mask shaking hands

Dear Editor,

After reading Editor Daniel Taylor’s Opinion piece on the Coronavirus (“China Virus,” “KungFlu”), I took the time to reflect on some of the issues introduced by Mr. Taylor. First, he points out that China is one of the biggest threats to the United States and the world, something that has been known for many years. In 2008, I had a friend and church member who worked for the US Government  who shared with me the results of his research that China was and would continue to be the biggest threat to our country for the foreseeable future. 

Next, Taylor referred to apologies from WWE star John Cena on calling Taiwan a country, and NBA star Lebron James reminding us that China and Hong Kong are now one country. This is of course true, but on reading more this morning about Taiwan and Hong Kong, the issues are extremely complicated and deserve entire articles themselves rather than “soundbites.”

I know Mr. Taylor believes that the use of the terms “Kung Flu, China Virus and Wuflu” are issues of free speech and from that standpoint I agree with him. I suggest, however, that we also must consider the reasons the then President of the United States used those terms. In my opinion, Mr. Trump used them to politicize the issue rather than look for a solution.  He used the terms to create division in our country between emotion and knowledge, between one group of people and another, and to engender chaos rather than unite our nation  against a common enemy, which in this case was Covid-19, rather than the entire People’s Republic of China. 

I do believe as Mr. Taylor does, and as President Biden does that we need to continue to investigate the origin of the virus: did it come from a “wet market, from bats in the wild, or from the lab in Wuhan, China. I believe this is important for our continued health and safety as a nation and as the world community. 

It is true that when the State Department turned over the Trump administration’s research into the Wuhan lab hypothesis in late March and early April, that they considered their work completed, and President Biden immediately shut down the project. However, as more information and speculation arose in mid May, President Biden assigned the intelligence  community to look closely at the two primary possibilities for the source of the virus: the human contact scenario or the lab scenario.  

Finally, I disagree with my friend Daniel in his evaluation of Dr. Anthony Fauci. Daniel believes that “Dr. Fauci cannot keep his opinions straight about anything,” while I see him as the consummate physician and scientist who continues to study and research and look for answers, trusts the science and after making a decision based on knowledge, he is also willing to change those decisions as the knowledge and information changes and improves.

In today’s world, with a population of almost eight billion people, there is a lot of information available, a lot complicated, a lot disputed, and it is often difficult to find the correct answers. That task is more difficult when we are divided.

 

Ben Alford

Albertville

(2) comments

mlrodge1

It seems that Mr. Alford's opinion of Dr. Fauci and how the coronavirus investigation was prematurely abandoned was written prior to the recent release of Dr. Fauci's emails. The latter's hands are far from clean and his ever-changing "opinion" has largely been based on the winds of politics, not science.

BettyLaFea

It seems that you need a new hobby. It also seems that you need a new moral compass and maybe more than a few more IQ points.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.