Letters to the Editor should be exclusive to The Globe and Mail. Include your name, address and daytime phone number. Try to keep letters to fewer than 150 words. Letters may be edited for length and clarity. To submit a letter by e-mail, click here: letters@globeandmail.com
.................................................................................................................................................
Food fight
Re Something To Chew On (Folio, Nov. 9): Reading of the food industry's concerns about "scaring" Canadians with warning labels on unhealthy foods brings to mind another industry's slogan: "Tastes good like a cigarette should."
One hopes we can see past the narrow self-interest in the almighty dollar and do something for the more than one fifth of Canadians who are obese.
Michael Vollmer, Burlington, Ont.
.........................................
Stand in any grocery checkout line and take note of what's in the carts. It's no wonder two in 10 Canadians are obese. Ask those same Canadians if they think that the potato chips, pop, cookies, high-sugar cereals and processed foods piled in their carts are good for them and they'll say no. So what are red circles going to do to stop these purchases, which people already know are bad for them?
Ruth Simpson, Edmonton
.........................................
Why are the purveyors of sugar, salt and saturated fat asked how sugar, salt and saturated fat content in food should be labelled?
Of course they aren't going to like designs that scare people away from buying – wait for it – sugar, salt and saturated fat.
Emma Saunders, Victoria
.........................................
If Food & Consumer Products Canada is so skeptical that labels can change behaviour, why is it arguing against Health Canada's proposed red-circle warning labels for foods high in salt, sugar and saturated fat?
A lawyer hired by the food industry, which is opposed to the red signs, says Canadians "are not idiots."
No, I'm not an idiot, but I do know that I'm subject to normal human weaknesses: I get sugar cravings, I love salty foods, and have been known to indulge in products that aren't particularly good for me.
I also know that psychologically, the red circles will make me stop … think … and maybe say, "Okay, I won't buy it this time." Those in the food industry aren't idiots either: They, too, understand the psychological impact of the red circles.
Obviously, the food industry will argue in its own best interest, but profits and investor returns have absolutely nothing to do with the issue under discussion. Bottom line: The proposed new labels are a public health issue and the food industry should not be at the table.
Nancy McFadden, Calgary
.........................................
Table for many
Re Everybody's Eating Alone (Life & Arts, Nov. 6): In our push to find ways to reconnect over food, we need to make sure that Canadians who can't buy in aren't left out.
People living on low incomes are most affected by social isolation and poor health. An investment in places and programs that bring people together around good food can have significant positive impacts on physical and mental health, foster a sense of belonging, and build stronger communities. We see it every day in the communities we serve.
The fact we're cooking less and eating alone more is a public health challenge, as Prof. Sylvain Charlebois says. It's great to see growing awareness that we need to pay attention both to what we eat and how we eat it. Now we need also to push for policies and investments that ensure all Canadians have the means to access healthy food in dignified ways. Our collective health depends on it.
Christina Palassio, Community Food Centres Canada
.........................................
Science, faith
Re Science And Religion Can Co-Exist So Stop Turf Wars (Nov. 9): In his overused plaintive for the rational co-existence of science and religion, Peter McKnight follows the only possible road: Science explains the natural, while religion divines the supernatural. We can all be secure in our beliefs just so long as we ensure the two philosophies do not stray from their realms.
Except we have no reason to believe that the supernatural even exists. Science rightly shies away from it because it cannot inform upon what is surmised without evidence. And because there is no evidence, there will always remain a cacophony of irreconcilable religious voices. As believer after believer mounts the box in speakers' corner, each preaching with equal conviction about why her or his supernatural explanation is the correct one, we're left with only one possibility – all are wrong.
Marc Riehm, Toronto
.........................................
Governor-General Julie Payette took on climate-change deniers, occult practices and, unfortunately, people of faith: "We are still debating and still questioning whether life was a divine intervention or whether it was coming out of a natural process let alone, oh my goodness, a random process."
I quote Charles Darwin: "I have never denied the existence of God. I think the theory of evolution is fully compatible with faith in God. I think the greatest argument for the existence in God is the impossibility of demonstrating and understanding that the immense universe, sublime above all measure, and man were the result of chance."
Look to the greats of science.
And to the greats of faith.
They are often the same.
Richard Doust, Aurora, Ont.
.........................................
It would be helpful to the discussion if critics of the Governor-General's remarks to the Science Conference would listen online to what she actually said.
She made no wholesale criticism of religious faith. She singled out four beliefs: climate-change denial, creationism, astrology, and sugar pills for cancer. None of these warrants the furor that has developed.
How banal must a Governor-General be to avoid offending anyone?
John Edmond, Ottawa
.........................................
Private? Public, too
Re Canada Leads Private-Sector Funding Call To Hit UN Goals (Nov. 7): It's welcome news that Canada's UN Ambassador has made financing the Sustainable Development Goals a priority.
The SDGs are a clear, universal framework for building a fairer, more sustainable, and safer world by 2030. Canadian leadership on SDG financing is a valuable contribution to global development.
However, true government leadership must go beyond encouraging contributions by the private sector.
While the government has made some positive policy commitments, particularly around women's rights and gender equality, Canada's financial investment in international assistance now sits near an all-time low. Justin Trudeau is on track to have the worst record on development assistance of any Canadian prime minister in the past 50 years.
Canada's ambitious development policy – and its ambitions for a UN Security Council seat – must be matched by ambitious investments in international assistance.
Julia Sanchez, president, Canadian Council for International Co-operation
.........................................
Pistol-packin' logic
Re Each New Shooting (letters, Nov. 9): Letter writer Stephen Crocker satirically suggests that the U.S. government should make it mandatory for all citizens to carry a gun.
In some American cities, this is almost the case already. It is actually against the law for an adult not to own a gun in Kennesaw, Ga.; Nelson, Ga.; Nucla, Colo.; Virgin, Utah; and the well-named Gun Barrel City, Tex.
As a fellow amateur satirist, I sympathize with Mr. Crocker if he feels that reality, as it so often does these days, is running neck-and-neck alongside our attempts to mock it.
John Lazarus, Kingston