Farm subsidies play a role in the obesity crisis, too

I was glad to see the Post-Gazette shed some much-needed light on the Farm Bill sneaking through Congress. While Clarke Thomas' column ("Fix the Farm Bill," Sept. 5 Midweek Perspectives) makes important points about land conservation, it's also extremely important to highlight how the supersized subsidies for corn, in particular, have fueled the obesity epidemic in the United States.

As Michael Pollan explained so well in his recent book, "The Omnivore's Dilemma," the gross overproduction of corn in the United States serves as the source of the sweeteners and preservatives and stabilizers used in the cheap snack foods, sodas and pretty much every bit of processed food that litters the shelves of most American grocery stores.

While the U.S. government on one hand tells Americans to eat their fruits and vegetables -- which are among the most expensive items in a grocery store -- on the other it doles out massive subsidies that almost strictly benefit large agribusinesses that produce the processed foods directly responsible for the obesity epidemic, which are among the cheapest in those same stores.

Just to rub (processed) salt in the wound, the obesity epidemic comes with an estimated price tag of about $123 billion annually in direct and indirect expenses, including those to pay for treatment of obesity-related diseases like diabetes and cancer.

It's time for the government to show some real support for the production of fruits and vegetables, for organic farming, and to overhaul the farm system to help real family farmers -- not big agribusinesses -- get fair prices for their products so they no longer need subsidies just to stay afloat.

CARMEN PHILLIPS
Pine

---

Hunters contribute

In regard to the Aug. 30 letter "Expand the Outrage" by Paul E. Vondra: Mr. Vondra equates legally controlled deer hunting in Pennsylvania with the blood sport of dogfighting. He uses the term "equally sadistic, perverted blood sport of deer hunting" to describe what 1.5 million taxpaying, conservation-minded Pennsylvania citizens enjoy as a legal, healthy form of recreation and sport.

He even goes on to say that since deer hunters are overwhelmingly white, middle-class "gun cultists" and backed by the National Rifle Association, we somehow are allowed to get away with this "blood sport."

Pennsylvania hunters are responsible for the reintroduction of the whitetail deer and many other animals in our great state. Licenses fees and our equipment taxes funded the reintroduction and continue to fund conservation projects on our state game lands where many animals other than deer live. Where were the animal rights activists then? What are they doing now?

Yes, the National Rifle Association backs the hunters in Pennsylvania and America. Its backing keeps hunting and other firearm sports as some of the safest sports in this country. I'm proud to be a member of the NRA and a Pennsylvania hunter. Because of the NRA and hunters, Americans have the right and advantage of being armed ... unlike citizens of other countries where the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.

JOHN TRAYNOR
Canonsburg

---

Depends on the spin

The Sept. 5 letter by Richard M. Hays Jr. ("GOP Freshness") was a deliberate and objectionable misuse of the dictionary. Yes, "deceased" and "dinosaur" come before and after the word Democrat as do "renaissance" and "resurrection" with the word Republican.

Mr. Hays' statements make it appear that these words directly precede and follow the words Democrat and Republican. They were, however, conveniently chosen to defame the Democrats and elevate the Republicans. Our spin is "daring" and "dependable" Democrats and "reptilian" and "repugnant" Republicans.

FRANK and ANN ROSENHOOVER
Altoona

---

Enough silliness

I happened to look in the dictionary after I read that Richard M. Hays Jr. ("GOP Freshness," Sept. 5) had found the word Republican between "renaissance" and "resurrection." I found "Republican" in my unabridged dictionary between "reptile" and "repudiate," which seems more apt when mentioning either party. I understand Mr. Hays' cherry-picking. I know that if I, Tom, were trying to pick up a woman in a bar by playing the same game, then I would try to avoid "toilet" and "torment."

Speaking of picking up a woman (or man) in a bar (or public restroom), another Sept. 5 letter ("Our High Standards") alleged that "Rob Rogers' perverted delight in [Sen. Larry Craig's] tragic fall is the real hypocrisy." In the mid-1990s when President Clinton was in office, the Republican leadership impeached him over a sex scandal. The precedent was set, and now they're receiving a taste of their own medicine. That's irony, not hypocrisy.

I agree there should be a standard set for senators. Everyone violating that conduct should be punished just as any regular citizen would. However, the real issues here are health care that is not available to everyone, a flagrantly out-of-control national debt, overpriced college tuition, uneven economic distribution, the war in Iraq, terrorism, decaying infrastructure, global warming, etc. I'm sick of wasting time.

TOM BAKER
Indiana, Pa.

---

Don't buy into hysteria about power lines and health risks

Plans to build a 500-kilovolt transmission line across southwestern Pennsylvania have generated a firestorm of public opposition. Considerations of aesthetics, bisecting of properties, maintenance of rights of way and the like are legitimate items for discussion and resolution.

But hysterical claims of adverse medical effects from high-voltage lines are pure hokum. Literally dozens of studies worldwide have shown there is no significant health difference between people living near transmission lines and those who do not. The exposure to electric and magnetic fields from these lines is far lower at ground level than one obtains from cell phones and other electronics. Further, maintenance men work directly connected to these lines, while they are energized, to clean insulators and inspect fittings. They show no adverse medical effects whatsoever.

Unfortunately it is not possible to store electric power in useful quantities nor is it feasible to generate all electric power locally. Transmission lines are essential to a reliable electric grid and economical generation. Local people often do not derive direct benefit from major infrastructure items such as dams and interstate highways, but that makes these items no less essential to our society.

KEITH H. SUEKER
Penn Hills

The writer is a professional engineer.

---

Our plans will reduce the wind project's impact on wildlife

Gamesa is taking exceptional measures to protect the natural habitat and wildlife near its proposed Shaffer Mountain wind farm in Somerset and Bedford counties. Proper design and the use of best management practices help to avoid conflicts with area species, especially migrating birds, bats and raptors ("Somerset Wind Farm Proposal Generates a Tempest Over Birds," Sept. 4).

Avian surveys of the project area have been coordinated with and reviewed by the Pennsylvania Game Commission and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Finding that the majority of birds migrate east of the Allegheny Front escarpment, Gamesa moved its proposed turbines off the ridge and 400 feet to the west to minimize impacts. Details of the project can be found at www.shaffermountainwindfarm.com.

Over the last 20 years, technology has advanced so windmills can be sited to avoid harm to raptors altogether. Windmills today spin at slower rates and have tubular towers instead of lattice towers like those installed in the western United States in the 1980s and 1990s. These design changes have made all the difference.

With the exception of one of the first commercial wind projects, which was installed in the Altamont Pass near San Francisco in the early 1980s, impacts to birds and raptors at projects have been very low.

The wind industry takes potential wildlife impacts seriously. However, the impacts of wind energy on birds will never be as detrimental as other commonly accepted impacts, such as those from buildings, windows, cats and communications towers.

A May 2007 report from the National Academy of Sciences states that in 2003, wind energy was responsible for only one in every 10,000 of human-caused bird deaths. Even if wind energy development were to increase 100-fold, the impacts would still pale in comparison to other sources of human-related mortality.

National environmental protection laws apply to all wind projects, and states such as Pennsylvania have even added another layer of consultation and review by wildlife agencies. These safeguards, combined with preconstruction surveys to identify possible impacts, ensure that impacts remain low and wind energy is developed responsibly.

MICHAEL PECK
Director of Media, Institutional & Labor Relations
Gamesa North America
Washington, D.C.

---

We welcome your letters. Please include your name, address and phone number, and send to Letters to the Editor, 34 Blvd. of the Allies, Pittsburgh 15222. E-mail letters to letters@post-gazette.com or fax to 412-263-2014. Letters should be 250 words or less, original and exclusive to the Post-Gazette. All letters are subject to editing for length, clarity and accuracy and will be verified before being published.