Skirmishes over efficacy and Covid strains is encouraging vaccine hesitancy

Australians have a 4.6 in 100,000 chance of being killed in a motor vehicle accident if they travel on our roads (Bureau of Infrastructure and Transport Research Economics). Their chances of dying from a Covid vaccine is four in one million (from British data of 21 million people vaccinated), information published online by the Therapeutic Goods Administration. This number is much less if aged over 55 — at least an order of magnitude difference, which has since further declined now that better treatments have been devised.

To equivocate between infection rates of the different Covid strains and efficacies of the different vaccines is to add oxygen to the concerning phenomena of vaccine hesitancy, to the dismay of front line health care workers everywhere.

We want the message to be simple, clear and for people to overcome their concerns, as we in the medical profession have, and get “the jab” for everyone’s sake.

Dr Marianne Cannon, Emergency Department, Mater Hospital, Brisbane, Qld

Ticky Fullerton reports that the global chief executive of AstraZeneca is planting 25 million trees in Australia, converting the company to electric cars and using only renewable energy in order to cut emissions (“AstraZeneca boss branches out with mass tree planting”, 6/6).

I for one would be much happier if CEO Pascal Soriot concentrated more on manufacturing sufficient doses of the Covid-19 vaccine to enable aged people at risk to have their vaccination program completed much earlier than is now the case in the regions.

He could then use his abundance of spare time to study the history of Australia, which would enlighten him on the fact that Australia has always had severe weather and accompanying bushfires, mostly caused by the combination of our naturally dry climate and the eucalyptus content of our native vegetation.

Jennifer Mullins, Mollymook Beach, NSW

Professor Jeremy Nicholson’s observations on the long-term impact of Covid-19 are reported on by Max Maddison (“World facing a long-term aftermath”, 7/6) and further study on the subject is needed urgently. The long-term impacts of Covid-19 can wreak havoc on human health from Type-2 diabetes, to abnormal liver functioning, heart disease, kidney problems and neurological symptoms.

It will be important, too, to investigate how China managed to keep the spread of Covid-19 under control. According to Worldometer’s Covid-19 data, as of last week, China’s total number of cases per million population was 63 while that of the US was 102,655, the UK 65,881 and Australia 1169. We should not dismiss China’s low Covid-19 cases as communist propaganda.

Dr Bill Mathew, Parkville, Vic

Future of democracy

Regarding the recent Newspoll, it is a well-known saying that “politics is a numbers game” (“Parties on level pegging but Morrison slides”, 7/6). If it is, it is timely to ask whether or not we can afford such a system of government when this nation faces so many serious challenges in employment, taxation, power costs, housing affordability and so on.

Democratic government is in trouble all over the Western world regarding the aforementioned. Most Western nations have lost the AAA rating, which is a pretty serious problem when it comes to high-risk investments.

I could say that it is necessary to cut back on things such as health and education and to reinstate the 40-hour week. There is no doubt that doing so would rectify many problems and improve the economy. But these steps would be political dynamite for party leaders trying to stay ahead in the polls.

Democratic government is safe for the next few years, but a system of government that cannot guarantee everyone a job and a roof overhead faces an uncertain future.

Greg Byrne, Wantirna South, , Vic

Choice to end suffering

Topics such as voluntary euthanasia will always produce polarised opinions (“It’s not up to you: autonomy no argument for euthanasia”, 5-6/6). Strong opposing views on religious grounds should not be a surprise and they need to be respected. But those forecasting the slippery slope from “right to die” to “duty to die” are stretching a long-bow. Surely our parliamentary and administrative capacity can prevent that — as has been done in other jurisdictions around the world, particularly in Switzerland.

And those advocating that palliative care ensures in all cases a dignified struggle-free death are engaging in wishful thinking.

What seems to be missing in all of the opposing arguments is a willingness to truly hear and respond to those terminally ill who wish to be released from their suffering. Their plight and their ability to choose the timing of their death should be our prime focus.

Michael Schilling, Millswood, SA