Letters to the Editor | April 13, 2023

The Streets Department works hard. The problem, as I see it, is that it works inefficiently. Trash collection should be on a predictable schedule. If people knew when the trucks were coming, trash would stay on the sidewalk much less. The longer it’s out, the more it gets away. People might even get to know their trash collectors.

The recycling trucks should come around first. The sanitation workers should be instructed to pick up only “good” recyclables — no plastic bags, greasy pizza boxes, etc. This would upgrade the value of what is recycled.

Trash collection should follow and gather up everything that’s left. Neighborhood programs should clean up quickly after trash collection. Trash day is when most of the mess is generated.

I have other questions: Why do the sanitation workers turn so many containers upside down, making a mess? What happened to the “Trash Police”? I haven’t seen any enforcement personnel in years. Why do supervisors drive gas-guzzling pickup trucks?

John Lindsay Jr., Philadelphia

Shame on you for telling the “story” of a small part of Darren Daulton’s life (April 10) without mentioning any of the good things that Darren, Darren’s widow, and Darren’s foundation have done for the past 10 years. Day in and day out, we (and other wonderful foundations around the country) have been making forward progress to help the thousands of families affected by brain cancer. To focus on a scorned, ex-spouse from 20-plus years ago is irresponsible journalism and effectively renders our hard work meaningless.

Beginning in 2017, we began collecting data on the foundation. Since that time, the foundation has paid over $400,000 in grants to nearly 200 families in the Delaware Valley who have been affected by brain cancer.

Brett A. Datto, president, The Darren Daulton Foundation, Philadelphia

In his article (“Having difficulty getting a primary care appointment?”, April 10), Jeffrey Millstein provides helpful tips for setting appointments. But why do doctors schedule so many physical exams?

Considerable research demonstrates little or no value in these exams for asymptomatic adults. Reputable researchers have raised concerns about screenings (e.g., Gilbert Welch’s book Overdiagnosis). The health education campaign Choosing Wisely estimates that there’s roughly $300 million spent nationwide each year on unnecessary tests — and billions more on follow-up.

The same doctors who caution against untested “alternative” treatment will ignore solid research results questioning the value of “routine” tests, exams, and screenings.

If we had infinite resources, this would not be a problem. Unfortunately, if you experience serious symptoms, your trusted primary care doctor may be too busy screening healthy people.

Tell patients the truth — these exams rarely save lives and may even do some harm — and you’ll have plenty of time to see those who really need you.

Cathy Goodwin, Philadelphia

Join the conversation: Send letters to letters@inquirer.com. Limit length to 150 words and include home address and day and evening phone number. Letters run in The Inquirer six days a week on the editorial pages and online.