05-10-2020, 10:23 AM
So I can see where you're coming from with your responses, but you should note that all the missteps with H1N1, the recent Ebola outbreaks, et al. were probably addressed in that nifty pandemic playbook that the previous administration handed to the current administration. Too bad the current administration willfully neglected to attend the transition team pandemic exercise and also declined to use the pandemic playbook for this current crisis.
I would argue that the CDC response to H1N1 has been about an order of magnitude more organized, faster, and certainly better backed by the rest of the federal apparatus. The response was coordinated between several agencies across multiple states, and progress was faster, and that saves lives. We didn't cure H1N1 in two months, but that's not the point. The point is that the H1N1 response was materially better than the SARS-CoV-2 response, and that's an indication that lessons of the past were ignored. That is tantamount to criminal negligence when about 100,000 deaths are projected.
Finally, yes, it is well-known that the CDC staff in China would have had better access to data, viral genomic samples, and embedded observations regarding the severity and spread of SARS-CoV-2 in the early days, probably in the first week of January at latest. The staff build relationships with their Chinese CDC counterparts, not through the WHO but directly. A real signal would have been sent from the staff to CDC HQ, and measures would have been activated from there that probably would not have been blocked by White House political appointees. I believe this red alert klaxon would have been nearly impossible to silence if we had gotten data from trusted federal staff and activated CDC operations sooner.
Testing and tracing should be a federally-directed responsibility, or at least, it requires federal leadership. We know those efforts are being hamstrung politically. In any case, those are measures that are of little use now that the virus is in full community spread mode. As the curve flattens and declines and communities re-open, we will need to go back to contact tracing. That time is really not here yet, despite the wishes of politicians.
I would argue that the CDC response to H1N1 has been about an order of magnitude more organized, faster, and certainly better backed by the rest of the federal apparatus. The response was coordinated between several agencies across multiple states, and progress was faster, and that saves lives. We didn't cure H1N1 in two months, but that's not the point. The point is that the H1N1 response was materially better than the SARS-CoV-2 response, and that's an indication that lessons of the past were ignored. That is tantamount to criminal negligence when about 100,000 deaths are projected.
Finally, yes, it is well-known that the CDC staff in China would have had better access to data, viral genomic samples, and embedded observations regarding the severity and spread of SARS-CoV-2 in the early days, probably in the first week of January at latest. The staff build relationships with their Chinese CDC counterparts, not through the WHO but directly. A real signal would have been sent from the staff to CDC HQ, and measures would have been activated from there that probably would not have been blocked by White House political appointees. I believe this red alert klaxon would have been nearly impossible to silence if we had gotten data from trusted federal staff and activated CDC operations sooner.
Testing and tracing should be a federally-directed responsibility, or at least, it requires federal leadership. We know those efforts are being hamstrung politically. In any case, those are measures that are of little use now that the virus is in full community spread mode. As the curve flattens and declines and communities re-open, we will need to go back to contact tracing. That time is really not here yet, despite the wishes of politicians.