ON reading Jill Stephenson's letter (October 15), in which she suggests "let the young live and let the virus run its course. We oldies will just have to protect ourselves as best we can", I felt relieved that she is not in charge of the Scottish Government's coronavirus strategy.

Quite apart from the fact that people of every age deserve to be protected, Ms Stephenson neglects to acknowledge that this dreadful illness can strike people of any age, and even if it doesn't actually kill them, we now know that Long Covid can leave its victims suffering pain and exhaustion for weeks and often months on end.

Regarding the Government's current restrictions, in suggesting there is a "Knoxian motive in all of this", Ms Stephenson must be aware that the other nations of the UK and many European countries are also implementing restrictions in order to stem the effects of Covid. That is the responsible thing to do; doing nothing and allowing the second wave of the virus to crash over us unchecked would end with Scotland suffering a real Act of Misery.

Ruth Marr, Stirling.

SO Nicola Sturgeon singles out the English town of Blackpool, telling us not to visit there because of the high Covid19 risk she claims it presents ("Sturgeon's warning on Blackpool trips", The Herald, October 15. The evidence she offers however is inconclusive. Scots who have been to Blackpool and tested positive may have contracted the virus en route or in one of the many parts of Scotland with higher coronavirus case numbers than the Lancashire town – such as the densely populated areas of Glasgow, South and North Lanarkshire, and Renfrewshire.

Ms Sturgeon should choose her words carefully before risking damage to the economy of an already struggling town. In fact, the principal reason for some Scots not to travel to Blackpool is to protect the good folk of Lancashire from us.

Martin Redfern, Melrose.

IT would appear that a number of officials and politicians cannot differentiate between confidentiality and secrecy. You report that NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde said in a statement that it was unable to confirm the number of patients who had died of Covid in the QEUH due to confidentiality ("Patients die after catching coronavirus at QEUH", The Herald, October 15). How can that be? Elsewhere NHS Lothian confirmed that fewer than five had died in a cancer ward. If my O-Grade Arithmetic is correct that would seem to narrow it down to 1, 2, 3 or 4.

In statements by the First Minister and Jason Leitch, confidentiality is often quoted when there is no need to do so.

Could we have more detail please of all deaths broken down by age, underlying health issues, care home, hospital. Maybe, even how many acquired the infection in these institutions. Trying to find answers to the above on the Government website is difficult if not impossible.

Jim McSheffrey, Giffnock.

DAVID McMillan (Letters, October 14) captures what seems illogical about Covid transmission, but is nevertheless fact. He asks: “If only one-fifth of Covid cases come in some tangential way from hospitality, where are the other four-fifths coming from?”

Extensive testing and contact tracing in Hong Kong showed that “19 per cent of [infected] cases were responsible for 80% of transmission, while 69% of cases did not infect another person”. This is not an isolated study. Other studies worldwide “have suggested that as few as 10-20% of infected people may be responsible for as much as 80-90% of transmission”. That is pretty much the four-fifths that David McMillan is looking for.

Thomas GF Gray, Lenzie.