Tag: Trump politicizing science

Trump’s messy attempt to clean up unwelcome coronavirus vaccine news

Washington Post logo

President Trump is putting a lot of his reelection hopes on one thing: the imminent arrival of a coronavirus vaccine that he and his administration can take credit for.

We got a glimpse Wednesday of just how dependent the president is on convincing Americans a vaccine is coming to end this pandemic in months.

Earlier in the day, a top public health official in his administration said something that doesn’t jibe with that. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention DirectorRobert Redfield said that even if a vaccine were ready and approved by this fall or winter, it wouldn’t be ready to be widely distributed to Americans until spring or summer 2021. Continue reading.

Trump undercuts GOP, calls for bigger COVID-19 relief package

The Hill logo

President Trump on Wednesday shook up the high-stakes debate over coronavirus relief, undercutting the Republicans’ long-held position by urging GOP leaders to go big.  

Senate Republicans had initially offered a $1.1 trillion emergency aid package, but subsequently voted on a proposal providing just $650 billion — only $350 billion of it in new funding. 

Democrats have howled at the GOP’s “emaciated” offer, arguing that it falls far short of the funding needed to address the dual health and economic crises caused by the deadly coronavirus.  Continue reading.

Public Health Experts Stunned By Trump Flack’s Attempt To Censor CDC Reports

Days after President Donald Trump admitted to knowingly downplaying the Covid-19 pandemic in his statements to the public, new reporting late Friday revealed that Trump political aides have been reviewing—and in some cases altering—weekly CDC reports about the deadly virus in an effort to bring them into closer alignment with the president’s false narrative and claims.

Politico reported Friday evening that the Health and Human Services Department’s politically appointed communications aides, led by former Trump campaign official Michael Caputo—a Republican strategist with no medical expertise—”have attempted to add caveats to the CDC’s findings, including an effort to retroactively change agency reports that they said wrongly inflated the risks of Covid-19 and should have made clear that Americans sickened by the virus may have been infected because of their own behavior.”

The primary target of the Trump officials’ interference, according to Politico, has been the CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Reports (MMWR), a crucial resource for experts, public officials, and members of the public seeking to track the spread of Covid-19. While CDC officials have pushed back on meddling from political appointees, Politico reported that the agency has “increasingly agreed to allow the political officials to review the reports and, in a few cases, compromised on the wording.” Continue reading.

Trump is misrepresenting coronavirus data again, and it’s extremely dangerous

A Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) report released last week has quickly become yet another cause for public controversy and confusion. Why? Because the coronavirus data — which showed that 94% of people who die of COVID-19 also have preexisting conditions — has been widely misinterpreted by many (including, of course, our President).

For those who egregiously assert that COVID-19 deaths are overreported, this served as evidence that most of the people who died after being infected with coronavirus were actually already sick beforehand and that COVID-19 itself has only actually killed only around 9,000 people in the US. Here’s everything you need to know to remain on the logical side of this conversation.

The report released by the CDC was a breakdown of COVID-19 fatalities in the U.S. from February to August, based on death certificates. First of all, this data is considered “provisional,” because these counts may not match counts from other sources, such as data from county health departments, the CDC stated in the report. That doesn’t mean the information is irrelevant, it just means that it’s subject to change. The CDC considers death certificates to be reliable sources of information because they include demographic details that state reporting agencies don’t, which makes them useful in figuring out what other factors (e.g.: like age, race, and underlying health conditions) may have contributed to a person’s death. Continue reading.

Two P.R. Experts at F.D.A. Have Been Ousted After Blood Plasma Fiasco

New York Times logo

The agency’s chief spokeswoman, Emily Miller, was removed from her position just 11 days into the job. And the contract was terminated of a consultant who had advised the F.D.A. chief to correct misleading claims about plasma’s benefits.

The head of the Food and Drug Administration ousted its top spokeswoman from her position on Friday in an urgent bid to restore the tarnished credibility of the agency after he made erroneous claims that overstated the benefits of plasma treatments for Covid-19 at a news conference with President Trump.

The decision came just a day after the F.D.A.’s parent agency, the Department of Health and Human Services, terminated the contract of a public relations consultant who had advised the F.D.A. commissioner, Dr. Stephen M. Hahn, to correct his misleading claims that 35 out of 100 Covid-19 patients “would have been saved because of the administration of plasma.”

The removals come at a moment when the agency, which will be making critical decisions about whether to approve coronavirus vaccines and treatments, is struggling to salvage its reputation as a neutral scientific arbiter. Continue reading.

Health agencies’ credibility at risk after week of blunders

WASHINGTON — The credibility of two of the nation’s leading public health agencies was under fire this week after controversial decisions that outside experts said smacked of political pressure from President Donald Trump as he attempts to move past the devastating toll of the coronavirus ahead of the November election.

The head of the Food and Drug Administration grossly misstated, then corrected, claims about the lifesaving power of a plasma therapy for COVID-19 authorized by his agency. Then the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention quietly updated its guidelines to suggest fewer Americans need to get tested for coronavirus, sparking outrage from scientists.

Trump’s own factual misstatements about COVID-19 are well documented, but the back-to-back messaging blunders by public health officials could create new damage, eroding public trust in front-line agencies. That’s already raising concerns about whether the administration will be forthcoming with critical details about upcoming vaccines needed to defeat the pandemic. Continue reading.

CDC director walks back change in coronavirus testing guidelines

The Hill logo

The director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on Thursday issued new guidance for coronavirus testing, days after a quiet change sparked protests from the scientific and medical communities.

In a statement, Director Robert Redfield said those who come into contact with confirmed or probable COVID-19 patients could be tested themselves, even if they do not show symptoms of the virus.

“Testing is meant to drive actions and achieve specific public health objectives. Everyone who needs a COVID-19 test, can get a test. Everyone who wants a test does not necessarily need a test; the key is to engage the needed public health community in the decision with the appropriate follow-up action,” Redfield said. Continue reading.

Dr. Fauci Raises Alarm About Trump’s Lax New CDC Testing Guidelines

Dr. Anthony Fauci raised alarms on Wednesday about a new change to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention’s new COVID-19 testing guidelines, which seem to discount the risk of asymptomatic transmission of the disease.

The guidelines were changed on Monday and have increasingly drawn concern from the medical community. They now state: “You do not necessarily need a test” even if “you have been in close contact (within 6 feet) of a person with a COVID-19 infection for at least 15 minutes but do not have symptoms.”

But critics argue that asymptomatic transmission of the virus is one of the primary vectors through which it spreads. Discouraging tests for people who have been exposed to the virus but don’t have symptoms could make it much more difficult to keep the spread of the disease under control. When people don’t have symptoms and they’re unaware they’re infected, they may be more likely to spread the disease because they go out in public and interact with other people. Arguably, people who are sick need the tests less, because their symptoms are reason enough to avoid other people. Continue reading.

Trump officials pressured CDC to change virus testing guidelines

Public health experts have questioned the scientific basis for the testing change.

Top Trump administration officials involved with the White House coronavirus task force ordered the Centers for Disease Control and Protection to stop promoting coronavirus testing for most people who have been exposed to the virus but aren’t showing symptoms, according to two people with knowledge of the process.

Federal testing czar Brett Giroir denied those allegations Wednesday, telling reporters that the CDC ultimately decided to narrow the recommendations for who should be tested.

“The new guidelines are a CDC action,” Giroir said. “As always, the guidelines received appropriate attention, consultation and input from Task Force experts, and I mean the medical and scientific experts, including CDC Director [Robert] Redfield.” Continue reading.

Reviving the US CDC

The COVID-19 pandemic continues to worsen in the USA with 1·3 million cases and an estimated death toll of 80 684 as of May 12. States that were initially the hardest hit, such as New York and New Jersey, have decelerated the rate of infections and deaths after the implementation of 2 months of lockdown. However, the emergence of new outbreaks in Minnesota, where the stay-at-home order is set to lift in mid-May, and Iowa, which did not enact any restrictions on movement or commerce, has prompted pointed new questions about the inconsistent and incoherent national response to the COVID-19 crisis.

The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the flagship agency for the nation’s public health, has seen its role minimised and become an ineffective and nominal adviser in the response to contain the spread of the virus. The strained relationship between the CDC and the federal government was further laid bare when, according to The Washington Post, Deborah Birx, the head of the US COVID-19 Task Force and a former director of the CDC’s Global HIV/AIDS Division, cast doubt on the CDC’s COVID-19 mortality and case data by reportedly saying: “There is nothing from the CDC that I can trust”. This is an unhelpful statement, but also a shocking indictment of an agency that was once regarded as the gold standard for global disease detection and control. How did an agency that was the first point of contact for many national health authorities facing a public health threat become so ill-prepared to protect the public’s health?

In the decades following its founding in 1946, the CDC became a national pillar of public health and globally respected. It trained cadres of applied epidemiologists to be deployed in the USA and abroad. CDC scientists have helped to discover new viruses and develop accurate tests for them. CDC support was instrumental in helping WHO to eradicate smallpox. However, funding to the CDC for a long time has been subject to conservative politics that have increasingly eroded the agency’s ability to mount effective, evidence-based public health responses. In the 1980s, the Reagan administration resisted providing the sufficient budget that the CDC needed to fight the HIV/AIDS crisis. The George W Bush administration put restrictions on global and domestic HIV prevention and reproductive health programming.