Letters to the editor

To the Editor: Art Casciato's excellent column on the Rhodes and Marshall scholarships ("After years of losses, Penn beats its rival," The Daily Pennsylvanian, 1/19/01) reminded me of the classic lines in Chariots of Fire. "If I can't win," said Abrahams, "I won't run." His fiance replies: "If you don't run, you can't win." Abrahams went on to win an Olympic Gold Medal, and Penn students can win more life-changing fellowships to study abroad. But first they have to apply. Casciato makes it clear that the more Penn students who apply for these grants, the more winners we will have. But he did omit one important fact: there is a new glittering prize on the horizon, the Gates Scholarships to Cambridge. These grants, donated recently by Bill and Melinda Gates, support tuition and living expenses for graduate or undergraduate study of up to three years at Cambridge, the top-ranked university in the United Kingdom. About 100 Gates grants each year are reserved for citizens of the United States. This means the odds of winning a Gates are about four times greater than the odds of winning a Rhodes. It also means that students who want to study more scientific fields, from physics to criminology, can do so at the best place outside the U.S. for taking a graduate degree in those fields. Cambridge is also strong in law and the humanities. For complete details, see http://www.gates.scholarships.cam.ac.uk.

Lawrence Sherman Director, Fels Center of Government

To the Editor: I would like to express my opinion regarding the discussion of the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania. I am an associate professor here at HUP. I have had the privilege of training and being a faculty member here over the past 15 years. The three-part mission of our institution is now threatened by the commercialization of health care. The financial problems of our institution, while real, should not be solved by encroaching on our ability to carry out our duties in an enriching, fulfilling and moral manner. Such would be the case with a plan spawned by financially driven individuals whose distillation of our moral goals leaves an academic institution barren. Rather than declaring defeat, we should strive for solutions which maintain our integrity. Such would not be the case if we, as an institution, divorce ourselves from our academic ties with the University and relinquish ourselves to an amorphous organization whose explicit goals run counter to everything we cherish. To proceed with turning our institution over to those with "for profit" intentions is to unravel everything this institution has built. Education is expensive. Training is not cost effective. Time for academic thought is not in keeping with short-term profits. However, as with our children, we give. We are a teaching institution, plain and simple. If Penn cannot fight against this economic pull, then who is left to take a stand? If Penn goes forth with this economic takeover, then the foundation of America and all medicine will change for the worse forever.

Emma Furth Associate Director Pathology and Laboratory Medicine

To the Editor: Our University has decided that the first step in reducing energy costs is to turn down the thermostats in campus office and laboratory buildings. No prior promotion for energy conservation. No study of the current temperature or energy usage of various sites. Instead, they indiscriminantly began lowering temperatures in research buildings almost two weeks ago. I ask the University to rethink this new policy for the following reasons. First, turning down all thermostats to 65 degrees does not mean that all areas of the building will be 65 degrees. The laboratory in which I spend at least 60 hours a week is currently at 61 degrees. Yet as I work, shivering in my heavy wool sweater, researchers a floor below are in short sleeve shirts because their labs are too warm. If you must turn down the temperature, at least ensure that the actual temperature matches the desired. Second, the University suggests that evening and weekend temperatures will be even lower when "offices aren't inhabited." After six years working in Penn research labs, I can confidently state that many researchers remain in the lab, working late into the evening, on weekends, and on holidays for that matter. Does Penn even know the work schedule of a typical laboratory or office? Earlier this week, Vice President of Facilities Services Omar Blaik noted Penn's interest in being a leader in "energy conservation." The way to save money is not to make your employees and students uncomfortable; the way to save money is to identify waste. Penn has not identified sources of waste. Believe me, I was using the heat that used to be here.

Carrie Hendrickson Ph.D. student, Medical School

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.