Panel blasts Boeing, FAA for crashes
A House committee issued a scathing report Wednesday questioning whether Boeing and government regulators have recognized problems that caused two deadly 737 Max jet crashes and whether either will be willing to make significant changes to fix them.
Staff members from the Democratic-controlled Transportation Committee blamed the crashes that killed 346 people on the “horrific culmination” of failed government oversight, design flaws and a lack of action at Boeing despite knowing about problems.
The committee identified deficiencies in the Federal Aviation Administration approval process for new jetliners. But the agency and Boeing have said certification of the Max complied with FAA regulations, the 246-page report said.
“The fact that a compliant airplane suffered from two deadly crashes in less than five months is clear evidence that the current regulatory system is fundamentally flawed and needs to be repaired,” the staff wrote in the report released early Wednesday.
The report highlights the need for legislation to fix the approval process and deal with the FAA’S delegation of some oversight tasks to aircraft manufacturer employees, said Committee Chairman Peter Defazio, D-oregon.
“Obviously the system is inadequate,” Defazio said. “We will be adopting significant reforms.”
He wouldn’t give details, saying committee leaders are in talks with Republicans about legislation. He said the committee won’t scrap the delegation program, and he hopes to reach agreement on reforms before year’s end.
A Senate committee on Wednesday delayed making changes to a bipartisan bill giving the FAA more control over picking company employees who sign off on safety decisions.
The House report stems from an 18-month investigation into the October 2018 crash of Lion Air flight 610 in Indonesia and the crash of Ethiopian Airlines flight 302 in March of 2019. The Max was grounded worldwide shortly after the Ethiopia crash. Regulators are testing planes with revamped flight control software, and Boeing hopes to get the Max flying again late this year or early in 2021.
Relatives of people who died in the crashes said the report exposes the truth.
“It was an unforgivable crime, and Boeing still wants to return the aircraft to service quickly,” said Ababu Amha, whose wife was a flight attendant on the Ethiopia Airlines jet. “All those responsible for the accident should pay the price for their actions.”
Paul Njoroge of Toronto, whose wife, three young children and mother-inlaw died in the Ethiopia crash while traveling to Kenya to see grandparents, said the report revealed Boeing’s culture of putting profit ahead of safety.
“There are instances in the report where some employees within Boeing tried to raise safety concern issues. But their concerns would be slammed by people within Boeing,” said Njoroge, who is among those suing the company. “This is an organization that should focus more on delivering safe planes.”
Eighteen months after the crash, Njoroge said, he still relies on support from others. “It just doesn’t go away. It never leaves my mind,” he said.
The investigators mainly focused on the reason Boeing was able to get the jet approved with minimal pilot training: It convinced the FAA that the Max was an updated version of previous generation 737s.
A single infusion of an experimental drug has markedly reduced levels of the coronavirus in newly infected patients and lowered the chances that they would need hospitalization, the drug’s maker announced Wednesday.
The drug is a monoclonal antibody, a manufactured copy of an antibody produced by a patient who recovered from COVID-19, the illness caused by the coronavirus. Many scientists hope monoclonal antibodies will prove to be powerful treatments for COVID-19, but they are difficult and expensive to manufacture, and progress has been slow.
The announcement, by Eli Lilly, was not accompanied by detailed data; independent scientists have not yet reviewed the results nor have they been published in a peer-reviewed journal.
The findings are the interim results of a trial sponsored by the pharmaceutical company. More than 450 newly diagnosed patients received the monoclonal antibody or a placebo infusion. Some 1.7% of those who got the drug were hospitalized, compared with 6% of those who received a placebo — a 72% reduction in risk.
Levels of the coronavirus plummeted among participants who received the drug, and their symptoms were fewer, compared with those who got the placebo.
The study will eventually enroll 800 patients of all ages and in all risk categories at sites across the United States.
In six months, Eli Lilly isolated an antibody from one of the first COVID-19 survivors, turned it into a drug and began a study, enrolling the first patients June 17. ‘‘It was an all-out effort,’’ said Dr. Daniel Skovronsky, the company’s chief scientific officer.
There is good news regarding a vaccine in these findings. If monoclonal antibodies had not worked, then the finding may have cast doubt on the notion that the virus can be stopped with antibodies.
On the other hand, the results — if they are proven accurate — do not guarantee that a vaccine will work. Eli Lilly’s monoclonal antibody is a temporary treatment; a vaccine is designed to elicit long-lasting natural antibodies and thus immunity.
The company will be discussing its data with the Food and Drug Administration, Skovronsky said, along with the possibility of obtaining an emergency use authorization allowing Eli Lilly to market the drug.