Dangerous Diet

I am outraged at the Aug. 25 article regarding "strict diets" for children. The diet laid out by Dr. Robert Suskind, one consisting of 600 to 800 calories a day diet for a child, should immediately be recognized as dangerous.

In fact, Dr. Suskind himself admitted later in the article that children who had been placed on this diet "had growth rates slightly below normal." Yet he contended that the diet was "safe when used under a doctor's supervision."

How can any diet that could possibly affect a child's growth be deemed as "safe?"

A diet of 800 calories a day is starvation. Whether or not a child is obese is irrelevant. Anyone subjected to such a severe restriction of calories will suffer from hunger. In my opinion, this diet is nothing less than torture.

The seriousness of child obesity is repeatedly mentioned throughout this article. What I consider to be an even more serious problem is our society's obsession with weight loss. It is clearly not just a health problem. Now we seem to be shamelessly inflicting our weight-watching, fat-reducing reducing culture on our children.

If health was really the concern here, our doctors would not be focusing on the health risks of being "overweight," but rather on the more serious health problems that arise from constant dieting and habitual caloric restriction.

It is much more healthy to be "overweight" and maintain that weight with moderate exercise than it is to be compulsively dieting, an unfortunate pattern that most Americans have fallen into and one that is continually endorsed by the media in articles such as this one.

It is time that we recognize the true dangers of dieting. Self-esteem is most certainly not gained through weight loss. A child needs to feel loved and accepted at any weight.

An obese child who sheds some pounds will not emerge a confident individual, as the article seems to imply. We must recognize as a society that we are oppressing these children with our cruel diets and our inability to embrace them as humans and not simply fatty organisms that need to be "fixed.'

Claire Mysko

Lutherville

Partners

On Aug. 27 The Sun ran an article regarding the University of Maryland's recognition of "domestic partners." Recognition of "domestic partners" is not an educational policy issue for the university but a political and social one for all citizens.

What The Sun article did not say was that the original "domestic partners" resolution did not pass the College Park Campus Senate unopposed. As a member of the Senate, I and several faculty and staff spoke against these resolutions, and it took two contentious meetings for the resolutions to pass.

The article did not say that few states have adopted "domestic partners" as policy. While advocates have much promoted the 25 or so colleges that offer "domestic partners" benefits, nationally they represent about one-half of 1 percent of all 3,601 institutions of higher education. This does not indicate a national wave of acceptance. The two states to the south, Virginia and North Carolina, have considered and rejected "domestic partners" for extension of benefits in their higher education system.

Recognition of "domestic partners" is a political and social statement with implication far beyond the benefits proposed. Providing spousal benefits for heterosexual non-married couples is actually condoning co-habitation and removing the stigma of out-of-wedlock births which reduces marriage to the status of mere preference. Making legal marriage a mere preference is not something we want our public institutions to promote.

While the extension of benefits to unmarried heterosexual couples is one social policy issue, another is the recognition of gay and lesbian life-styles as being of equal value to society as marriage. While America is a tolerant nation in which individual choice is protected, it is a leap of logic to say that public and private good is promoted though endorsing and sponsoring unconventional life choices.

I would urge all concerned citizens to write to George McGowan, chair of Regents, University of Maryland System, Adelphi, Md. 20783 and express their opinion.

A. Lawrence Lauer

Olney

The writer is a member of the UMCP Senate and Senate Executive Committee.

No Raises

This letter is in reference to Aug. 19 article concerning the recommended raise in salaries for city officials. The recommended raise for the mayor alone would cover the salaries of two laid-off city employees.

I am infuriated with the insensitivity of any city official who would even consider accepting a raise at a time when people are losing their jobs and important benefits.

Just recently the mayor has made unwise decisions concerning top city school officials, while other employees were being laid off.

I am a city resident who was laid off from my full-time position in the private sector over two years ago. I am trying to make ends meet while taking temporary jobs, with no benefits, while continuing to job hunt. I would like to have a portion of the raise recommended for the city officials.

If there is enough money to give the recommended raises, then there must be enough in the budget to replace the faded street signs that are difficult to read. And also to complete filling in last winter's pot holes.

Now that elections are coming soon, perhaps it is time to consider placing people in these positions who are more than happy to work at a reasonable rate of pay. To clean house, so to speak.

Have the taxpayers vote to have any city official getting a raise.

Dolores J. Quandt

Baltimore

Maryland Rip-Off

"Welcome to Maryland!" is not exactly the greeting several local automobile inspection stations offer newcomers to the state. It's not even close.

I am in the process of buying a house in Anne Arundel County, and I am full of enthusiasm for a life I am beginning in Maryland.

But one thing has put a damper on the excitement -- trying to figure out the inspection process the state has come up with.

Let me see if I have this correct:

First, the inspection price can be set by the individual station. I received quotes ranging from $40 to $62.

Second, the time needed for the inspection ran anywhere from an hour and a half to most of the day.

And the most baffling of all, instead of a standardized test process like the emissions testing, Maryland has seen fit to turn over the inspection process to repair shops that stand to profit by finding violations.

Evidently an odd thing happened to my headlights, set to factory specifications, which passed another state's inspection in February, and all of a sudden they are pointing in the wrong direction and a local station wants another $10 to fix them.

Don't get me wrong, there are Marylanders whom I have found to be helpful, including the State Police, who helped straighten out an inspection station that tried to convince me I needed a spare tire to pass inspection.

And I am sure there are places of business that are honest and conduct the tests in the manner in which they were meant to be.

But just in case, here is a reminder: Spare tires are not part of

the state inspection.

Sandy Linn

Arnold

Baseball's Void

Hurrah for Mike Littwin. In his Aug. 31 column, he expressed the pathos of many baseball fans who, without considering baseball's symmetry or timelessness, just plain miss the game.

I have four sons with whom I enjoy a wonderful relationship but, even so, the inability to lounge around together and watch the Os for an inning or two or to pore over the sports page and boast about the latest accomplishments of our favorite players, has unquestionably left avoid that just cannot be filled by news of corporate mergers or the latest back to school fashion trends.

In many households, baseball is a common ground on which family members with diverse interests can share their views. The debate over salary caps and arbitration bores us to tears -- why can't the players and owners give a little and then give us back our game.

Rich D'Adamo

Hunt Valley

Eternal Frank Sinatra

Regarding J. D. Considine's article, "Sinatra falls short of hisinging legend" (Aug. 30), I have attended numerous concerts by Frank Sinatra and, as any true fan of his music will tell you, his interpretations and lyrics on a given song vary constantly.

I have four different recordings of "Mack the Knife," and I defy you to come up with the same phrasing or lyrics on any of the recordings.

I'm not familiar with Mr. Considine, but since his byline identifies him as your "pop music critic" therein may lie the problem. Frank Sinatra's music is certainly not pop.

Frank Sinatra is an artist. If Mr. Considine were a true critic, he would evaluate the different phases of Frank Sinatra's performances relative to a given era. The Sinatra of the 1940s is different from the Sinatra of the 1950s, '60s or '70s.

Frank Sinatra's concerts continue to sell out because fans of the 1990s want to hear the Sinatra of the '90s.

Anthony A. DiGirolamo

Baltimore

Regarding your recent review of Frank Sinatra's concert aMerriweather Post Pavilion, J. D. Considine came down pretty hard on Mr. Sinatra's performance.

Obviously, at age 78, Mr. Sinatra is not the singer he used to be. It is unrealistic to expect him to be.

Mr. Sinatra did a fine job with the songs he performed, and he captivated the audience throughout the concert. I had never seen Mr. Sinatra in concert before, but I was not disappointed. Nor did I feel I received "cheap nostalgia," as stated in Mr. Considine's review.

Mr. Sinatra is a legend in American music. He has spent his entire life entertaining audiences. That in itself deserves an ovation.

I am 40 years old, so I wasn't even born when Frank Sintra was in the prime of his career. Yet I was impressed with his performance and wouldn't have missed it for the world.

Carol O'Brocki

Glen Burnie