Thank you all for your expressions of support.
In addition, I think I have discovered a better way:
In order to have a local sending it (a much better chance of getting
published), one has two options:
1 change the "William Heitman" in the first line and the signature block to
your name and sending that or
2. Adding a cover letter saying that you feel like this guy does and would
they please publish this in their "letters to the editor"
Hey Ivan,
How about sending these two? Maine is sorta close to Massachusetts, no? Or
if you know a Boston PWP, get him/her to do so.
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
1 [log in to unmask]
2 www.boston.com/globe
My name is William Heitman and I am a PWP (Person with Parkinson's Disease)
If you had the opportunity to make up to a 1000 % annual return on an
investment in one year, could you find the money?
I recently went to Washington, DC as part of the Parkinson's Action Network's
fifth annual Public Policy Forum. We "Parkinson's Activists" spent the better
part of a week (Jun 14-17) hearing about the latest research funding, and how
to approach Members of Congress. On Tuesday the 16, we visited our lawmakers.
We are not paid lobbyists, but we are special. We deal with this disease
daily. We feel the public needs to know about our situation:
The US economy loses about 25 billion dollars a year (that is 68.493 million
dollars a day) to maintain about one million American PWP. The majority of
the expense comes in the later years of the disease. Our US Government pays
out a substantial part of that from your taxes-a conservative estimate might
be 20% of it, or five billion dollars a year (13.6 million dollars a day).
While we are grateful for the cash, too much of it goes for our expensive and
powerful pills. We would greatly prefer a cure.
However, that takes more money.
The investment is one hundred million dollars a year for five years. This
amount is not simply a nice round number. Distinguished researchers,
advocates and lawmakers worked together a few years back to decide how much
could be absorbed by projects of high scientific and/or clinical merit by the
PD research community.
Lawmakers made possible that investment last year by passing into law the
Morris K. Udall Research and Education Act (The Udall Act). However, that Act
only "authorized" the spending of 100 million dollars. "Appropriation" of the
funds this year is still required.
There is a powerful case for doing this. For instance, if a cure is achieved:
--First, this great (up to 1000 %,) rate of return, as good as it is, applies
only to the first year without a 5 billion dollar direct cost of PD. Then
things get better. Today, that cost recurs yearly. Funding a cure for PD
would begin a future when the Government benefits by that $ 5 billion , year
after year-forever (much improving ANY yearly rate of return).
--Second, saving the whole $25 billion should increase investment and yield
more tax dollars. Ex PWPs could buy stock rather than pills.
However, for any of this to happen the money is required .
Every day's delay is another day of uncomfortable life for the PWP's and
68.493 million dollars down the drain. Time is money. Time is life. Please
help us to preserve both. So far, there has been no appropriated Udall Act
money.
Without this cash to speed them, researchers (funded by other sources) have
proceeded more slowly over the past five years. Many important projects await
these funds. Exciting leads are being explored, many more are planned.
There you have it, the possibility for saving 13.6 to 68.5 million dollars a
day, the possibility to stop a horrible disease.
Would you help us do this? Ask your Congress to fully fund the Udall Act
(one hundred million dollars).
To call: dial the number
` (202) 224-3121
The operator answers "Capitol." Name the Legislator that you want to call.
They will connect you with his/her office.
Best regards,
William H. Heitman, MD (Ret)
Fortunately, past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results,
Like most investments, there are no guarantees--actual results may vary
depending on future costs, and other variables. There exists the possibility
that the desired result may be more difficult or expensive than expected.
However, there is also potential for an even better rate of return than 1000 %
.
