Saving the Economy, and Saving Lives

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/24/opinion/letters/us-coronavirus-trump.html

Version 0 of 1.

To the Editor:

Re “Trump, Defying Experts, Talks of Easing Restrictions by Easter” (nytimes.com, March 24):

We could rejoice at President Trump’s suggestion that perhaps the lockdown of much of America has been overdone. But why would we? When someone who exhibits absolutely zero empathy suggests that an economic shock would be worse than the deaths from Covid-19, it is clearly replete with self-interest.

The state of the economy was one of the few things Mr. Trump had going for him in his bid for re-election. Now he wants us to risk our lives and those of our loved ones to save his political life? I don’t think so.

Patricia WellerEmmitsburg, Md.

To the Editor:

The president of the United States is unqualified to decide a critical issue — whether the nation should relax public health restrictions addressing the spread of Covid-19. By stating that physicians would shut the country for years if they could, the president again demonstrated his disdain for the truth when it doesn’t align with his belief system.

Practicing medicine without a license is a crime for good reason. In this critical moment it should be obvious to all that the collective advice of our nation’s public health experts trumps the opinion of one self-proclaimed dealmaker.

James V. DunfordSan DiegoThe writer is professor emeritus of emergency medicine at U.C. San Diego School of Medicine.

To the Editor:

I’ll be 74 next week, and on Monday I realized that my president considers me to be collateral damage in his effort to get re-elected.

Sue YoungMontclair, N.J.

To the Editor:

Re “Halting Virus Will Require Harsh Steps, Experts Say” (front page, March 23):

It seems clear that the partial state-by-state control efforts are not very effective. I’m not an epidemiologist or a virologist, but my interpretation of the medical experts’ recent announcements suggest that a very different and stringent approach is required, targeted at saving lives while restoring our culture and economy.

So why not require all Americans to shelter in place for two weeks (exceptions for very specific emergencies and controlled food and drug delivery); conduct massive testing during Week 2; quarantine or isolate all positives; treat the very ill in hospitals; then allow the nation to phase itself back in.

Otherwise we are in for a very prolonged limbo period that violates our culture and our humanity while ineffectively controlling the virus contagion.

Paul J. ZaleskyEast Greenwich, R.I.

To the Editor:

It seemed very strange to me that Italy was hit earlier and harder by the coronavirus than any other European country. A Chinese friend told me that the explanation was that top Italian designers, generally located in Milan, want to advertise that their goods are manufactured in Italy. For cheap labor they brought over Chinese workers. Most of these workers went back home for Chinese New Year and returned just before the news of the coronavirus blew up.

Marina AngelPhiladelphia