Polarized, partisan views prevent a coming together effort for public health

Dear Editor:

In his opinion piece, “We must prevent government malpractice,” Caleb Crosby’s argument for freedom to make personal health choices independent of government is immediately evident to this reader as a facile one in service to a difficult to defend position against public health.

To compare the medical practice of bloodletting in 1799 to the modern medical science of today is a stretch. Such a comparison ignores how often modern medicine has made possible favorable outcomes from disease, which routinely saves lives. Such a beginning to his argument sounds neat and tidy but ignores how modern medical practice is light years from 1799 and how the science that drives modern medicine delivers results.

The results, when it comes to SARS CoV-2, are clear from hospitals across this country and the world. Data, ranging from 87 percent to 91 percent, show that most hospitalizations and deaths from SARS CoV-2 are among the unvaccinated, and that the Delta variant developed when vaccination rates dropped off sharply. Will Crosby argue that doctors are manufacturing such abundant evidence? What motivation could there be for our exhausted doctors to do that?

According to an AMA survey from June ’21, 96 percent of practicing medical doctors are fully vaccinated, and of the physicians who were not yet vaccinated, 45 percent planned to get the vaccine, which leaves a small portion of the remaining 4 percent unvaccinated. Whether you agree or not that individual freedom is more important than the public good, these physicians are clearly leading by example for the public good.

In fact, in a landmark case, the U.S. Supreme Court set a precedent in support of the view that the public good overrides personal freedom, in 1905, in Jacobson v. Massachusetts.

The letter Crosby references that argues that “the state has no role in mandating its citizens to receive a vaccine” ignores the historical role of government in managing public health through vaccination programs that saved countless lives. Smallpox, for example, was eradicated by a massive international search for outbreaks, backed up with a vaccination program. Without vaccinations and coordinated vaccination programs, how would the public be dealing with smallpox, polio, tetanus, measles or rubella?

Crosby claims not to be anti-vaccination, but his argument says something quite different. When he writes, “…we do not know what mitigation attempts or treatment options will be deemed successful…” I must wonder if he’s been living under a rock or is just determined to stick to his argument because it fits his political views. Claiming to be non-partisan does not mean your partisanship is not evident.

In fact, despite Crosby’s assertion that the letter does not attempt to spread misinformation, it does just that and has been “flagged as misinformation by most medical organizations” according to the Oct. 4, article at AL.com, 23 anti-vaccine doctors urge Alabama governor to make mandates illegal.

For a little context here, there are 10,600 licensed physicians in Alabama and only 23 signed this letter.

For further context, according to this letter “The mandates are illegal, unsafe and immoral.” However, an AL.com article states that the letter includes “information about the safety and effectiveness of the vaccines that isn’t supported by federal and state data, including statements that have been directly refuted by U.S. health agencies.”

The group who drafted the letter call themselves Concerned Doctors and sponsor a website that supports the use of ivermectin to treat COVID-19 and provides resources for those seeking doctors to prescribe the drug, including links to America’s Frontline Doctors, a group that charges patients for consultations and prescriptions of ivermectin. Moreover, this group is at the center of a network of right-wing health providers that has made at least $15 million selling consultations and ineffective COVID-19 treatments to the public.

At least one of the doctors who signed the letter is a member of America’s Frontline Doctors. If that’s not partisan, I don’t know what is. Freedom indeed. Not for the public good, but for the personal freedom to make millions by taking advantage of the polarized and partisan views creating a public health crisis.

The COVID-19 vaccine, proven effective, is free and available to all.

To date, with the polarized and partisan views on vaccines that prevent a united, American, coming together effort for public health, 716,370 lives have already been lost. One estimate says that to arrive at the combined casualty rate of Vietnam and Afghanistan, it would take more than 300 years of combat to kill as many Americans as have been killed by COVID-19 in about 18 months.

To argue for personal freedom to stand apart from your fellow citizens, or to stand with your politics regardless of the implications, and make a choice for yourself, ignores so much that is truly important and true about the public health crisis facing this country. Real complexities exist but can become difficult to address when superficial and simplistic arguments are taken seriously.

I can no longer reason that because I am not a Republican in Alabama and in the super majority it does no good to speak up because my voice is discounted, and my vote does not count. What I hope is that by speaking out I can encourage more people to do the same.

Roberta Lynn Ledbetter

A Caring American

Enterprise