LETTERS TO THE EDITOR: THERE ARE DEADLIER ISSUES THAN SMOKING FACING THIS COUNTRY

To the Editor,

Smoking seems to be the popular issue these days. Almost daily we hear on TV and read statistics about the harm caused by smoking and second-hand smoke.

Smokers are looked at in disgust by young mothers sitting in the no-smoking section, while their children wipe their runny noses on the back of their hands and cough and sneeze on the little old lady in the booth behind them.

It's time to stop discriminating against smokers. It's time to stop harassing, pressuring, and limiting them. It's time for the press to quit pumping out one-sided statistics and educate the public about other issues that are just as important.

The number one killer of children is almost 100 percent preventable. Treatment for this killer costs $13.8 billion per year. This taker of our children's lives also leaves 50,000 permanently disabled per year. What is it? Accidents. These statistics come from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Another of our nation's killers is a direct factor in 100,000 deaths a year and plays a part in even more. This killer costs over $85.8 billion a year and contributes to homicides, suicides, rape, and the spread of AIDs. This killer: alcohol -- according to the Alcohol, Drug Abuse and Mental Health Administration.

According to Nutrition Action Magazine, March 1994, poor diet causes at least as many deaths from cancer each year as smoking.

I could go on quoting statistics. I could mention AIDs or lack of prenatal care. Who knows how many dollars could be saved if people only covered coughs and sneezes and washed their hands more often? I could mention countless other preventable diseases and disorders.

Yet smokers are singled out and are now even expected to pay for everyone else's health care. Is this fair?

I don't think smoking is to be commended. I do think it is to be discouraged. It is harmful and unsightly. But I do think other issues are just as important and even more deadly. It is time to point fingers in other directions.

One other point I'd like to address is this: Advocates of this new tax point out that if prices are raised high enough, people will stop smoking and others will never start. When that happens, what will happen to the funding? Why base something as important as our nation's health care on something as unpredictable as whether people smoke or not? Let's find something concrete to fund our new health care program.

SANDRA FANN

Jackson