To the Editor:
Re “Covid Vaccine Hesitancy Is Getting Worse,” by Danielle Ofri (Opinion guest essay, Jan. 31):
Unfortunately, Dr. Ofri’s language here embodies the misguided approach that too many in the medical community have taken during and after the pandemic, severely eroding our patients’ trust in public health.
Reasonable people can disagree about the utility of Covid vaccine boosters in otherwise healthy adults. Indeed the World Health Organization is not recommending updated Covid boosters for otherwise healthy adults or children.
Thus, the almost 80 percent of American adults who chose not to get boosted this winter are not suffering from the “heebie-jeebies.” They are making a rational decision that is in line with that made by European health agencies that likewise don’t support universal Covid boosters (a policy that, in my mind, is strongly supported by the current scientific evidence).
To suggest otherwise is harmful to the trust we physicians are trying to restore with our patients after the pandemic.
Shelli Farhadian
Guilford, Conn.
The writer is an assistant professor of medicine (infectious diseases) at Yale School of Medicine.
To the Editor:
When I read this essay I thought of a traffic safety conference I’d once attended. The subject was seatbelt use, and the common attitude discussed was that “it won’t happen to me” and “if I die, then it won’t be my problem anymore.” The speaker responded, “But what if you survive — in a permanently disabled state?” The prospect of living with the adverse consequences of your behavior can raise the stakes in one’s mind.
Perhaps part of the issue with Covid vaccination resistance is that the argument has been framed in the most serious — and unlikely — consequence. Most people who get Covid these days don’t die from it or wind up in intensive care. However, many who get it can suffer long-term effects from the disease.
Rather than frame the question with “You might die!,” perhaps the question should be “Are you willing to deal with long Covid and the other effects that can come with infection?” That question might be more persuasive.
Dave Higgins
Albany, N.Y.
To the Editor:
Perhaps Dr. Danielle Ofri should ask where her patients are receiving their news. They may not be consumers of The Times or other mainstream outlets that, however imperfectly, try to offer a fact-based view of the world.
If they actively imbibe social media with all its conspiratorial explanations, then Dr. Ofri and her colleagues face a daunting educational task on top of already overwhelming medical responsibilities.
David Smollar
San Diego
To the Editor:
I’m shocked that this doctor’s patients could not articulate why they did not want to get the Covid vaccine. I’m writing to tell you why, at least from my humble experience.
I’ve had the Covid vaccine twice now, and I had Covid once. The effects of the vaccine were far worse than actually getting Covid. The first time, I had intense chills and fever and was immobile for 24 hours. The second time, which was just a few weeks ago, I became incredibly nauseous, vomited, and felt sick and immobile for days after.
Covid itself? Very mild fever, cough, but completely mobile and fine.
I got the Covid vaccine this year only because I am pregnant and supposedly that makes me high risk. But I will never, ever get it again. Who would voluntarily want to make themselves that ill when they might not ever get Covid at all, and if they did, it would be far less painful and life-disrupting than the vaccine?
L. Wallach
Long Beach, N.Y.
To the Editor:
When reading Dr. Danielle Ofri’s article about patients’ hesitancy in getting the Covid vaccine, I was reminded of a disturbing and increasingly normalized trend in current medical practice. She said that after several attempts in speaking with patients and trying to understand why there was hesitancy, she decided to actually make eye contact: “So I clear the deck, push myself away from the computer, make full eye contact and begin again.”
As a doctor I feel like this is a contributing cause for the hesitancy. The patient-doctor relationship has been lost. Making eye contact should be the bare minimum in terms of having a “relationship.”
So often these days doctors walk into an exam room, sit in front of a computer and type. Often, the economic systems in place force doctors to see several patients in a short period of time, leaving them little opportunity to truly build a relationship of trust and understanding.
Is it any wonder that patients push back on a medical establishment that tells them to trust their doctor and take a vaccine but doesn’t bother to get to know them as individuals?
Lara Oboler
New York
The writer is a cardiologist.
To the Editor:
A doctor who (gasp) pushes herself away from the computer and makes full eye contact? Is this really a thing? Be still my heart.
S.E. Gross
Tallahassee, Fla.
Enjoying Medellín, Despite the Bad Press
To the Editor:
Re “‘Devil’s Breath’ Blamed as Visitors to Colombia Are Drugged on Dates” (news article, Jan. 24), about travelers to Medellín who have been drugged and robbed:
My friend Susan and I recently spent nearly a week in Medellín, a city once in the grip of the drug lord Pablo Escobar and cocaine traffickers. One of the first places we visited was Comuna 13, a neighborhood that used to be known for the violence that fractured daily life. It’s now a colorful district filled with street vendors and vivid murals.
Throughout our trip we were struck by the kindness and friendliness of strangers who stopped to ask if they could help as we stood on a street corner staring at Google Maps. One young man walked 15 minutes out of his way to make sure we reached our destination.
Neither Susan nor I were the target of any group looking to drug us or steal our credit cards. Nor were we trying to find companionship by going online to search for dates. And at no time did we feel in danger as we strolled the city’s charming streets.
The incidents of drugging and robbing unsuspecting tourists are reprehensible and should be prosecuted. In addition, Tinder and other dating sites should warn users about the potential dangers of online dating in Medellín.
Still, I hope that these attacks will not come to define a city that welcomes travelers looking for a rich and satisfying cultural experience.
Carole Zimmer
New York
The writer, a journalist, is the host of the “Now What?” podcast.
Tedium in the Court
To the Editor:
Re “On Trial, Trump Uses the Courtroom as a Stage” (news analysis, front page, Jan. 29):
You note that Donald Trump, who dropped in whenever he pleased at his own recent civil trials — yet fidgeted, fussed and even walked out in a huff, at times — will be required to appear for the entirety of his four upcoming criminal trials.
The toil and tedium of litigating even a single criminal case is typically exhausting for everyone involved — jurors, court staff, lawyers and defendants alike.
The idea of Mr. Trump being ordered to attend four such events brings to mind a well-known ethnographic study of the lower criminal courts in New Haven, aptly titled “The Process Is the Punishment.”
This is likely to be Mr. Trump’s experience as well, regardless of the outcome. In the criminal context, he is above neither the law nor its ornate and often maddeningly inefficient processes.
Michael A. Coffino
Sausalito, Calif.
The writer is a criminal defense lawyer.