Budget shortchanges medical research
The president's 2008 budget proposal continues a dangerous trend of underfunding medical and scientific research ("President's budget comes under fire," Feb. 3).
It underestimates the vital hope such research offers families facing debilitating and fatal diseases, including Alzheimer's disease.
It is absolutely critical to maintain a level of funding that ensures that scientists have the tools and resources to find treatments to delay, halt or reverse the progression of Alzheimer's and other life-threatening diseases.
As many as 5 million Americans are living with Alzheimer's disease today.
In 2000, there were 74,600 in Maryland with Alzheimer's disease; by 2010, we estimate that there will be 96,000 Marylanders with the disease.
Without effective treatments, Maryland's health care and long-term care systems will not be able to provide sufficient supports for these patients.
On the other hand, investing in research to end Alzheimer's disease is one of the most prudent decisions that the government can make - it would save lives and save billions in Medicare and Medicaid costs.
Cass Naugle
Baltimore
The writer is executive director of the Greater Maryland chapter of the Alzheimer's Association.
No reason to fear products for babies
Contrary to the alarmist headlines inspired by the latest study on phthalates, these chemicals are not a threat to anyone's health - not to babies, their mothers or the rest of us ("Effects of baby products studied," Feb. 4).
These useful chemicals have been around us for more than 50 years, and there is zero evidence of anyone being harmed by typical exposure levels.
Indeed, authoritative panels have evaluated phthalates, both here and in the European Union, and none of them has found the chemicals to pose a risk to human health.
The current report in the journal Pediatrics merely asserts that phthalates or their breakdown products are sometimes "detectable" in infants' urine.
But the mere presence of a substance does not mean that it is harmful.
Parents are highly vulnerable to being manipulated by scare stories concerning their children's health and safety.
But they need not be concerned about using lotions or shampoos on their babies - they have many important concerns without being frightened about such nonsense.
Dr. Gilbert Ross
New York
The writer is executive and medical director for the American Council on Science and Health.
Still misses music on city public radio
I can't claim any special outrage at the firing of Marc Steiner because I've been nursing a grudge against WYPR and its predecessor station for jettisoning most of the station's classical programming years ago ("Dispute over Steiner's firing continues on-air," Feb. 6).
If given the choice of listening to talkers or to some of the greatest art ever conceived by the human mind, I know which one I would choose.
Even someone as well-informed, locally relevant and respectful as Mr. Steiner wouldn't stand a chance against Bach, Puccini or Delius on my dial.
Paul R. Schlitz Jr.
Baltimore
Make White House liable for wiretaps
Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey and National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell recently wrote a 12-page letter to Senate leaders seeking to update the 1978 surveillance law ("Surveillance debate stirs veto threat," Feb. 6).
At issue is whether telecommunications companies are liable in lawsuits for violating privacy rights by cooperating with the White House in wiretapping just about anyone it chose after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.
The letter included the sentence: "Private citizens who respond in good faith to a request for assistance by public officials should not be held liable for their actions."
I'm not a lawyer, but that would seem to mean that it's OK to do what the government asks you to do even though you know the request may be illegal or unethical.
The White House wants the telecommunications companies to be immune from legal actions as a result of their cooperation, just in case their cooperation is ruled illegal.
But it seems to me that if illegal acts were committed by the telecommunications companies and the White House encouraged or coerced these acts, the White House itself should be liable.
Howard Albert
Joppa
Sanctions wrong response to abuse
I was heartened to read that the United States has taken concrete steps to confront the repressive military junta of Myanmar ("U.S. moves to punish Myanmar regime," Feb. 6).
This is indeed encouraging; for far too long, the plight of the citizens of Myanmar has been ignored by the governments of the world.
Unfortunately, the course of economic sanctions chosen by the Treasury Department will not provide the relief the people of Myanmar desperately need.
One need only look to Cuba, whose government remains strong after decades of sanctions, or North Korea, where Kim Jong Il continues to terrorize his people while living in the lap of luxury, for proof of the ineffectiveness of sanctions.
The time has come to abandon economic sanctions for the ineffectual waste that they are, and move to a system that rewards compliance with internationally recognized standards rather than doling out punishment for misbehavior - punishment that is far too easily shifted onto innocent children and the victims of repression and abuse that these sanctions are designed to protect.
Ross F. Gearllach
Arlington,Va.
The writer is an analyst for the Institute for Conflict Analysis and Resolution.
State commissioner can't assess risks
While I am in no position to critique the work of the Medical Mutual Liability Insurance Society's actuaries, which is the focus of Jay Angoff's column "Faulty forecasts" (Opinion
Commentary, Feb. 1), I do applaud the actions of the current insurance commissioner in ordering refunds to policyholders and taxpayers.
And I am in a position to criticize the absurd suggestion by Mr. Angoff that the commissioner substitute his own judgment as to what historical data the actuaries should use in projecting future claims against the insurer.
The commissioner is not trained to make this professional judgment. The actuaries are.
A more sensible suggestion would be for the commissioner to hire a qualified actuary to review the work of the insurer's actuaries.
If incompetence or malfeasance is found, the matter should be referred to the Actuarial Board for Counseling and Discipline, the disciplinary arm of the profession.
The board has a variety of options, including recommending to its member organizations that they expel the offending actuary.
Dwight K. Bartlett
Annapolis
The writer is a fellow for the Society of Actuaries and a former Maryland insurance commissioner.