Letters To Learn From

I selected one letter from the New York Times, and one from the Los Angeles Times.  They are similar in the respect that they are both clear and rational, while avoiding an overwhelmingly serious tone. 


Letter from the New York Times addressing climate change:
Re “Is It Weird Enough Yet?,” by Thomas L. Friedman (column, Sept. 14):

I agree strongly that “we need to take steps to mitigate climate change — just in case Governor Perry is wrong.”

The French philosopher and mathematician Blaise Pascal, in what has become known as Pascal’s wager, suggested that even people who did not believe in God should act as if they did, since being wrong could be catastrophic.

I would say to the climate skeptics: If you do not believe in climate change but act as if you did, even if you are right, the result would be a society with clean, sustainable jobs, less dependence on Mideast oil and healthier lives. But if you are wrong and we do not act immediately, the results would be catastrophic.

PHILLIP GOTTSCHALK
Montville, N.J., Sept. 14, 2011

I liked this letter because the writer is very rational in the sense that he addresses the idea: What is the worst thing that can happen if we believe in climate change? The letter addresses the two possible outcomes of how we react to the issue of climate change. He makes it clear what is at stake, and his reference to Pascal makes it easy to understand that there is no huge downfall to believing that climate change does in fact exist.  In my opinion, it is hard to argue with any of the points that he makes.

Letter from the Los Angeles Times addressing prescription drugs:
Re "Drugs now deadlier than autos," Sept. 18

It wouldn't be at all surprising to find that the increased abuse of prescription drugs somewhat coincides with pharmaceutical companies increasingly marketing their products directly to consumers.

Though I do not wish to demean the seriousness of the maladies that many of these drugs are intended to treat, the advertisements cause semi-hysterical laughter because the possible risks associated with imbibing these drugs often sound far worse than the conditions they treat. Side effects I've heard include blindness, a sudden drop in blood pressure, suicidal thoughts and death.
Do drug companies want to actually help those in need, or do they simply try to make ever more money?
Lewis Redding

Arcadia

This letter caught my attention because it addresses the harm of prescription drugs rationally while also utilizing some irony and a tinge of dark humor. The writer lets his personality shine through a little bit without being overly radical with his ideas or language. It also caught my attention because the same thought always crosses my mind as I watch commercial after commercial about prescription medicine that cram a long list of side-effects at the very end that seem far worse than what the medicine is treating. It makes you question whether you should just take your chances with what you already have. The writer shows some level of being a critical consumer, as he does not just buy into what the drug companies are trying to market.