Dear editor:
In theory I agree with Kirk Lapointe that the public deserves, and can handle, more information on many subjects. However, I think we can understand that the health officials do not want to fuel the racism that has already been exposed by COVID. “Hot spots” need to be dealt with; they do not need to be labelled for all and sundry.
We can also understand that information from different sources involves different time frames and geographic areas and so may appear to contradict other information, thus increasing the unease that most of us are living with most of the time in the COVID crisis.
I can certainly understand that the press has an insatiable appetite for information, but as an avid reader, I found myself awash in more COVID information than I could handle, intellectually or emotionally. The surfeit was so excessive, so far beyond what was useful, that I eventually stopped listening/reading and thereby missed an important piece that I DID need: the fact that getting my first dose of vaccine with the first cohort did not automatically register me for the second dose, though I was told that it did.
I sympathize with the fine line that the press must walk in these crisis situations, but I thought the previous opinion piece on this subject was largely political, designed to undermine confidence in the government and the health system. It was so upsetting that I cancelled my monthly subscription. This one was more moderate, but I’m sure that you are aware of other things happening that deserve attention but are being overshadowed by the COVID crisis. A little more social analysis of why the “hot spots” are where they are might be helpful, without any more complicated numbers at all. Take care all.
Donna Stewart
North Vancouver
What are your thoughts? Send us a letter via email by clicking here or post a comment below.
