I was dismayed by Kevin Roche's comments in his opinion piece in Thursday's paper, "Time to face hard truths and get on with life — virus and all" (Opinion Exchange, Nov. 11). For starters, so far there are 759,000 U.S. victims of COVID who are unable to get on with life because they have died. The author's cavalier attitude toward that number is appalling and shameful.

The current approach to dealing with the pandemic is not a failure. The problem is that too many have opportunistically changed a scientific problem into a political one. It is entirely possible to name people who were vaccinated and still got COVID (the late Colin Powell, for example, though Roche fails to mention that the 84-year-old general had multiple myeloma, which affects the patient's immune response). The unvaccinated are more likely to get the disease and therefore more likely to transmit it. According to Health System Tracker, 98.6% of hospitalized patients this summer were unvaccinated.

Roche's advice that we declare the epidemic over and celebrate that we survived is offensive and simple-minded. It is denial taken to new levels.

Catherine Silver, Lakeville

•••

Thank you for printing Roche's opinion on COVID-19. He pointed out that there are public health concerns other than infectious diseases. We should not sacrifice the mental health and the emotional well-being of the public in a futile attempt to contain a virus by shutting down businesses and keeping children out of school.

Another Star Tribune article on the same day, "Fading immunity fuels COVID wave," had a revealing line. In regard to the rapid rise and fall of COVID in Florida, Ali Mokdad, a professor with the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation in Washington state, said, "Basically in Florida, it spread so fast, much faster than you are seeing in Minnesota, that it ran out of people to infect."

Jerri Johnson, Eagan

•••

Roche's commentary was full of holes. His first distortion was that the "underlying problem" is "the vaccines' failure to meet inflated expectations." He didn't identify the source of those expectations. Next, he didn't provide any numbers with "extremely" when he added that "notwithstanding extremely high levels of vaccinations, we see ongoing significant numbers of cases ... ." He didn't acknowledge how much higher the cases would be without vaccines. He complained about "declining vaccine effectiveness against infection after a few months" and about "breakthrough cases," but left out the basic solution provided by boosters. He asserted the "virus cannot be suppressed." That's merely an opinion, not a fact. He flagged "over-testing" because it "disrupts." He didn't mention how much the virus itself disrupts. Finally, he demanded, we must "declare the pandemic over." At least he didn't declare that we should all pretend to be ostriches.

Jim Bartos, Maple Grove

Where are Mayor Jacob Frey and Chief of Police Medaria Arradondo? The Minneapolis electorate supported by a wide margin having a stronger mayor and maintaining a solid police force, but neither has spoken about their strategy to reduce crime and increase support for public health. Surely they have a plan after all their criticism of the opposition for lack of one. Nature abhors a vacuum, and Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison took advantage of that by stepping in on Wednesday with an opinion piece claiming that Frey now supports creating a "comprehensive Department of Public Safety" ("Let's focus on what we agree about: reform," Opinion Exchange, Nov. 10). What? That's not what I voted for. The city does not need another department. It's time for Frey and Arradondo to demonstrate the leadership voters expect in Minneapolis and introduce their vision for the city.

•••

We appreciate the Star Tribune's commitment to a continuing serious discussion of police reform. You could help this greatly by publishing articles that provide specific, reliable information about policing in Minneapolis. For example, the police union contract: What is happening in the long negotiating process? Could the contract provide more accountability for police misconduct? And, what is the recent history of police discipline in Minneapolis, and the actual effects of arbitration? Do the middle managers in the department support changes in its culture? Does the city attorney's office have a problem with defending the city against police misconduct, and also considering prosecution of officers who use excessive force? Why is there no possibility of effective civilian oversight?

John Stuart and Robert Lyman, Minneapolis

The writers are a retired state public defender and a retired civil rights attorney, respectively.

•••

Re-elected Mayor Jacob Frey has already made promises, along with MPD Chief Arradondo, to work in this direction. But as Levy Armstrong makes clear, the residents of Minneapolis need more than promises and political posturing. We need a solid, thoroughly researched, spelled-out plan. I hope the mayor, the chief, and the City Council follow through on this within the next few months with a detailed, fact-based, strategic plan. Something people have been hoping for, pleading for, and demanding for years now: a written plan, with teeth.

Henry Gould, Minneapolis

•••

Levy Armstrong castigates those who tried to create a Department of Public Safety, then goes to advocate for the exact same model (a combination of police, medical professionals and mental health professionals), saying only that the Police Department ought to be in charge of it. That difference is, of course, important. Many police officers hate having anyone besides themselves responding to calls; it limits their authority and could eliminate jobs.

She also asks why the City Council didn't reform policing, but she conveniently forgets that the city charter does not allow this. The mayor, the chief of police and, most of all, the union control the Police Department. The City Council has almost no power over it. Her opinion piece is disingenuous.

On our first visit to Cafe Un Deux Trois, our waitperson said the restaurant was fondly referred to by staff as "Cafe 12 Step" for the many folks Michael brought in who had similar struggles with addiction ("Un Deux Trois owner was 'ultimate character,'" Nov. 11). Being not from Minnesota, I was decidedly on Michael's side on the hugging issue. After experiencing numerous lunches, dinners, stories and non-air-kisses planted squarely on the lips of both my fiancé and I, we took over the restaurant on Friday, Sept. 20, 1995, for our wedding reception. Having Michael host and Andrew Zimmern cook is still a highlight of our 26 years together. Miss him.

David A. Plut, Minneapolis