Letters, Oct. 16
Atlas is a charlatan
Scott Atlas, Trump’s newly minted COVID-19 adviser, is a charlatan posing as knowledgeable in infectious diseases but lacking relevant expertise. Atlas is a radiologist who has been repudiated by 78 of his former colleagues from Stanford Medical School for expressing opinions contrary to medical science consensus.
Herd immunity with a disease such as COVID-19 requires that 70% of the population become immune. With a current population of 330 million, this means 230 million Americans must contract the disease, recover, and become immune. Unfortunately, the jury is still out on whether those recovering from COVID-19 gain long-term immunity.
Case mortality in the U.S. is currently 2.9%. Assuming that this death rate applies to those Americans contracting the disease, over 6 million of us must die.
Additionally, many individuals recovering from the disease experience long-term damage to their lungs, heart and brain. Thus, in addition to the millions of deaths, Trump’s plan will cause many thousands of Americans to suffer long-term health consequences.
At the same time as he’s promoting American deaths, Trump is committed to eliminating the Affordable Care Act and eliminate health coverage for millions of Americans.
We have choices: follow medical science or proposals leading to millions of deaths.
I’ve been around long enough to remember Harry Truman’s victory over Dewey in 1948, and have listened to or watched debates off and on to this day.
Tuesday night was, in my opinion, a new low in the process with the incumbent president bullying his opponent, Joe Biden, and the debate moderator, and attempting to hog all the time allocated to both debaters.
No well-mannered demeanor or dignified exchanges of opinions and philosophies, but a virtual shouting match, punctuated with name calling and plenty of blame to go around regarding the sorry COVID mess.
All I can say is if Trump really wants to be reelected, he has a peculiar way of showing it.
William Mac Bean
What a joke
The presidential debate was a complete disaster. Two old men arguing over each while the country continues to struggle while living during a global pandemic.
But Donald Trump claimed he won the debate. Of course he would be the winner, if the debate determined who the “biggest tool” was. Joe Biden at least said something sensible, “Shut up man.”
Donald Trump also refused to condemn white supremacy since some of his supporters uphold and defend it. Chris Wallace looked helpless as he tried to control Trump and his constant barrage of deceitful and hateful rhetoric.
I would argue it is time for the American people to come together and vote this horrible man out of office before it’s too late. We have global climate change and racial justice that must be addressed. Now which candidate do you think would actually address these issues?
Homeless in Hawthorne Park
I’ve written before about this issue but feel the need to do so again.
An article about the responses of the people in the tents in Hawthorne Park to services offered said that some were too mentally ill to respond or take advantage of resources. I’ve worked in mental health for 27 years, including 15 years in an inpatient setting, and felt horrible every time I released a chronically mentally ill person to basically meet the streets.
Of course, I had a placement which they agreed to, but both of us knew that they would not go but return to the streets. I know we have coronavirus and fires to deal with, but the fact is that our society, under protecting people’s rights, has no alternative for our chronically mentally persons who do not meet the criteria for an involuntary commitment to live on our streets and Bear Creek.
This should not be a police issue but a societal issue. We need another commitment criteria. We as a society need to care about our mentally ill persons and provide an environment where they can be cared for even if they don’t agree due to their illness.
Think a little deeper
Barbara Field (Oct. 1) says she’s “not voting for Trump.” But she is voting for him. All those “bumper sticker,” righteous-feeling statements really don’t say anything. All candidates/parties make those claims in their fliers.
I urge her to think a little deeper about the man she’s voting for and what his philosophy and style mean to the future of this country. Trump is a man who doesn’t accept science, who doesn’t respect minorities, who considers himself above the law.
It’s pretty well understood that the philosophy and style of a leader shows in the philosophy and style of the people he/she leads. The increasing hate and violence we are experiencing in this country are directly caused by this man’s approach to governing. And it’s worsening.
If Field has children, how about voting for them?