Readers Write: Gun control, drug use on the light rail, the CDC

Opinion editor’s note: Strib Voices publishes letters from readers online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

I have heard Republicans say for years that you can’t solve our problems by throwing money at them. They say that, instead, you need commonsense solutions. Now they say more funding for mental health beds and longer prison sentences for gun violators will solve the problem (“House GOP offers safety proposals,” Sept. 6). Common sense tells me that someone who is going to commit suicide after they commit a mass murder is not concerned about jail time. Common sense tells me that if you can’t fire 100 rounds per minute you won’t be able to kill as many people. Common sense tells me that spending more on mental health beds, as House Speaker Lisa Demuth suggests, will not prevent undiagnosed killers, such as Robin Westman, from committing mass murders.

I understand that weapon control is not the only answer, but neither is Demuth’s proposal to throw money at mental health and longer jail time for offenders. I have heard, for years, campaigning politicians say they are elected to do what is right and not necessarily what is popular. Once they get elected, they only do what will get them re-elected. Please, GOP, do what is right.

Rick Olson, Brooklyn Park

•••

What happened at Annunciation Church was horrible and unspeakable.

Anyone else ever wonder why the DFL, when it had control of the governor’s office, the House and the Senate (the trifecta) didn’t take care of all the gun issues then? Too busy spending down the surplus?

I thought I had heard that the DFL was worried that their senators and representatives who represent constituents out in the “rocks and cows” regions would be voted out. And the DFL would lose control.

Gun control beliefs out in those areas are much different than what they are in the Twin Cities. There’s more respect for guns and how they are used.

So what happens now?

Mike McLean, Richfield

If a dog bites a man, that is not news. But if a man bites a dog, that is news. So it is with school shootings, actual rarities. Shootings in the home are more common, so common that they receive little, if any coverage. The majority of children killed in mass shootings are killed in the home, most often by a family member. A child has a better chance of getting killed in the home than in the school. (If you don’t believe me, Google it.)

Since school shootings receive massive publicity, some people think these rarities will become “normalized.” I doubt that. School shootings will continue to get noticed because of their infrequency. What has already become normalized is the mass shootings of children in their own homes. That is where the guns are, not in schools.

David Wiljamaa, Minneapolis

Regarding the Sept. 7 “Metro Transit riders: expect more security” article, I was left with the impression that drug use on the light rail is acceptable and the goal of the Metro Transit is to help people get better. At the same Hamline Midway public meeting with Metro Transit, a citizen Homeless Action Team member spoke at the meeting and said out of 40 interactions with homeless people a day from his team, only one will want assistance with drug treatment. This reflects the interview in the article with Bashir Nasir, who has apparently several times refused assistance for drug treatment.

How is negative behavior being reduced when no serious consequences face open drug users and smokers on the train? I am a regular light-rail commuter and the reason the train feels unpleasant and unsafe at times is the drug users. Low-level crimes (presumably including drug use and smoking) must be drastically underreported, since my understanding is most of these cases must be reported by light-rail riders and confirmed by Metro Transit police. Metro Transit (and the great Twin Cities) must make a decision: Is the light rail for riders or for drug users? It cannot be for both.

Much news coverage of the administration’s attack on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention focuses on damage done to the agency itself. Minnesotans and all Americans deserve to know that destruction of the CDC also endangers their own state and local health departments. Most of the money that Congress annually appropriates to the CDC is awarded by the CDC to state health departments and local departments to help protect their citizens from infectious and chronic diseases and a host of other health threats. The CDC shares science-based recommendations for the use of those funds.

Destruction of the CDC is bad enough. But canceling already-enacted congressional funding and slashing funds in the upcoming 2025-2026 budget year — as proposed by the administration — means deep cuts in financial aid to state and local public health departments across the country. Minnesota has long been recognized for its excellent state and local health departments. But deep cuts in the CDC’s financial assistance will seriously undercut the capacity of public health departments here and nationwide.

The current attack on the CDC and other federal health agencies is unprecedented. We served at the CDC from 1989 to 2015. The five presidents — three Republicans and two Democrats — in whose administrations we served appointed highly capable physicians and scientists as CDC directors; endorsed using open, science-based processes in making policy and budget decisions; and supported the critical role the CDC and state and local public health departments — working in close partnership with each other — play in protecting Americans’ health. The current administration must do the same.

Anthony Moulton and Monica Eischen, Minneapolis

The writers are former CDC employees.

Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has referenced a clinical trial that showed vaccines are not safe. I think we have all referenced a study we read that proposes a medical outcome that we agree or disagree with. Be careful, medical research is complex and difficult to do well.

As a hospital pharmacist, I read lots of medical literature, and later, while working in industry, I designed clinical research trials for Food and Drug Administration approval and eventual publication. There are many levels of medical research. Testimonials (i.e., “I took X and Y happened”) are of almost no value in the world of scientific validity. The gold standard for medical research is a randomized, double-blind, multicenter study published in a peer-reviewed journal. There are many options in between those two.

To really have confidence in a medical study outcome, one needs to go to the source and ask lots of questions. These include: Who sponsored the study, was it multicenter or at one institution, did they use valid assessment tools, what is the definition of success, and did the statistical analysis support the conclusion? There are many more.

The point is, be careful what you say. Scientific validity is never concluded with one study. even a well-designed study. Ask some questions about the study source and design. Take any medical research for what it is, one more piece of information to be considered.

Richard Jansen, Cumberland, Wis.

The new name for President Donald Trump and his administration is MASA: Make America Sick Again. With all the cuts to CDC personnel, funding cuts to vaccines and vaccine research, Americans will be sicker and die earlier because of this medical malfeasance. Michael Osterholm has gone on record stating the next pandemic will make the COVID-19 pandemic look like child’s play.

What happened to following scientific research and proven evidence that vaccines work and save American lives? Please bring back common sense before it’s too late.