[76lsjumb]

The principle of political pressure influencing scientific advice is problematic. . . . The underlying scientific advice should not be influenced by the President

Exactly right.

Apparently the CDC is going to change its science-based guidelines to bring them in line with the President's wishes. It's the same issue as the President altering a weather forecast with a Sharpie. It's corrupt.

I guess our disagreement here may be one of semantics.  What you call "scientific advice" I call "risk-benefit analysis."  Scientifically, no one should be in the same enclosed room with anyone else because it is possible that the first person would be infected but be asymptomatic and, due to aerosol transmission possibility, the second person might become infected, even if both are wearing N-95 masks, because even masks are not absolutely 100% safe.  Therefore, the "scientific advice," until we have determined that COVID-19 has been completely eradicated from the earth, would be that no one should ever be in the same room with anyone else.  Period [since, of course, we can't sacrifice even one life].

I would hope that you believe -- and agree with me -- that the foregoing is absurd hyperbole.  However, you presumably can work back from that absurd hyperbole to a point where you are willing to impose restrictions that you believe are based on scientific advice. Your point, however, may very well be -- indeed, almost certainly is -- different from my point where I believe that the restrictions are warranted based on scientific advice.  We likely have different risk tolerances AND we likely have different value assessments as to what things are important relative to other things.

I don't believe it's my place to brand your tolerances and values as corrupt, nor do I think it's fair of you to brand mine that way... or to brand the Administration's simply based on your dislike for Trump.  There is as much evidence for the charge that Trump opponents want to keep the schools shut down for political reasons as there is for the opposite view.  Indeed, I don't think you would consider it fair, or right, for me to accuse you of corruptly using science to push an agenda of seriously undermining the education of our youth simply to ensure continued unrest until Trump is defeated in November, but that charge has as much evidence to support it as the charge that Trump is somehow influencing the "underlying scientific advice."

Moreover, "science" doesn't mandate that schools must re-open, nor that they can't reopen, nor does "science" mandate what steps should be taken if and when they do re-open.  Science should certainly INFORM the people who make those decisions.  But, so will risk analysis and, frankly, politics.

As for weather forecasting, if you're trying to tell me that politics doesn't influence BOTH sides of the climate change debate, I've got a bridge to sell you... [But, hopefully to avoid vitriolic replies that are a waste of time, I do want to say that I agree altering weather maps with a sharpie is pointless and stupid, even if not "corrupt" (as I understand that word)].  Of course, pointless and stupid is what Trump does best, after all...

[76lsjumb]

The principle of political pressure influencing scientific advice is problematic. . . . The underlying scientific advice should not be influenced by the President

Exactly right.

Apparently the CDC is going to change its science-based guidelines to bring them in line with the President's wishes. It's the same issue as the President altering a weather forecast with a Sharpie. It's corrupt.

I guess our disagreement here may be one of semantics.  What you call "scientific advice" I call "risk-benefit analysis."  Scientifically, no one should be in the same enclosed room with anyone else because it is possible that the first person would be infected but be asymptomatic and, due to aerosol transmission possibility, the second person might become infected, even if both are wearing N-95 masks, because even masks are not absolutely 100% safe.  Therefore, the "scientific advice," until we have determined that COVID-19 has been completely eradicated from the earth, would be that no one should ever be in the same room with anyone else.  Period [since, of course, we can't sacrifice even one life].

I would hope that you believe -- and agree with me -- that the foregoing is absurd hyperbole.  However, you presumably can work back from that absurd hyperbole to a point where you are willing to impose restrictions that you believe are based on scientific advice. Your point, however, may very well be -- indeed, almost certainly is -- different from my point where I believe that the restrictions are warranted based on scientific advice.  We likely have different risk tolerances AND we likely have different value assessments as to what things are important relative to other things.

I don't believe it's my place to brand your tolerances and values as corrupt, nor do I think it's fair of you to brand mine that way... or to brand the Administration's simply based on your dislike for Trump.  There is as much evidence for the charge that Trump opponents want to keep the schools shut down for political reasons as there is for the opposite view.  Indeed, I don't think you would consider it fair, or right, for me to accuse you of corruptly using science to push an agenda of seriously undermining the education of our youth simply to ensure continued unrest until Trump is defeated in November, but that charge has as much evidence to support it as the charge that Trump is somehow influencing the "underlying scientific advice."

Moreover, "science" doesn't mandate that schools must re-open, nor that they can't reopen, nor does "science" mandate what steps should be taken if and when they do re-open.  Science should certainly INFORM the people who make those decisions.  But, so will risk analysis and, frankly, politics.

As for weather forecasting, if you're trying to tell me that politics doesn't influence BOTH sides of the climate change debate, I've got a bridge to sell you... [But, hopefully to avoid vitriolic replies that are a waste of time, I do want to say that I agree altering weather maps with a sharpie is pointless and stupid, even if not "corrupt" (as I understand that word)].  Of course, pointless and stupid is what Trump does best, after all...