San Diego Unseen: An Urban Portrait
A better health issue
I’m a bodyworker and, so, would be considered a member of the “alternative health community,” I guess. Thought I’d state that upfront, I was looking forward to your alternative health issue [Jan. 19] and was pretty confused about your approach to your presentation of complimentary alternative medicine (CAM).
The first article about alternative Health Network was good—informative and helpful. You had a sidebar about using tea, which is good, I guess. Then there was a two-page spread about medical marijuana with ads. The article seemed vague about the actual benefits of medical marijuana. Then there was a good article about doctors going rogue off the insurance grid, so to speak. That was interesting. The next article about cleanses seemed more story-like than informative, as did the cosmetics article on the next page, although the tip about the EWG website was a good one. The story about the hugs guy, while charming and upliftingly goofy in its own way, is not exactly CAM.
I suppose readers who really want to find the skinny on CAM can do deep research on their own, but I was scratching my head that CityBeat had announced this issue weeks ahead of time and the result seems like unfocused, light on information and a mishmash.
There are real issues to be considered, from my point of view, such as the efficacy of bodywork versus painkillers and cortisone or surgery for myofascial pain. And when it comes to nutrition, there’s so much information about everything from raw-food diets to superfoods and supplement use, organic and GMO foods—it’s a cornucopia of subjects worth covering.
San Diego, as conservative as it is, has a thriving alternative-health community with incredibly accomplished and pioneering individuals who have contributed to alternative health. It would have been interesting to read about some of them. I don’t want to be a hater because I’m always glad when I see coverage of CAM outside of trade publications, but I would encourage you to dig a little deeper next time. You can keep your whimsical approach and still find something worth writing that has more meat.
Jason Lewis, North Park
A better waterfront
I just had to thank you for your Jan. 26 editorial on that horrible building on Broadway Pier. You captured the history and players and the irony of one of the funders now pulling its ships out! Twenty-eight million dollars spent for what? Destroying the planned park at the foot of Broadway Pier, blocking views to the bay from Broadway, rescinding security regulations when a cruise ship is docked, restricting access to the pier, etc.
The battle continues: The Navy Broadway Complex Coalition’s California Environmental Quality Act suit against the Port on the cruise-ship terminal is scheduled to be heard on March 4. Recently, NBCC filed a new action challenging the 2008 Environmental Assessment (EA) regarding the project to develop the 14-acre Navy site. We won our challenge to the 2006 EA, and other than some public hearings, there were few changes to the 2006 document and no response to significant issues such as national security and earthquake issues.
Keep up the good work—generally our local media are pretty sad, and it’s great to see you focusing and digging deep to provide needed information! The goal is to get a waterfront for the people, and, recently, I was at a Board of Supervisors meeting to support the first steps to implement the waterfront parks where there are currently parking lots at the county administration building. The Ruocco Park, mostly funded by the Ruocco Fund, will get underway this year at the old seafood market area between G Street Mole and Seaport Village. Hopefully, the adaptive re-use of the Old Police HQ will follow as the economy improves.
Diane Coombs, Del Cerro
This issue of CityBeat is only semi-effective as body armor in a prison shanking situation.
