Sir, – On the face of it the introduction (and approval by the UK Government) of the Pfizer BioNtech vaccine is encouraging.
But given that the timescale to develop this vaccine and test on patients has been very short there are a number of issues that persons need consider.
1) In the event of serious side effects or death from the vaccine will compensation be available from the UK Government given their approval that the vaccine is safe?
2) Will it be necessary to sign a disclaimer that the vaccine taker will not sue Pfizer BioNtech in the event of serious side effects or death?
3) Will known side effects be made aware to the vaccine taker?
The above is mentioned as quite limited testing of the vaccine has been undertaken and assessment of side effects.
As “first” world general public users of the vaccine, the UK population are being used as test guinea pigs.
There is little to praise the UK or Scottish governments, or their “science” advisers, on their handling of coronavirus to date.
John McKay.
Busan, South Korea.
Brexit is causing the real economic pain
Sir, – Martin Redfern asks “What planet is Nicola Sturgeon on?” (Courier, December 3)
That is a bit rich coming from the heid bummer of the “Four Horsemen of the Scotalypse” who obsessively bombard the press with their anti-independence rants.
They are entitled to their view of course.
But that the “economy is on its knees” is largely because of Brexit.
We will recover financially, and health wise, from the pandemic in time.
But only an independent Scotland can truly recover from the London government’s arrogant incompetence and build a new nation using our outstanding natural and human resources.
David Roche.
Hill House, Coupar Angus.
Cash for NHS staff is a populist stunt
Sir, – What an example of crass mismanagement by the Scottish Government the giving of £500 to NHS workers is.
What about the police, firefighters, refuse crews, shop workers and public transport operators who have all worked throughout this Covid pandemic?
I also cannot believe the temerity of Ms Sturgeon suggesting that this should be paid tax free, which, of course, is outwith her control.
A cheap, populist, electioneering stunt badly thought out.
Gerry Mulligan.
Glenrothes.
Jim is right to defend the defenceless
Sir, – Your correspondent Gerard Watts is clearly upset that Jim Crumley, a highly respected writer, uses his Courier opinion articles to be a voice for wildlife and the environment.
His main complaint is that in focusing on protecting wildlife, Jim damages the rural economy and “forgets the people”.
By this he means the people employed in the business of raising thousands of birds for grown men to shoot for a day’s ‘sport’.
I invite him instead to reflect on the ecological damage of the release of these non-native birds, eg to native species and their habitat.
Not to mention the lead shot which finds its way into hungry scavengers which naturally want to share in the bounty that falls from the sky or is discarded after a day’s shoot.
Birds of prey are very vulnerable in this poisonous food chain.
Blood sport enthusiasts invariably prefer to defend their activity by blaming their critics.
What we never hear is why they pay large sums of money to participate in this grisly so-called sport.
I can’t recall ever seeing in writing a shooter’s detailed account of the thrill they undoubtedly get from taking the life of a beautiful creature. Not once for a meal, for example, but killing again and again.
I have followed Jim’s wise and heartfelt writing for many years, and I say keep up the good work.
Kathy Hackman.
Devon, England.
