentally friendly, but I am frequently amused by the shocked reactions I get from people when they learn that I choose not to own a car or even a bike. I know that not everyone can do this because they live or work outside of town, but it can be frustrating when drivers seem to have complete disregard for the safety of pedestrians. I’m not the person jaywalking and darting out in traffic that makes you slam on the brakes. I wait for the walk sign and look both ways before stepping off the curb. Please show me the same respect by yielding to me when it’s raining out or I’m carrying armloads of groceries or city construction has blocked off the sidewalks, and don’t honk because I don’t cross the street fast enough.
Oh, those French
Recently, I had occasion to read your interesting publication in which my grandson was featured in the article, “Does Charlottesville have a gang problem?” [July 8, 2008]. Todd is a police detective and was accurately described by your reporter Scott Weaver, who appears to be a gifted writer. So, my question is this: Why muddy an otherwise interesting article with offending pornographic language? In the very first paragraph, G—d— (page 18) which is bad enough but then on page 20, he used the “f” word in its entirety. Is his vocabulary really so limited? The bigger question is—why weren’t these edited out? Responsibility goes along with free speech. As Camus noted in his novel The Plague, we must guard against little plagues so they won’t become huge plagues.
I assume your news weekly is read by families including young, impressionable readers. There is no excuse for such language at all but especially in a newspaper that has a 24,000 copies distribution. I sincerely hope that future contributors are warned about the language permissible and that editors will catch and delete inappropriate words that offend all decent readers.
Mt. Vernon, Ilinois