To the editor:
About “COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is getting worse” by Daniel Ofri (opinion guest essay, January 31):
Unfortunately, Dr. Ofri’s words here embody the flawed approach taken by too much of the medical community during and after the pandemic, severely undermining patient trust in public health.
Reasonable people may disagree about the usefulness of boosting COVID-19 vaccines for healthy adults. In fact, the World Health Organization does not recommend the latest coronavirus boosters for healthy adults or children.
So the nearly 80% of American adults who choose not to boost this winter aren’t suffering from the “heebie heebie.” They are making a reasonable decision that is consistent with the decision taken by the European health authorities, who similarly do not support universal Covid boosters (in my opinion, this policy is supported by current scientific evidence). strongly supported).
To suggest otherwise is to undermine the trust that we, as doctors, are trying to restore with our patients after the pandemic.
Sherry Farhadian
guilford, connecticut
The author is an assistant professor of medicine (infectious diseases) at Yale University School of Medicine.
To the editor:
When I read this essay, I remembered a traffic safety conference I once attended. The topic was the use of seatbelts, and the common attitudes discussed were: “That won’t happen to me” and “If I die, it’s not my problem anymore.” The speaker replied, “But what if you survive, that is, become permanently disabled?” The fear of living with the negative effects of one’s actions can heighten emotional danger.
Perhaps part of the problem with resistance to coronavirus vaccination is that the debate is framed around the most serious and unlikely outcomes. These days, most people who get infected with the new coronavirus do not die from the virus or end up in intensive care. However, many affected people may suffer long-term effects from the disease.
Instead of framing the question as “I might die!” perhaps the question should be “Are we willing to deal with long-term coronavirus and other consequences that may come with infection?” . That question may be more persuasive.
dave higgins
Albany, New York
To the editor:
Perhaps Dr. Daniel Ofri should ask his patients where they get their news. They may not be consumers of the Times or other mainstream media outlets that seek to provide an imperfect but fact-based view of the world.
If they actively consume social media containing conspiratorial explanations, Dr. Ofri and her colleagues face daunting educational challenges on top of their already overwhelming medical responsibilities. become.
david smoller
san diego
To the editor:
I was shocked that this doctor’s patients couldn’t clearly explain why they didn’t want to get the coronavirus vaccine. I would like to tell you why, at least from my humble experience.
I have had two doses of the Covid vaccine so far and have had Covid once. The effectiveness of the vaccine was far worse than actually getting infected with the coronavirus. The first time I experienced severe chills and fever, I was unable to move for 24 hours. The second time was just a few weeks ago, I felt incredibly nauseous and vomited and felt sick and unable to move for days afterwards.
Covid itself? I have a very mild fever and cough, but I am fully mobile and feeling well.
The only reason I got the COVID-19 vaccine this year is because I’m pregnant and considered to be at high risk. But I’ll never get it again. Who would want to voluntarily contract the coronavirus when they might not get infected at all, and even if they did, it would be far less painful and life-destroying than a vaccine?
L. Wallach
Long Beach, New York
To the editor:
When I read Dr. Daniel Ofri’s article on patient hesitancy in receiving the coronavirus vaccine, I was reminded of a disturbing and increasingly normalized trend in current medical practice. She said after several attempts to have a conversation with the patient and try to understand why she was hesitant, she decided to actually make eye contact. “So I clear the deck, move myself away from the computer, make full eye contact, and start over.”
As a doctor, I feel like this is a source of hesitation. The relationship between patient and doctor was lost. Making eye contact should be the bare minimum in building a “relationship.”
These days, doctors very often walk into an exam room, sit down at a computer, and type. The economic systems in place often force doctors to see multiple patients in a short period of time, with little opportunity to develop genuine relationships of trust and understanding.
Isn’t it strange that patients object to medical institutions that tell people to trust their doctors and get vaccinated, but don’t go out of their way to get to know their patients as individuals?
Lara Oboler
new york
The author is a cardiologist.
To the editor:
(Gasp) Move away from the computer. full eye contact? Is this really the case? It’s still my heart.
SE gloss
Tallahassee, Florida
Enjoy Medellin despite the bad press
To the editor:
Traveler to Medellin drugged and robbed: “’Devil’s breath’ blamed as Colombian tourist drugged on date” (News article, January 24th) )about:
My friend Susan and I recently spent almost a week in Medellin, a city that was once under the control of drug lord Pablo Escobar and cocaine traffickers. One of our first stops was Comuna 13, a neighborhood once known for violent acts that disrupted daily life. Today, it’s a colorful district lined with street vendors and bright murals.
During our trip, we would stand on street corners staring at Google Maps and be struck by the kindness and friendliness of strangers who would stop and ask if they could help. One young man went out of his way to walk 15 minutes to help us reach our destination.
Neither Susan nor I were targeted by a group trying to drug us or steal our credit cards. Nor did I try to find companionship by looking for online dates. And we never once felt in danger while strolling through the city’s charming streets.
Incidents of drugging and robbing unsuspecting tourists are condemnable and should be prosecuted. Additionally, Tinder and other dating sites must warn users about the potential dangers of online dating in Medellin.
Still, I hope these attacks don’t define a city as welcoming to travelers seeking rich and satisfying cultural experiences.
carol zimmer
new york
The author, a journalist, is the host of “Now What?” Podcast.
boredom in court
To the editor:
“During trial, Trump uses courtroom as stage” (News Analysis, front page, January 29):
You may have noticed that Donald Trump, who stopped by his own recent civil trial whenever he pleased, fidgeted, fussed, and even sulked and left at times, will now have to appear in all four of his upcoming criminal trials. You noticed something.
Litigating even one criminal case is typically exhausting for everyone involved: jurors, court staff, attorneys, and defendants.
The idea that Trump was ordered to attend four such events is based on a famous ethnographic study of New Haven’s lower criminal courts, aptly titled “Process Is Punishment.” Made to remember.
Regardless of the outcome, this will likely be Mr. Trump’s experience as well. In a criminal context, he transcends the law and its fancy, often maddeningly inefficient processes.
Michael A. Coffino
Sausalito, California
The author is a criminal defense attorney.