TO VACCINATE OR NOT TO VACCINATE (that is the question -with apologies to Shakespeare)

 Full disclosure: I was one of those who had vaccine hesitancy. Frankly, I felt that we weren't being told the truth by ANYBODY - including those who are in authority abroad. And, my basic question -why- simply was not being answered.  Or, not answered in a way that to me made sense. So, I sat on my decision to vaccinate or not and waited until I could be satisfied one way or another. After all, the best advice always is 'when in doubt, don't'! And I wasn't about to put anything in my body that I wasn't sure about. 

So? What changed? The truth is absolutely nothing. But after reviewing time and again all the arguments both for and against, I came to the conclusion that perhaps the safer way to go was indeed to vaccinate. I had spoken to a lot of doctors - all of whom said yes, vaccinate. I had also read all the arguments both for and against vaccinating and had noticed that every argument that I could find against vaccination was based either on anecdotal evidence or on so-called 'reports' that I could not find anywhere else other than from the persons who had sent them to me but the arguments in favour were almost always backed up by science.

Put another way, the evidence that the vaccines were/are safe greatly outweighed the evidence that they were/are not. Now, I am fully aware that an argument that I find compelling is not one that you might consider in that regard. In other words, for an argument to convince the other person, it must be presented in such a manner that he/she finds compelling, not what the proponent of the argument believes to be the truth. I am also aware that if you cannot say something in one sentence then you cannot say it at all. You may need a paragraph, a chapter or even a whole book to explain your sentence, butif you cannot make your point in one sentence then you cannot say it at all.

So in one sentence, my point is that all the scientific evidence (to me) points to the fact that it appears safer to get the vaccine than not to get it and that the stories (like those of Nicki Minaj about swollen testicles, etc.) ought to be discarded unless and until scientific evidence is produced that proves the point. You have every right to disagree with me on this. After all, it is your body! And for the record, this does not mean that I agree with the T&T Government's response and how it has handled this crisis. But that's another story.

AN OPEN LETTER TO THE MINISTER OF ENERGY

Dear Mr. Young,

 In recent times a story started on social media which (rather surprisingly because it was potentially very critical of the Government) found its way into the main stream media. Basically the report was that NGC (the National Gas Company) had lost or was about to lose more than $400 million and that the company's board of directors had asked for, and received, a full indemnification of this loss/potential loss from The Government (GORTT).

You will not be surprised therefore when I tell you that this report stirred up a heck of a lot of questions - none of which have been answered to date except for a very bland statement that talks were on-going and the matter was at a very sensitive stage. Translation: 'we ain't sayin' nothing at the moment for reasons that we are not prepared to give other than confidentiality'.

Somebody has forwarded to me  today a press release of yesterday's date supposedly made by you, our erstwhile Minister of Energy, Stuart R. Young (we mustn't forget the 'R' - it makes you seem more important - and yes, I do know that it is an initial probably for your middle name - but it does seem more than a little pretentious.). In this press release you say that any troubles the NGC is having was caused by the Kamla regime (why am I so surprised?) and  that there has been a 'mis-characterization (sic) of information that  was leaked in a surreptitious manner[and] was not surprising and was expected.' You, Mr. Minister, go on to say that 'at the appropriate time we will provide the accurate information ...' But, you say, 'due to the current stage of discussions and the sensitive negotiations that time is not now.' Of course, there is no hint of when 'the appropriate time' will be.

You then take a not unexpected swipe at the opposition (after all the best defence is always offence) and re-affirm your faith in the NGC board and the President of NGC.

To which I say, 'okay. Let's take the honourable gentleman (you) at his word, for he would never lie to us, would he?' But a whole set of questions arise: The first is, Mr. Minister, do you have any idea when the issues may be resolved and we can learn the whole truth? A week? A month? A year? Indefinitely? If the last, then when would be a good time to raise this matter again? a week? A month? A year? Because, I'm sure that you will agree that the possible loss of $400 million plus is much to serious to be left alone indefinitely and we (the general public) deserve to know what in the name of heaven is going on. Put another way, if tomorrow the shoe is on the other foot and you and your party form the Opposition would you be prepared to accept such an answer? (Forgive me if I say that I'm sure that you wouldn't.)

Then I think that  while you can confirm or deny (as the case may be) those parts of the report that are true and those that are not, the real question is will you? You see, Mr. Minister, most people believe that there has been/will be a huge loss. and most people are looking for answers - which (for the sake of argument - I am prepared to concede may not be available right now. But 'right now' cannot mean never and there has to be some sort of reporting/accounting in the reasonably foreseeable future.

Put another way, has the NGC lost a bucket load of money or is it in danger of losing it?

We can't operate on the old 'trust me. I will never do anything wrong' line. All of the voters in this country are legal adults. We deserve to be treated as such. And the deflecting of arguments by attacking those that dare to question you just ain't working any more. We need the truth! Now!

Yours faithfully,

Robin A.G. Montano

(As I have two middle names and on the off chance that it is not pretentious - I think it is - I have signed off like you but with my two middle initials.)