On ‘Finding Meaning In Each Mouthful’: “After enjoying a plant-based diet for a year, I’ve learned to cook colorful new foods, seen my skin improve and felt new energy; I now go to sleep knowing I did something for the environment and didn’t cause an animal to suffer.” Victoria L. Schmitt, Durango, Colo.
The GOP ’ s Post-Bush Prospects I read your excerpt from “The Bush Tragedy” by Jacob Weisberg (“Fishing for a Way to Change the World,” Jan. 28). Tragedy requires the downfall of a hero, someone more than life-size destroyed by a fatal flaw. Few could argue that George W. Bush would qualify as heroic or larger than life despite awkward attempts to package him as such. (Who can forget the flight suit of the unfortunate “Mission Accomplished” moment?) Many of us are flawed. We may exhibit pride, greed or a penchant for denying obvious facts, but such shortcomings do not make us tragic, only ordinary. A great nation peopled by generous and energetic citizens brought to its knees by an administration whose hallmarks have proved to be arrogance, acquisitiveness and denial is truly a great tragedy. Ken Winkes Conway, Wash.
There are many of us who simply don’t see Bush’s years in office as a “tragedy.” We could be in far different circumstances post-9/11 than where we are now. I was able to buy my first home because of the strong housing market we had along with the great economy. You’ll never rewrite my perception of the last seven years. Carol Hono Kailua-Kona, Hawaii
What we are living with today is not “The Bush Tragedy,” as Jacob Weisberg calls it, but an American tragedy. After all, Bush’s children are not being maimed or killed in Iraq. Bush and his extended family have not lost their homes as victims of predatory lending policies. Bush and his friends have not had to declare bankruptcy because of our economic decline. And it is an American tragedy because we elected him. No matter how one feels about the 2000 election, Bush got a majority of American votes in 2004 to continue what he had already started. Those who voted for Bush or didn’t vote even though they disliked what he was doing bear some responsibility. And since none of the major Republican candidates has repudiated Bush’s leadership, the next election provides Americans an opportunity to end this tragedy or to perpetuate it. Kent Koppelman La Crosse, Wis.
Michael Gerson, former senior adviser to President Bush, states that the Medicare prescription-drug-care plan was implemented smoothly and is wildly popular among the elderly (“How My Party Lost Its Way”). Nothing could be farther from the truth. The plan was a mishmash of confusion for the elderly. Every insurance company offered a different plan. Elders who were not computer-savvy were totally lost. Many others were so confused that they had to turn to elder help groups or their pharmacists to help them navigate the maze. The program is now in its third year and both my wife and I have changed companies each year because the companies change their formularies and increase the monthly fees. For 2008, the provider that we had used in 2007 doubled the monthly fee. Lucky for me, I have been able to use the government Web site to find a provider who best fits our needs. Don Prillaman Roanoke, Va.
C-Section Births Predominate I’d like to offer three additional explanations for the increased rate of Caesarean sections (“Birth, the American Way,” Jan. 28). First, not only are American women far less likely to prepare for natural childbirth by taking prenatal classes such as Lamaze, the physical well-being of many has vastly deteriorated given obesity, maternal diabetes, drug abuse and overall poor fitness. It is not uncommon for women to go into labor weighing well over 250 pounds. They tend to have huge babies that cannot pass through their normal-size pelvises. Second, health-care providers feel an obligation to control labor pains with medication that have the potential to interfere with effective dilation and pushing. Finally, peer pressure to have a “natural,” vaginal birth has nearly disappeared. This societal choice began well before the “too posh to push” theory. It’s easy to point at hospitals or physicians, and to suggest greed is the major factor in the increased C-section rate. Such accusations demonstrate a naiveté that ignores a much more complex set of circumstances. Jeffrey A. Lindenberg, M.D. Stockton, Calif.
“Birth, the American Way” exposes a disturbing trend of high C-section rates in the United States. What was left unsaid is that the trend is rippling across many developing countries with rates skyrocketing higher than those in the United States. In Chile, up to 40 percent of all births are by C-section; in Beijing, 60 percent, and in India, as high as 34 percent in some areas. The way the United States practices medicine is usually perceived by doctors and women in other countries as the “best practice.” The increased risk of disease and death for women and newborns (results of the trial in which I participated) because of C-sections has dire consequences, especially in poor contexts where women face other major health risks and have, on average, more children. Improving the quality of maternity care for women everywhere requires promoting the rational use of C-sections, a life-saving procedure when necessary and performed well, which will bring down the unacceptably high C-section rates in the United States and abroad. Ana Langer, M.D., President Engender Health New York, N.Y.
