Coronavirus - What Are The Implications?

He certainly hasn't been perfect. He has been terrible. The disbanding of the very group of experts that was in place to direct the best and quickest response against this exact type of situation .... for instance.

https://www.latimes.com/science/story/2020-04-06/us-battle-against-coronavirus-front-lines-war-room

Excerpts:

"A deadly virus was spreading in China, killing 40% of its victims and threatening to burst into a major outbreak.

In the U.S., the pandemic preparedness team at the White House’s National Security Council (NSC) was tracking it daily, even as President Trump took office in those early days of 2017.

The NSC team, called the Directorate for Global Health Security and Biodefense, had helmed the country’s preparations for months, coordinating health agencies, the State Department, and even the Pentagon to prepare for its spread to the U.S.

That virus, H7N9, never did.

Less than three years later, its successor — the novel coronavirus — broke out. But by then the directorate had been dismantled by the Trump administration.

As a consequence, the pandemic response is now being steered by non-scientists: Vice President Mike Pence, Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar, and even the president’s son-in-law are jostling for control of a response marred by confusion and delays.

It is unclear how the outbreak would have played out if the group had still been intact. But without a team that was trained to handle just such a pandemic — drawing on itstheir experiences from SARS in 2002; H1N1 in 2009; Ebola in 2014; Zika in 2016 — the United States was left without a vital rudder, experts and former NSC officials said.

A war-room-like command center would have compelled action across disparate agencies to form a coherent and swift response, they say.

“It’s pretty clear that, by not having an authoritative personality in the White House who understood what was at stake, the United States will pay a huge price,” said J. Stephen Morrison, the director of the Global Health Policy Center at the bipartisan Center for Strategic and International Studies, who last year warned of the need to reinstate the directorate.

“No one on high had the strategic urgency to see the bigger picture and say, ‘We damn well better move rapidly, because if we don’t, the consequences are going to be disastrous,’” Morrison said."



"The elite group was trained to distinguish the magnitude of a microscopic threat. It was meant to cut through red tape among agencies, pushing officials to detect and isolate the first U.S. cases to prevent spread. Backers say the team could have foreseen key problems, including testing roadblocks and gear shortages, that have worsened the crisis.

The decision to disband the unit was made by then-national security advisor John Bolton. At the time, an NSC spokesman said the change was intended to reduce bureaucracy and streamline offices with similar missions. The administration was still strongly committed to pandemic preparedness, the spokesman said.

The National Security Council did not respond to multiple inquiries from The Times.

A report by CSIS in November 2019 urged that the Trump administration restore the National Security Council’s health security directorate, saying the authorities currently in place were “insufficient” to address a global health threat.

“It remains unclear who would be in charge at the White House in the case of a grave pandemic threat or cross-border biological crisis,” warned the report. See big link above. (Does anyone really disagree?)

The coronavirus may have already been spreading.

Last month, when Trump was asked about the directorate’s elimination, he called the inquiries “nasty” and said he knew nothing about it. But he also justified the layoffs of scientific experts across the agencies as efficient: “I’m a business person — I don’t like having thousands of people around when you don’t need them. When we need them, we can get them back very quickly,” he said.

Critics say that was a fatal mistake, and contributed to the rapid spread of the virus. More than 300,000 Americans in 50 states have now tested positive for coronavirus, and more than 8,000 have died.

“It’s like watching in slow-motion. It all could have been different,” Morrison said."



"The NSC has included health security experts as part of its mission since at least the Clinton presidency, though their influence has varied with each administration. The pandemic response team was formalized into a directorate in 2016 under President Obama.

With headquarters in the executive building directly east of the White House, the NSC had both the experience and authority to track biological threats and help extinguish them before they spread. The team included several of the world’s leading biosecurity experts: Beth Cameron, a PhD biologist who had spent years leading a weapons of mass destruction program at the Pentagon; Dr. Luciana Borio, an infectious disease physician who headed the FDA’s work on emerging threats; and Rear Adm. R. Timothy Ziemer, a U.S. Navy helicopter pilot whose tenure leading the U.S. malaria initiative drove down the world’s malaria deaths by 40%.

The unit had three main duties: to provide constant surveillance for a quick pandemic response; unify government agencies under one command; and to ensure that the White House conveyed scientifically sound information to the public.

One of its main sources for disease intelligence was provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, where a 24,000-square-foot emergency operation center is staffed around the clock to monitor real-time reports of potential outbreaks around the world. Digital screens cover the walls, using maps and intelligence feeds to evaluate early signals that a pathogen is taking hold in humans."



“The NSC’s job tends to be thinking from the 30,000-foot level: Where are the seams? What could happen in the weeks and months ahead that nobody else is thinking about?” said Cameron, who served on Obama’s Ebola task force and then led the directorate.

A 69-page pandemic “playbook” written by the directorate in 2016 attempted just that, detailing how to procure vital supplies during an outbreak. But that guidance has gone disregarded as the coronavirus response runs short of masks and ventilators. “You know, we’re not a shipping clerk,” Trump said.

Diagnostic testing has also revealed a stark contrast in approaches toward pandemic response. During H1N1, the Food and Drug Administration coordinated with the CDC to approve a diagnostic test less than two weeks after the first case was detected in California. But during the coronavirus outbreak, delays in testing supplies and approvals have left the United States exponentially behind other nations.

Trump said the challenges they faced were due to “uncharted territory.”

“Nobody knew there would be a pandemic or an epidemic of this proportion,” Trump said last month. “I would view it as something that just surprised the whole world. And if people would have known about it, it could have stopped.”

Health experts, though unsurprised, agree with his final point: It could have been.

“In a national security crisis, the president needs experienced generals by his side. He needs the brightest minds in biological threats to advise him,” Gostin said. “And now, we are faced with one of the seminal biological events of the century, and they can’t decide who’s in charge.”

 

Fake News.

The team was dissolved, but many of the key individuals on the team are still working at the White House.

https://www.breitbart.com/health/20...ot-fire-the-entire-white-house-pandemic-team/

 

What ****ing good did it do to keep them around if he didn't listen to them in any kind of timely fashion (see supply chain) and constantly contradicts the scientists?? Surely they did not forget everything they were concerned about. I'm not a Dem and I know you're a Libertarian but the lengths you go to defend this clown are quite something.

 

The fact that you attack the poster instead of the post itself, shows your true colors. Have a good day.

 

Your post said nothing except it was "fake news" and he kept many of those people around. So you dismissed everything I went to the trouble to highlight and illustrate about the way he has handled the crisis. You gotta be kidding. Pot meet kettle.

And "quite something" to describe the way it seems to me you defend him against what is painfully obvious as to how he has handled this is hardly an attack on you personally. I've shown "my true colors"? C'mon Man ... I have known you on CL and here a long time.

 

More fake news or biased reporting? This s*** happened under his watch because of the decisions he made to NOT listen to "many of the key individuals on the team" who "are still working at the White House"

 

He made decisions others might have as well, but we’ll never know. When Democrats so negligently amassed an unacceptable amount of federal debt that never benefitted the American people, cuts had to be made.

Pandemic preparation is something that hasn’t really applied for 100 years. Easy to see how it might have taken a back seat. Hindsite is 20/20

 

I have no problem with looking at it that way. But as the richest country in the world it is absolutely indefensible, to me, that at the very least Trump didn't listen (enough, or seriously) to the experts around him in the early stages of covid-19 becoming epidemic in China and European countries, and the nation got caught so short on vital equipment and protective gear supplies that would be needed by medical personnel if the virus blew up in America as well ..... even after what we saw was happening in China and Italy and GB. F*** him and his dismissive comment that I quoted above on that issue alone. Nurses and doctors are dying because of it.

A 69-page pandemic “playbook” written by the directorate in 2016 attempted just that, detailing how to procure vital supplies during an outbreak. But that guidance has gone disregarded as the coronavirus response runs short of masks and ventilators. “You know, we’re not a shipping clerk,” Trump said.

 

A month ago Trump said he takes no responsibility. Yesterday he said he has total authority.

You can’t have it both ways.

Sure, maybe prior administrations left us playing from behind. Or maybe Trump had to cut back because the other side was wasting money. Maybe if someone else was in charge they may have made worse preparations. Whatever, I get dizzy following all the defenses for this guy.

At the end of the day, Trump needs to man up. For a movement that puts up this macho narrative of being anti-PC unlike all the triggered liberal snowflakes, his camp is really thin-skinned and childish.

 

The higher the death count, the more grief he will get. It would be the same regardless, but our country’s media has an agenda and can’t wait to feast on this.

makes more sense to focus on solutions to me. I’m quarantined overseas, so figure it out soon. K guys, thx.

 

Seems appropriate

‪ Trump announces halt of funding to WHO pending review of coronavirus response

https://twitter.com/i/events/1250188692179660800‬

if you parrot and repeat what the supposed experts are saying and then you get grilled for exactly that, I’m pretty sure you are going to want to hold that organization accountable. WHO failed miserably, and they obviously need a leadership shakeup.

interesting note: US contributes 400 million a year as the largest donor, and China contributes about 40 mil. Yet it appeared China was using them as their personal puppet. Completely unacceptable, and you’re damn right you should hit them where it hurts most. In the pocket.

 

I have not read yet in any depth what the WHO is accused of not handling anywhere “near well” with regard to how it mattered and what should have been done ... once China went into the beginning of its epidemic. And here is Japan as well calling them out. Interesting to say the least.

 

WHO is supposed to be the expert, but instead backed China and parroted their lies to the detriment of the world.

They have one job. They failed at it in the most grievous way possible, and I hope they don’t survive this in their current format. Heads need to roll.

 

This one seems even more promising, and I hope it works out (I’m biased since my brother works for them and he’s excited about the stock jumps).

It’s interesting though. With hydroxychloroquine there were a lot of people coming out to vocally attack the studies that supported its use, or people coming out to eagerly defend the use-case and dismiss criticisms of the study. Because Trump talked about it. It almost seemed like the conversation was not even really about the drug. It was a politicized discourse, a veiled attack or defense on Trump with the drug just serving as a backdrop.

So I’m curious: (a) If Trump starts talking more about remdesivir. If not, might that lend evidence to the idea that he has vested interest in hydroxychloroquine? If the idea was that he was so vocal about hydroxychloroquine because he wants to feed people hope, why not be equally as vocal about promising remdesivir studies? And (b), if Trump doesn’t really talk too much about remdesivir, will people on both sides be as vocal about defending or critiquing these early studies?

 

In other news, I’m not sure how I feel about these re-opening guidelines. I think on paper they make sense from a high level, and they’re just guidelines. The idea is that it’s data driven. I think it’s too early to re-open, but the guidelines dictate that if after gradual re-opening the cases start climbing up again then you roll back. And the states clearly have the power to handle things on their own terms. I think the problem is that I don’t think there are many states close to meeting the gating guidelines to move onto Phase 1 of re-opening yet, and we don’t have the testing/contact tracing systems yet in place to actually validate the outlined requirements.

Which is fine, I take that to mean that essentially we should remain locked down until we do have that infrastructure in place and can demonstrate that reduction in cases.

But by laying out those guidelines I think it gives unfounded optimism that most states are already near that re-opening point, and so people are going to start getting lax in their social distancing.

I’ll admit, personally even as an introverted homebody I’ve started to crack a bit. It’s been long enough that my household is unlikely to be infected and I haven’t heard of anyone I know getting sick. So I’ve started to get complacent, thinking like the finish line is close. Eagerly anticipating hanging out with friends, getting more lax about planning grocery store runs, etc. I know that’s wrong though, and for the sake of my mental health I shouldn’t be thinking that way as it will set me up for disappointment. I think we’re still on the first leg of a marathon, not close to the finish line of a sprint.