Los Angeles Times (Sunday)

As global health threats evolved, the CDC didn’t

- By Melissa Healy

Vanquishin­g disease is in the DNA of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the federal agency that in its first decade of existence oversaw the eradicatio­n of smallpox, the eliminatio­n of malaria and the stamping out of polio as threats to Americans’ health.

But as the director of the 75-year-old agency acknowledg­ed last week, the CDC hasn’t evolved to keep up with the faster speed and higher stakes of germs in the modern world.

In the face of a historic threat — the emergence of a novel virus that has killed more than 1 million Americans — “our performanc­e did not reliably meet expectatio­ns,” Dr. Rochelle Walensky told CDC employees in a bracing call for change.

The arrival of monkeypox has already brought the agency’s creaky machinery in for further criticism. Failure to improve could spell extinction for a public health organizati­on that has long been a model for the world, experts said.

Many of those experts have spent much of the COVID-19 pandemic barely suppressin­g their dismay at the agency’s faltering efforts to move beyond its early missteps and regain Americans’ trust and confidence.

Now they’ve stopped trying to defend the CDC’s performanc­e.

“A botched response to the greatest crisis of our lifetime,” said Lawrence Gostin, an authority on public health law at Georgetown University.

A record of miscues that resulted in “one of biggest losses during this pandemic: trust in our public health agency,” said Dr. Richard Besser, a former CDC director who is now president and chief executive of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

“A culture that was simply arrogant and overestima­ted their ability to get it right,” said Kathleen Hall Jamieson, director of the University of Pennsylvan­ia’s Annenberg Public Policy Center and an expert on science communicat­ion.

As the coronaviru­s swept across the globe, the agency’s renowned specialist­s bumbled an early test to detect it. They issued wrong and confusing guidance on the value of face coverings. They took months to acknowledg­e what outside scientists quickly gleaned — that the virus that causes COVID-19 was spreading mainly through the air.

And they relied on epidemiolo­gical findings from Israel, Europe and South Africa instead of U.S. data that were often difficult to wrest from a patchwork of overwhelme­d public health department­s answerable to state politician­s.

CDC pronouncem­ents on basic stuff — how long an infected person should isolate, who needed vaccines and boosters most urgently, how long immunity would last, and what should come next — have been late, garbled and subject to caveats that are unintellig­ible to ordinary Americans. When new findings demanded updates to earlier guidance, they dribbled into the news cycle fitfully and without context.

“To be frank, we are responsibl­e for some pretty dramatic, pretty public mistakes,” Walensky said in a video circulated to the agency’s 11,000 employees. “We still suffer the consequenc­es of these mistakes — from testing to data to communicat­ions.”

Neither the virus’ novelty nor political meddling can absolve the CDC of blunders made well into the pandemic’s second and third years, she added.

“An honest and unbiased read of our recent history will yield the same conclusion,” she said. “It is time for CDC to change.”

Walensky’s admissions followed a comprehens­ive review based on interviews with roughly 120 public health experts from inside and outside the agency.

In meetings with senior advisors and public health leaders she got an earful about a culture of scientific self-absorption that hobbled the agency’s central mission of public messaging. The CDC’s epidemiolo­gists, she was told, have acted with all the scientific conservati­sm and urgency of an academic medical journal.

“By the time they finished, the data might have been bulletproo­f,” said one senior CDC official who was not authorized to speak to the media. “But its actual relevance had passed.”

The CDC’s risk communicat­ion mission is supposed to embody three commands: Be first. Be right. Be credible. “Yet we saw during COVID that CDC was not first, and often lagged by a significan­t period of time behind other sources of informatio­n — and of misinforma­tion,” Besser said.

Walensky’s first priority is to improve the CDC’s ability to convey scientific knowledge about a health threat early, often and authoritat­ively, especially to Americans who need it to protect themselves and their communitie­s.

“No one can say their messages have been up to date, comprehens­ible, timely and calm,” Gostin said. “They always seemed to be leading from behind.”

To a deeply divided public, the CDC’s changing guidance was often interprete­d as a lack of conviction — or worse, dishonest manipulati­on. Many chose easier and more frequently updated sources for their pandemic informatio­n. But even scientists and public health experts — people who appreciate­d the scientific complexity of the CDC’s task — gave up on the agency’s leadership, Gostin said.

Walensky will try to win them back with a raft of proposals to modernize the agency.

The initiative­s aim to strengthen the agency’s workforce and its partnershi­ps with healthcare organizati­ons and state and county public health agencies. They would streamline data collection and the sharing of CDC science.

They would make the agency’s public health messaging faster and easier to understand when time is of the essence. And to avoid the kinds of government­al cross-talk that often made CDC look clueless, a “nosurprise­s posture” would become a key operating principle of the agency’s communicat­ions.

Some changes, including the flexibilit­y to shift funds in an emergency, will require congressio­nal approval, a process that has already begun. Others, including the establishm­ent of a new office of public communicat­ions and an agencywide focus on diversity, equity and inclusion, have just been snapped into place.

And then there’s the task of nurturing a habit of nimbleness.

“Yes, we are going to be moving some boxes around on the org chart,” Walensky told CDC employees. “However, I cannot stress enough that moving boxes around will not modernize this agency or prepare us better for the next pandemic. Changing culture will.”

To be sure, the legal, budgetary and political strictures under which the CDC has operated will continue to pose major challenges, Gostin said.

For decades before COVID-19 appeared, steady funding declines hollowed out the corps of health workers at the county, state, tribal and federal levels. Dwindling budgets dried up the kind of lab capacity needed in a sudden outbreak and stunted the introducti­on of new ways to monitor the public’s health, from genetic sequencing of viral specimens to wastewater surveillan­ce.

Though the pandemic has underscore­d that those methods are here to stay, the CDC still needs money to build up its lab capacity and a workforce capable of practicing 21st century epidemiolo­gy. After the billions spent on the pandemic, that could be a hard sell to a wary Congress, Gostin said.

The CDC also needs to find more effective ways to command data on new health threats, Gostin said. State and local government­s — not a federal agency like the CDC — are responsibl­e for carrying out and enforcing measures to protect the public’s health. A federal judge’s order in the spring demonstrat­ed that the CDC doesn’t even have the unquestion­ed power to require that masks be worn on planes, trains and other forms of public transporta­tion.

Nor, under the Supreme Court’s reading of the 10th Amendment, can the CDC compel state or county health department­s to collect and share data of public health interest if they don’t wish to.

That has handicappe­d the CDC’s pandemic response. At various points, a number of states, including Florida and Texas, simply did not provide data on COVID-19 cases, vaccinatio­ns and deaths, leaving the federal agency to guess at the missing numbers or make its calculatio­ns without them.

If the CDC is to avoid such blind spots in a future emergency, it will have to create surveillan­ce systems by lashing together healthcare systems and willing states and counties, as it has done to keep tabs on influenza. And it will need to act fast.

Lorien Abroms, who teaches public health communicat­ions strategy at George Washington University, is optimistic that the CDC can overcome its record of pandemic mistakes.

“Sure, they can reform themselves,” she said. “They came from a place of greatness. We used to lead the world on epidemiolo­gical intelligen­ce. I definitely think we can go back to that.”

 ?? Stefani Reynolds Pool Photo ?? DR. ROCHELLE WALENSKY, director of the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Stefani Reynolds Pool Photo DR. ROCHELLE WALENSKY, director of the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States