Unscientific approach to tackling crisis
From: David Rimington, Fairways Drive, Harrogate.
I AM writing to protest at the way in which the new lockdown is being implemented ( The Yorkshire Post, November 2).
There is no need whatsoever to prohibit people from playing golf or going fishing. I know of no person who has caught the virus either on a golf course or sat by a lake or river fishing.
At the same time, allowing universities and secondary schools to remain open, when young people at a number of universities have been forced to spend two weeks locked up because a small minority have tested positive, is clearly stupid.
I would add that the figures produced by the Government are not being obtained in a professional scientific manner.
We need to know:
■ The total number of tests.
■ What section of the population have been tested.
■ The locations where tests were carried out.
■ The total number of those tested who have tested positive.
■ The total number of those tested positive who have symptoms. ( It could well be that there are a number of false positive results in this group).
■ The total number of those who have been hospitalised.
■ The total number of deaths. It is only when you have this information can you hope to predict the impact on the NHS.
Figures are being published on the number of infections per 100,000 population. These are nonsense. You can only obtain these figures by testing a representative sample of the population. Testing needs to be targeted to produce the information required. At present it appears to be random.
We will not get through this situation by the present unscientific piecemeal approach. Test and trace is a shambles and was never applied at the outset when the virus was brought in to the UK from overseas.
Restrictions need to be applied where they might do some good, not applied more in hope than expectation.
From: Paul Stones, Church Road, Wadworth, Doncaster.
AT the beginning of the pandemic I held the view that, in the Western world at least, we were being faced with a situation that we had not previously experienced in modern times and for which we were ill- prepared.
Consequently I felt sympathetic to the challenge faced by the Government and local authorities in dealing with the pandemic.
We are now eight months further on and one would like to assume that during that time a wealth of knowledge and experience has been gained, both at home and abroad, which can be used effectively to manage this situation.
Clearly ( and sadly for many) this isn’t the case. How can it be that, having made substantial sacrifices to gain control of the situation, we have in effect nullified all that we gained to the extent that we are heading towards a worse position than we were earlier in the year?
The daily briefings issued in March and April always included a statement to the effect that actions were being driven by the science. That being the case, at what point did the science become secondary to other considerations?
You don’t need a degree in virology to know that reducing the R factor to less than one does not mean that the virus has been defeated and that without appropriate controls it will return ( and keep returning) with the same virulence as before. Yet this is exactly the approach we seem to have taken.
Has anyone cast an eye to the Far East and southern hemisphere and asked the question as to why countries such as South Korea, Taiwan and New Zealand are so successful in managing and containing this virus? What can we learn?
As a United Kingdom, we have also allowed four different approaches to develop. I hesitate to say that there is an element of political posturing involved, but surely there is a consensus amongst all public health professionals and scientists as to how this pandemic should be managed? Yet this doesn’t translate into a consistent approach from our politicians.
We have been a United Kingdom for many years and the borders between the countries are nominal at best, but the politicians seem unable to reflect this in their Covid- 19 regulations by agreeing a common UK- wide approach. I find it immensely disappointing that our UK governments have not managed this situation much better and more effectively.