I refer to the letter “Testing and quarantine for hamsters is the best option, not this unnecessary cull” (January 28). The decision to euthanise hamsters was made only after careful consideration of the evidence at hand and weighing different options to control the outbreak. At the time the decision was made, there was strong evidence of infection in the hamster population in at least two sites (a Tai Po warehouse and a Causeway Bay pet shop). There was also compelling genetic and epidemiological evidence that hamster-to-human transmission had occurred and that the virus had been introduced to the hamsters outside of Hong Kong. This outbreak was the first known case of natural infection in hamsters globally and was also the first known case of hamster-to-human transmission. In light of this, earlier advice from the World Organisation for Animal Health and others about the low probability of pet animal-to-human transmission had to be reviewed. Decisions had to be made based on the evidence from this novel outbreak and experimental findings with hamsters, not on previous experience with other species that have not yet been associated with transmission to humans. In particular, it is known that hamsters are capable of shedding very large quantities of virus and that contact and airborne transmission between hamsters can occur easily, based on experimental studies. Having identified two latest import consignments totalling some 1,900 hamsters with relatively higher risk of carrying the Covid-19 virus, we decided to euthanise all the hamsters in the infected places and other pet shops. We also advised owners to surrender their hamsters purchased after December 22 last year to us for humane dispatch to prevent further spread of the disease. Some have suggested subjecting the animals to quarantine and repeated testing before deciding on their handling. However, it was not practical given the lack of a suitable quarantine facility to house such a large number of animals individually for a long period of time. We also considered home quarantine, but this was rejected because of the potential for airborne spread of the virus to others in the household and the difficulties likely to be encountered in testing, including the action to be taken in the face of positive results. As at January 31, at least 10 human cases genetically and/or epidemiologically linked to pet shops and secondary human-to-human transmission in some cases have been found so far. An owner-surrendered hamster was also found to be infected . All these findings demonstrate the threat these animals pose to human health. Dr Thomas Sit, assistant director (inspection and quarantine), Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department Flight bans lack a compelling justification On the very day the UK government lifted all Covid-related restrictions imposed to combat the Omicron variant in England, the Hong Kong government announced the extension of the ban on arrivals from the UK, the US and six other countries. I left Hong Kong in December to spend Christmas and New Year with my family in the UK and, because of the travel ban, I have been marooned in the UK with no foreseeable prospect of returning to my home in Hong Kong. The Hong Kong government should not deprive permanent residents of Hong Kong of access to their homes without urgent and compelling reasons. According to the government, the reason for the ban is “to prevent imported cases from putting additional pressure on the medical system”. What is the evidence that travellers from the eight designated countries carry a greater risk of introducing Covid-19 into Hong Kong than those from many other countries? Any infected travellers are likely to be filtered out by the mandatory pre-travel testing. The government must terminate this unnecessary and oppressive travel ban immediately. James Watkins, Mid-Levels Why the differing periods for isolation orders? Can anyone explain why people who are in a building subject to a “restrictive-testing declaration”, aka a building lockdown, are free, after five to seven days, to go about their business in Hong Kong whether they are vaccinated or not? Meanwhile, Hong Kong residents returning from abroad have to spend 14 days in quarantine and then still have to undergo another seven days of self-monitoring and isolation. If one is able to freely roam Hong Kong after seven days, having been in a building with cases or close contacts of cases and tested thoroughly, why can’t the quarantine for returning residents also be seven days? Those returnees will already have had a negative test within 48 hours of their flight back to Hong Kong and are then tested on arrival in Hong Kong. T. Bardwell, Lantau Health expert should not be calling vaccines ineffective I refer to “Omicron: Hong Kong logs second straight day of triple-digit Covid-19 cases as public health crisis deepens” ( January 24 ), in which a respiratory expert, Dr Leung Chi-chiu, said Hong Kong must not consider dropping its zero-Covid approach in favour of living with the virus, then concluded with this zinger: “At this stage don’t fantasise about living with this virus, as the vaccines are not effective in tackling the mutated virus.” If he was referring to Omicron as the “mutated virus”, then he ought to know that vaccinated seniors are 49 times less likely to be hospitalised than their vaccinated counterparts, according to the US Centres for Disease Control and Prevention. Experiences in the UK and Europe seem to confirm this. Or is he talking about possible future “mutated viruses”? If so, that’s a recipe for a forever-lockdown. We’ll never be out of zero-Covid approaches. This is a truly stupendous statement from an influential expert at a time when the government is trying to boost vaccination rates. It is incredible that a respiratory expert would say vaccines are not effective. Peter Forsythe, Discovery Bay Social distancing was always only a means to an end As we enter the fifth Covid-19 wave and strict social distancing measures snap back into place, it is time to consider if we have made any progress after two years of living in the pandemic. Specifically, now is the opportune moment to evaluate whether we have remained clear-headed on what social distancing measures are for and how they should be applied, depending on the need of the population and the ever-evolving global situation. From the outset, social distancing measures aim to slow infection rates to prevent the health care system from being overwhelmed, and to protect an unvaccinated population from severe illness and death. The purpose of social distancing measures and quarantine policies is, fundamentally, to buy time for vaccine development and the subsequent inoculation of the population – so that hospitalisation rates and death are kept at acceptable levels. This may sound unthinkable to Hong Kong, but has been proven true in Europe and the United States. In other words, social distancing and quarantine measures are by nature temporary. A test of whether the purpose of these measures has been fully understood and internalised will be evident from how we react to the fifth wave that is now upon us. Reverting to the strictest measures in place for the city despite the current double-dose vaccination rate of more than 70 per cent of Hong Kong’s eligible population, the rapid dominance of the less severe Omicron variant around the world, and the well-established global approach of “living with the virus”, would be a telltale sign of tunnel vision. Let’s not confuse temporary strategies for long-term goals. Let’s be responsive to our global surroundings – we cannot shut out the globalised world we live in after all. Sickness and death have never been conditions we as living beings can outrun. Vaccines can shield us from the former for a short while, the latter most likely for considerably longer (fingers crossed). However, no concoction of isolation measures can shield us indefinitely from the vulnerabilities that constitute the human condition. The arrival of the fifth wave in Hong Kong – despite having one of the strictest social distancing measures in the world – should be a knell to any such delusions. The question is whether those in power and those unvaccinated realise, and accept, this reality. Joanne Tsang, Tung Chung