JUST exactly where does Joanna Blythman get the information that “only 2.7% of infections stem from bars or restaurants” ("Panicky politicians and careerist technocrats are killing Scotland’s food culture – and they don’t care", Herald Magazine, October 31)? Coronavirus spreads by social interaction, and unfortunately no matter how assiduously those in the hospitality sector apply mitigation measures, it is not possible to ensure that any environment, especially indoors, is Covid-safe. She accuses not just politicians but also the medical and scientific community of not caring about the consequences of the decisions that they take, the latter being described as “people who relish their new-found importance in the public gaze, people who might even get an OBE or a promotion out of it”. This is petty and spiteful and it does not reflect well on your food critic.

Based on the evidence over the past few weeks from Scotland, the rest of the UK and Europe, it is clear that there is a second wave of coronavirus coming which is very likely to be more deadly than the first. This was the case with the Spanish flu pandemic in 1918. It is therefore imperative that measures are taken to reduce social interactions as much as possible, which will inevitably included the closure of pubs and restaurants. Until we have an accurate and rapid testing regime, or effective treatments or a vaccine, what is the alternative? As a friend of mine once opined, you’re a long time deid.

Bill Stewart, Glasgow G11.

I HAVE total sympathy for the UK and the devolved national governments. They are in an impossible and invidious position in trying to deal with this unprecedented pandemic, which requires tough and difficult decisions to halt the spread of this dangerous and deadly virus. But it is wrong to proclaim that they are “following the science”.

Science is rarely a single voice, especially when dealing with the unknown. Throughout the centuries, progress in science has depended on individuals questioning the prevailing orthodoxy, and in so doing, often generating a hostile reaction. With the current pandemic, for every expert who supports the “lockdown approach”, an equally authoritative expert can be found who disagrees. Let’s have an honest and open debate on the coronavirus strategy and not pretend that “the correct science” is dictating our response.

Dr Ian Forbes (retired programme leader at GlaxoSmithKline), Glasgow G41.

I HAVE been broadly supportive of the Covid rules imposed by both the Scottish and UK governments and have complied with them unerringly throughout this pandemic. Personal sacrifice has been difficult but I have accepted that the restrictions were an important factor in reducing infection rates and protecting others more vulnerable than myself. As from today (November 2), however, I find myself questioning the logic in some aspects of these restrictions.

According to my postcode I live in Mauchline, East Ayrshire, but my house is outwith the council boundary, which places it in South Ayrshire. It is South Ayrshire Council who collect my council tax and empty my bins. As I live in a tier 3 zone, I can travel 42 miles to the village of Ballantrae without breaking the rules but cannot travel to Mauchline, a mere four miles away. Now I understand how border communities feel.

David Clark, Tarbolton.