Letter: COVID decisions were based on available data

It is amazing how well Mike Dobbins in his letter to the editor and Debra Saunders in her Opinion piece are at criticizing decisions made during the COVID-19 pandemic when they already know the outcome.

COVID-19 was a novel virus that had never before infected humans. In the countries first affected, hospitals were overwhelmed and many died. The initial patients in the U.S. were critically ill, and it was clear that Trump's dismantling of our disaster response system was likely to lead to significant morbidity and mortality with an overwhelmed health system. The public health experts used the best information available to them at the time. The use of masks did not harm one single person. Closing schools likely saved the lives of some children. And how many parents and grandparents would have died, being infected from their child that brought the infection into the household?

Both writers claim that critics were silenced. Really? A Google search for "Great Barrington Declaration" reveals 1.6 million results. Yep, that's truly the definition of censorship. In addition, critics such as Dr. Martin Makary, a member of the Brownstone Institute, were prominently featured in articles in publications such as The Wall Street Journal and testified before Congress. In fact, he famously predicted that the U.S. would have herd immunity from COVID-19 by April, 2021. How did that turn out?

The retrospectoscope is always perfectly accurate. If anyone truly deserves being silenced, it is people like Dobbins and Saunders, who push their political agendas by criticizing the work of the many on the front lines making these life-and-death decisions without magical ability to know the outcome of the pandemic while the pandemic was raging.

Ronald Hirsch

Elgin