ShareThis Page
Letters to the Editor


| Wednesday, July 16, 2008

I am appalled at the relentless marketing to new target populations of the obscene concept that drugs, not lifestyle, will prevent disease.

The United States is only 5 percent of the world's human population, yet it consumes 70 percent of the world's medications -- and yet is only 37th among nations in longevity.

The Trib is the tool of Big Pharma for placing on the front page the recommendation by Dr. Stephen Daniels -- who has worked as a consultant for both Abbott and Merck -- that some children as young as 8 be given cholesterol-fighting drugs to ward off heart problems (" Cholesterol drugs to be advised for children ," Associated Press, July 7 and while almost never giving any coverage to safe, natural approaches for health.

Recent studies show that cholesterol drugs do not prevent clogging of arteries and that many heart attack victims had low cholesterol.

Cholesterol is a necessary nutrient, responsible for normal male and female hormone production, brain function and cell-wall manufacture.

Developing children will be at serious risk if they are induced, unnecessarily, to take drugs that will inhibit their normal development, potentially damage their livers and muscles, decrease their immunity and rob their bodies of vital energy through the blockage of coenzyme Q production.

Dr. Dean Ornish has shown that preventing as well as reversing the clogging of arteries is mainly a matter of steering away from a top-heavy meat and chicken diet and avoiding junk foods and hydrogenated trans fats.

The dual epidemics of obesity and decreased life expectancy plaguing the younger generation are the result of poor diet and lack of exercise, not a drug deficiency.

James H. Winer South Side The writer is a doctor of chiropractic and a radio talk-show host.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me