Grappling With
Imperfect Science
...... the contagious Omicron variant is pushing the C.D.C. into uncharted territory. Because decisions must be made at a breakneck pace, the agency has issued recommendations based on what once would have been considered insufficient evidence, amid growing public concern about how these guidelines affect the economy and education.
The agency’s director, Dr. Rochelle P. Walensky, has sometimes skipped much of the traditional scientific review process, most recently in shortening the isolation period for infected Americans.
...
In recent interviews, some officials at the C.D.C. privately described the decisions as demoralizing, and worried about Dr. Walensky’s increasing reliance on a small group of advisers and what they saw as the White House’s heavy political influence on her actions.
This is the second time I have read the equivalent of "political influence." I wish that someone would spell out what the political influence is. If Biden is warping the science I will be first in line to excoriate him.
...
There are policy considerations in a pandemic that are “not the sole purview of C.D.C.,” said Dr. Richard E. Besser, who served as interim chief of the agency during the H1N1 influenza virus outbreak of 2009. But, he added, “I think we need some more clarity” when policy and economics drive agency recommendations.
Well, of course there are "policy considerations" in managing a fucking pandemic. Of course "economics" is a "consideration." Be specific: "WHEN [have] policy and economics drive[n] agency recommendations." Have policy and economics driven agency recommendations at the expense of science? If so, SAY SO SPECIFICALLY!
At the end of December, Dr. Walensky announced that infected Americans would need to isolate for only five days, not 10, if they were no longer experiencing symptoms, and that a negative test result would not be required to end the isolation period.
Critics complained that the virus might spread as contagious people were allowed to return to offices and schools...
But the recommendation had an important advantage: It could help keep hospitals, businesses and schools afloat through the worst of the Omicron surge.
Is that bad? Is that "influencing" the science? If so, tough.
The recommendations for isolation are “basically correct,” said Dr. Thomas R. Frieden, who led the agency under President Barack Obama. “The problem is, they were not explained.”
Or is that the problem, that Walensky doesn't, and never has, "explained" clearly. What do you need clarity on, Besser, and who do you need it from?
Last March, the C.D.C. said that schoolchildren could safely sit three feet apart in classrooms, instead of six feet, although there was virtually no research to back up the recommendation. But the move did make it easier for administrators to consider opening schools.
Walensky continually has taken the White House by surprise with her pronouncements. In this instance Jen Psaki had to back away from Walensky and did so inartfully, saying Walensky was "speaking in her personal capacity."
In May, Dr. Walensky cited scientific data when she told vaccinated people that they could take off their masks and mingle freely, much to the consternation of experts who said that the move ignored the possibility of breakthrough infections. (Those arrived with the Delta variant.)
That took the White House and the civilian employers completely by surprise.
In August, Dr. Walensky joined President Biden in supporting booster shots for all Americans, well before scientists at the Food and Drug Administration or at her own agency had a chance to review the data on whether they were needed.
The most recent example, the isolation advice, left turmoil within the agency over the way in which it was established and announced.
...
“There are people at C.D.C. who really don’t get it,” Dr. Frieden said.
During his tenure, he said, he was frequently confronted with “in some ways charming, but in some ways problematic, cluelessness on the part of C.D.C. staff that their recommendations, their guidance, their statements could have big implications.”
...
Some of the current conflict at the C.D.C. predates the pandemic and Dr. Walensky’s leadership. Tension between the agency and the National Institutes of Health, represented by Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, festered even during previous public health crises, some health officials noted.
I didn't know that!
In the most recent instance, Dr. Fauci and Surgeon General Dr. Vivek Murthy gave assurances on television that the C.D.C. would revisit its recommendations for isolation — when the agency had no plans to do so — and irritated senior C.D.C. scientists.
Ideally, the secretary of health and human services, Xavier Becerra, should smooth things over, said Dr. Peter Hotez, dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine.
I read previously that Becerra will not cut the knot. He doesn't want to get involved. Which...dear Lord.
In a rare appearance, Mr. Becerra last week defended Dr. Walensky in a CNN interview, saying she had “a medical license and a degree in public health. She doesn’t have a degree in marketing.”
With defense like that, you have no need of critics!
Okay, now I just saw this. This article in the Times is written by Apoorva Mandavilli, in whose reporting I do not have faith. I haven't noticed her name on a byline in some time and was hoping the Times had moved her to The Athletic or something.
