CDC: Trump policies minimized pandemic
Review: Guidelines were not written by medical experts
WASHINGTON — Federal health officials have identified several pandemic recommendations released during the Trump administration that they say were “not primarily authored” by staffers and do not reflect the best scientific evidence, based on a review ordered by its new director.
The review identified three documents that had already been removed from the agency’s website: One, released in July, delivered a strong argument for school reopenings and minimized health risks. A second set of guidelines about the country’s reopening was released in April by the White House and was less detailed than what had been drafted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Federal Emergency Management Agency. A third guidance issued in August discouraged the testing of people without COVID-19 symptoms even when they had contact with infected individuals. That was replaced in September after experts inside and outside the agency raised alarms.
CDC Director Rochelle Walensky ordered the review as part of her pledge to restore public trust in the beleaguered agency, which had seen its recommendations watered down or ignored during the Trump administration to align with the former president’s efforts to play down the severity of the pandemic.
The review was conducted “to ensure that all of CDC’S existing COVID-19 guidance is evidencebased and free of politics,” according to a memo from the agency’s principal deputy director, Anne Schuchat. She conducted the review, which was posted on the agency’s website Monday. Officials said they are revamping all pandemic-related guidance to ensure that science and transparency are paramount.
The July school reopening guidance was controversial because it was released weeks after Trump criticized the agency’s earlier recommendations as being “very tough and expensive.” The opening preamble extolling the importance of in-school classes was presented as a CDC document, but the agency was not part of the discussion or drafting, Walensky said. That guidance was removed in October.
“This is something that I will not allow as CDC director,” Walensky said. “The processes we have in place moving forward will ensure this cannot and will not occur.”
Schuchat does not identify the outside authors who wrote the three guidances not developed by CDC staffers. Nor does her memo mention political interference by the Trump administration. The word “politics” appears only once, and Walensky and Schuchat appeared to go out of their way in interviews to avoid discussing it.
But the review provides official confirmation of what has been widely reported in press accounts at the time — that political appointees ordered revisions to critical CDC guidance. In addition to the three documents not written by CDC staffers, the review also cited recommendations that should have used stronger language and that should have cited supporting scientific briefs.
In addition, the memo said that too often, it was difficult to “decipher the core recommendations” in long guidance documents, and “the crux of what was new or changed was difficult to find.” But the document, a copy of which was shared with the Washington Post, does not provide specifics.
Walensky said she plans to adopt Schuchat’s recommendations to ensure that scientific rationale for major guidance is clearly communicated — with executive summaries that identify what’s new. She said that key guidance will be reviewed quarterly and that briefings will be held for media and other publichealth groups when they are issued.