Hear hear to David Heilpern’s recent 10 point grumble, particularly points 7, 8 and 9. If the primary objective of COVID policy is to reduce the number of severe cases overwhelming hospital resources, surely we would employ every strategy available to us?
Perversely, public health measures implemented during the lockdowns have not enhanced public health. Anyone remember ‘Life. Be in it’ and Norm? We were encouraged to ‘get on yer bike, go and exercise in the fresh air and sunshine, eat a more wholesome diet’. The theory was that fewer unhealthy people equalled fewer severely ill patients.
Compensating people damaged in pursuit of the ‘Greater Good?’ – okay. But what about the moral hazards for the manufacturers of the shots, those who reap profits but bear no responsibility for serious side effects? Some Nordic countries have required that suppliers must set aside some of their profits to cover the costs of compensation.
Regarding the ‘infodemic’, I can only suggest that David acquire a copy of Dr Judy Wilyman’s (Phd,Msc,Bsc,Dip Ed) controversial [anti-vax] analysis of the drift in Australia’s public health policy. In an epidemic of vulnerability, Dr Wilyman’s analysis shows why we will never hear much about building community immunity and wellbeing. Will another Norm ever exhort us to turn off the telly’, can the beer and junk food? Fat chance!
For four decades The Echo has printed the stories some people loved, some people hated, and some pretended not to read. If you want us to keep telling the truth, the real truth, not the sugar-coated version. We’ll need your support to keep the presses rolling. 
