Her suggestion that "we" need to empower "regular doctors and ordinary people" with information on the "softer" options of controlling the virus smacks of simple ignorance, not only regarding the severity of the pandemic but the research behind its control through vaccination.

Her comment does not describe what a regular doctor and ordinary person are, or what the soft options for virus treatment may involve?

The FLCCC alliance website (which is suggested that we examine) outlines the use of Ivermectin, a veterinary parasiticide in common use for many years, to treat Covid 19, even though it has been shown in trials that it offers no clinical benefit.

Is this one of the soft options (along with the discredited hydroxychloroquine) which is being referred to here?

Remember that only in the last week Sky News was ordered to remove video content on several of the unproven treatments of the virus.

There is not an alternative reality regarding our understanding of the virus and its impact on our lives. Its control through vaccination is underpinned by our understanding of the science- based research and clinical trials which have been undertaken.

The other "softer" preventions and treatments, which are not mentioned at all, are not based any such understanding.

Phillip Geary, Honorary Associate Professor

The University of Newcastle