Listening to Mrs Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor at her press briefing on Tuesday, when asked why some people were not planning to take part in universal community testing, she stated that the only reason she could think of was wanting to smear the central government (“ Hong Kong leader says Covid-19 tests can help restart city’s battered economy ”, August 25). She is rather out of touch. The real reason is much less exciting. Given the low risk of actually getting sick if you have Covid-19, the outcome of being imprisoned in unpleasant hospitals or designated isolation facilities for some weeks with no symptoms (thus unable to work, look after children, or even get internet in some facilities!) is a big disincentive. If she allowed people to self-isolate at home if they live alone, or in a decent hotel if they don’t, rather than be imprisoned in hospital, she might find the numbers increase. Sarah Fairhurst, Tuen Mun Arrogant Lam must stop dismissing expert views The citywide Covid-19 testing plan has lost all credibility before it’s even started. Anyone who raises the slightest professional doubt about its efficacy is automatically trashed by the government as being politically motivated or wanting to “ smear the central government ”, with no attempt made to address their concerns. We’re told by government officials to “trust” them – I can only guess that this must be an exercise in group irony because their track record in “trust” and credibility pushes most people to do precisely the opposite of what they say. Is our chief-executive-in-name-only so arrogant that she must always be right and epidemiologists, medical professionals, data privacy controllers, and behavioural scientists always be wrong? She continually dismisses the expert opinions of qualified professionals when they don’t fit with her political stance. Carrie Lam, a leader hopelessly out of touch with Hongkongers What is she going to do if and when they are all proven right, and this whole exercise turns out to be a gargantuan waste of everyone’s time and money? Whatever happens, she will doubtlessly present it as a resolute success and yet another opportunity to thank the unswerving generosity of the mainland. If she wants to save her political career with her tiresome and pathetic obsequiousness, then that’s up to her. But there is no reason why professionals need to let themselves get dragged into it. She needs to wake up to the fact that the economic survival of this city needs its independent professionals much more than it needs her. Lee Faulkner, Lamma