 We at the Central Central Medical and Dental Association recognize the important role that we play as guardians of the nation's health care. We understand that we are equal partners with the Ministry of Health in healthcare generally and certainly during this COVID-19 pandemic. We certainly have made recommendations and there's been continuous communication between ourselves and the Ministry of Health through our Chief Medical Officer. We're predominantly with the executive, executive members, but we've felt that with the increasing numbers, the spike in COVID cases, that there's been a need perhaps more for communication with the general membership so we get views from everybody when we speak to the Ministry. And that is why we concluded a meeting yesterday, a very productive and fruitful meeting, might I say, might I say. We've said in the past that our organization is a very heterogeneous group, so there are varying opinions on just about everything. And as it pertains to the management of COVID-19, opinions do vary as well. But what we always seek is consensus on the way forward because at the end of the day, we recognize a spike and outbreaking COVID-19. We are in the front line and it will certainly affect our members. And the reality is that our role first and foremost is the interest and a well-being of members and by extension the care of the people of St. Lucia. Coming out of the meeting, of course, the big debate is what the whole front-door, back-door debate that has been going on with reference with the citizens of St. Lucia. There is a lot of talk about that. And the reality, I think, as our Chief Medical Officer has said, is that there's no definitive proof of where it's coming from. Now the contact tracers do have information and a lot of them are our members as well. There is information that they would know but privilege information because we remain physicians and there is information that the general public cannot know. So there was a lot of debate, for example, with case number 29, that was a long time ago at this point, with why was the bus driver's license number released. And we have explained in the past the reason why that had to be done because we were consulted on that in part and our members were consulted because of the nature of what the bus driver does. That you had no idea who got in that bus or had contact with him. So that had to be revealed as opposed to, for example, a physician who you generally have a list of who the physician sees. And there's arguments being made as to whether the physician is like everybody else and can go everywhere. But we again have to look at the definition of contact. What constitutes contact with the patient who's tested positive for COVID-19? So we're looking at the distance, the amount of time spent with that person. Were you wearing a mask? Were you wearing protective gear? So all those things do have to be taken into account. So as I said, our meeting was quite productive and the debate regarding tourism. And let me just say at this point that the SLMDA has not called for a shutdown of this country, nor have we recommended it as has been done in some quarters. That in part is because we recognize the importance, not just of tourism, but to keep the economy going that that is important. Shutdowns are the beginning. So in March we certainly did call for a shutdown of all economic activity. And that in part was to get a better handle of what was going on with this pandemic because it's been so fast moving. The shutdown allowed, not only for St. Lucia, but countries around the world to stock up on PPE, to get testing supplies, to get better training, to get so many things in place that we perhaps would not have had before this pandemic started. And in every crisis there is opportunity. And there has been opportunity in this in that our testing capacity, not just for COVID, but for other infectious diseases has improved. So we always have to see the opportunity in things. So that is what the shutdown allowed for. And we have been able to do that. So the refurbishment of the respiratory hospital. Our members on the ground, we the ones who work there in part, we understand the changes that have happened there. And the improvements just, I'm a nephrologist. So just from the perspective of dialysis, there have been significant improvements. We've been able to have more acute dialysis, what we call the water purification plants for dialysis. There is more of that. That has made our lives a lot easier in terms of being able to manage the two hospitals that we're able to do that a lot more effectively. So are there glitches? Absolutely. But we understand the changes that have been made to accommodate the patients and to try to get them in the best of care before they go home. Now, we have continued to advocate for home isolation and home quarantine. Only for the fact that we believe that we're going to overwhelm the healthcare system and the hospital bed capacity if we don't start isolating patients who are able to at home. And that includes our members if they have the adequate capacity, adequate facilities at home to isolate because it's not a decision that of course can be taken very calmly. Those things have to be done very judiciously because you need to ensure of course that people are going to stay home if you've tested positive for COVID-19. And that you're not sharing the same space with your family so you're not risking infecting members of your family. So there are several factors that do have to be taken into account, but we continue to advocate for that. We certainly again, and we recommended it before in our Chief Medical Officer, the rest of the officials at the Ministry of Health, certainly are on board with the concept of telemedicine that we certainly have to do more of that if only to limit contact. And in part to keep those same vulnerable patients, our diabetics, our hypertensives, patients with heart disease, cancer, chronic kidney disease off the buses, keep them at home but still be able to attend to them so we don't have what we call the third wave where patients, other pathologies are left behind because there was so much focus on COVID. So we recognize that we cannot completely ignore those patients. Now with reference to there's a lot of debate about should we stick to the Barbados model or stick to the model that we currently have as it pertains to arrivals. And even there there is a lot of debate and varying opinions because there is some testing being done of guests and certainly guests who arrive without a test are retested here at the airport. There are members who believe that every single person should be retested. Of course we have to look at the capacity to do that and the feasibility. There are members who believe perhaps not everybody but a certain percentage of those guests should be tested. Interesting enough, some of when we speak to colleagues overseas and some of our lab people here, they don't think testing really is the only there's a lot of focus on testing as opposed to some of the other protocols and there are protocols which are in place. So we've suddenly felt that if the hotels aren't adhering to the protocols which are in place in terms of protecting our citizens who work there, then their license should be revoked because those were given on the premise that certain things would be done because we certainly cannot have a situation. And as I said, there's been no definitive proof that the outbreak started there. There really isn't and there's a lot of that going on. But we do need to ensure that everybody is adhering to the protocols and that includes us as individuals. We cannot forget that we have a huge responsibility in all of this. That is a personal responsibility that everybody has to do their part. Ensure that you're wearing your mask, ensure that you're keeping your physical distance, ensure that you're not participating in any mass crowd events as it is mandated. You cannot have more than 25 persons at any event and we certainly are on board with those regulations. So we all have to do our part to stem this rise in cases of COVID-19 and St. Lucia. And we continue to say this is not a call to panic. Unfortunately, we've had two deaths. Thankfully, most of our patients are quite stable and doing quite well. Some of them completely asymptomatic. But of course, there is always the fear of transmission and that is why those measures are in place. So just to go back a bit to the varying models across the OECS and CARICOM and that in and of itself, the fact that everybody is doing their own thing, speaks to, well, CARICOM integration or what it is or what it should be. We certainly believe as an association that if one model seems to be working better than the other, that there are, we perhaps should stick to go to that model or change. But this is a fast-changing situation and we understand that the dynamics and different islands are different and that was made very clear. In St. Lucia, for now, we're still sticking to the 14-day quarantine for everybody because as was explained, most of our guests are spending one week. So at day seven, they usually are going back home. So whereas in Barbados, we're testing on day five. They're retesting on day five and everybody is being tested. There are slight variations to that model. But our suggestions, our recommendations still remain that if there is a certain model that seems to be working, that perhaps we should adapt that model. But those things, a lot of consultation certainly has to go into that. So the long and short of this, as we would like to recommend as a St. Lucia Medical and Dental Association, is that we all have to do our part. The policy makers certainly have a huge role to play in all of this, but we as citizens of St. Lucia, we have to do our part and adhere to the protocols if we're going to stem the tide of this rapid rise in cases of COVID-19. It is not a call to panic. It's a call to action that if we all just essentially stick to protocols, we will be able to get through this and get through this well. Importantly, the psychosocial, the psychological effect of all of this, we cannot ignore it, the psychological effect of unemployment that has to be taken into account. And that is something we think of when we do not recommend necessarily a full shutdown of the country. That what we call for adjustment to certain rules and regulations, but we need to ensure in as much as possible that our people remain healthy, that there's no stigmatization of patients who have had COVID-19 because that is not helping anybody. The psychological impact of this is significant. It's been said multiple studies that the mental health impact of COVID-19 is probably going to be as significant as a physical impact of this. So that cannot be forgotten in this fight against COVID-19.