OPINION

Crosswalk gamble

Re: "Pedestrian crossings need to be safer", (BP, Feb 17).

I read the article and thought why nobody thinks about punishing motorists who ignore traffic lights and reprimand the police to enforce traffic rules.

In the afternoon, I walked to Camillian Hospital; the pedestrian crossing had traffic lights. Nevertheless, two cars and three motorbikes jumped the red light even though I was already walking on the zebra stripes. Well, this is very normal on this road; the police could collect fines of 100,000 baht daily, but of course, it will never be done. Then I had to cross the road at Tops/Marche, a zebra crossing, but no traffic lights.

As I have lived in Bangkok for some time, I have been super cautious when crossing the road on a zebra crossing. I cautiously crossed the road, another 3m, and I would have been safe on the sidewalk when a motorbike at high speed approached, stopped 5cm from hitting my leg, and immediately continued at high speed. I was shocked, near to a heart attack. Informing the police by giving them the bike number plate is useless; they don't care.

Free cash flop

Re: "TDRI sounds alarm on excess stimulus", (Business, Feb 17).

I fully agree with the Thailand Development Research Institute Foundation's warning that excessive stimuli -- like Pheu Thai's 10,000-baht per person handout -- encourage consumer spending, which doesn't always lead to increased production.

Here, firms will not hire more staff or build new factories because of a one-time handout. Instead, we need sustainable income increases that come from being more productive.

Now, our productivity is very low. For instance, our rice yields have not risen for a decade and are just half of what Vietnamese farmers get.

Low productivity has led to rising debts. The average Thai farm household has debts equal to 7.89 years of total household income, and at 58 years old, the average Thai farmer is well past his peak income years.

We don't need to buy more; we need to become more productive.

Claims need proof

Re: "Treatment protectionism", (PostBag, Feb 9).

I would like to take up Michael Setter's offer to pour scorn on his latest theory about deworming tablets curing cancer. The physician he quotes, Dr William Makis, is a radiologist. To call him a "highly accredited oncologist" is simply a fabrication.

Dr Makis was one of nine authors of a paper titled "A systematic review of autopsy findings in deaths after Covid-19 vaccination" that made doubtful claims about Covid vaccines based on the authors' random interpretation of autopsy results. This academic paper was eventually withdrawn in June last year after members of the scientific community raised concerns about "inappropriate citation of reference, inappropriate design of methodology, errors, misrepresentation, and lack of factual support for the conclusions and failure to recognise and cite disconfirming evidence".

Now, Mr Setter would have us believe that his favourite deworming tablet, Ivermectin, was not only a cure for Covid but is now, magically, a cure for cancer, too.

Given the above, Post readers can choose to believe either actual scientists who follow proper protocols, have their work peer-reviewed and don't make stuff up, or Mr Setter with his YouTube videos.

It shouldn't be a difficult decision.