CDC officials describe intense pressure, job threats from Trump White House

[rambot]

If Your Time is short​

• During a coronavirus press briefing, President Trump floated the idea of using disinfectants and sunlight to treat COVID-19 patients.
• Trump has since walked back those remarks, and several websites and social media posts have taken them out of context.
• The briefing transcript shows that Trump did not say people should inject themselves with bleach or alcohol to treat the coronavirus. He was asking officials on the White House coronavirus task force whether they could be used in potential cures.
• PolitiFact - In Context: What Donald Trump said about disinfectant, sun and coronavirus
• SOME PEOPLE ONLY BELIEVE WHAT THEY WANT TO BELIEVE

You were so confident that use spoke SOOOOO clearly and yet you don't even bother to share his exact words?
That could literally be THE most generous translation of a set of sentences that have been uttered.


Here you go. From Billy Shakespeare himself:

"A question that probably some of you are thinking of if you’re totally into that world, which I find to be very interesting. So, supposedly we hit the body with a tremendous, whether it’s ultraviolet or just very powerful light, and I think you said that hasn’t been checked, but you’re going to test it. And then I said supposing you brought the light inside the body, which you can do either through the skin or in some other way. (To Bryan) And I think you said you’re going to test that, too. Sounds interesting, right? And then I see the disinfectant, where it knocks it out in one minute. And is there a way we can do something like that, by injection inside or almost a cleaning, because you see it gets in the lungs and it does a tremendous number on the lungs, so it’d be interesting to check that, so that you’re going to have to use medical doctors with, but it sounds interesting to me. So, we’ll see, but the whole concept of the light, the way it kills it in one minute. That’s pretty powerful."

I fail to see how that makes him seem reasonable, enlightenned and intelligent.

Those are his words.


It's interesting that Biden's misses with his language tend to be shorter misspoken sentences. Whereas with Trump it's a series of sentences that individually kind of make sense and together, are so radically unclear you wonder what he is trying to communicate. I can't think of examples where Biden prattles on and on and it gets more and more incoherent.

 

[disciple Clint]

I did read it, It does not tell me if you knew President Trump described his "disinfectant by injection inside" comment as sarcastic
what it does discuss could be more accurate.

In particular
"During a coronavirus press briefing, President Trump floated the idea of using disinfectants and sunlight to treat COVID-19 patients. "
should be changed to
"During a coronavirus press briefing, President Trump floated the idea of using disinfectants by an injection inside or almost a cleaning [sic] and sunlight to treat COVID-19 patients. "
This more accurate statement is basically the same as the statement you objected to.

You read this? "The briefing transcript shows that Trump did not say people should inject themselves with bleach or alcohol to treat the coronavirus. He was asking officials on the White House coronavirus task force whether they could be used in potential cures.:
And You read this? "I was asking a very sarcastic question to the reporters in the room about disinfectant on the inside," he said during a briefing in the Oval Office on April 24. "But it does kill it, and it would kill it on the hands, and that would make things much better. That was done in the form of a sarcastic question to the reporters."

 

[rambot]

You read this? "The briefing transcript shows that Trump did not say people should inject themselves with bleach or alcohol to treat the coronavirus. He was asking officials on the White House coronavirus task force whether they could be used in potential cures.:
And You read this? "I was asking a very sarcastic question to the reporters in the room about disinfectant on the inside," he said during a briefing in the Oval Office on April 24. "But it does kill it, and it would kill it on the hands, and that would make things much better. That was done in the form of a sarcastic question to the reporters."

He wasn't being sarcastic. Come on man. Read the body language; read the voice intonation; the words. There's nothing sarcastic.

Why do you believe him with this excuse? There are 0 indications of it.

 

[Pommer]

You read this? "The briefing transcript shows that Trump did not say people should inject themselves with bleach or alcohol to treat the coronavirus. He was asking officials on the White House coronavirus task force whether they could be used in potential cures.:
And You read this? "I was asking a very sarcastic question to the reporters in the room about disinfectant on the inside," he said during a briefing in the Oval Office on April 24. "But it does kill it, and it would kill it on the hands, and that would make things much better. That was done in the form of a sarcastic question to the reporters."

In what world is sarcasm “okay” during a daily-briefing about trying to limit the devastation caused by the (then) ongoing pandemic?

You don’t “brainstorm” on the podium; the time for that is in private with the experts.
The daily briefing wasn’t even “hosted” by the Chairman of the Corona Virus Task Force (Pence), but by the President, to showcase how “on top of it he was”; and he failed, miserably.

 

[perplexed]

You read this? "The briefing transcript shows that Trump did not say people should inject themselves with bleach or alcohol to treat the coronavirus. He was asking officials on the White House coronavirus task force whether they could be used in potential cures.:

??why do you ask that , is because I did not mention bleach or alcohol , in particular Lysol and Clorox
Those are often discussed because they put out warnings after Trumps press briefing but they were not particularly relevant to any comments made in the thread

Anyway I will try to rephrase what I said to make it more clear
The president did say the following
"I see the disinfectant that knocks it out in a minute, one minute. And is there a way we can do something like that by injection inside or almost a cleaning? "

The article you quote says
"During a coronavirus press briefing, President Trump floated the idea of using disinfectants and sunlight to treat COVID-19 patients"

To improve the article it should say
"During a coronavirus press briefing, President Trump appeared to float the idea of using disinfectants and sunlight by injection to treat COVID-19 patients however later he claimed his comments were sarcastic"

 

[perplexed]

And You read this? "I was asking a very sarcastic question to the reporters in the room about disinfectant on the inside," he said during a briefing in the Oval Office on April 24. "But it does kill it, and it would kill it on the hands, and that would make things much better. That was done in the form of a sarcastic question to the reporters."

That does not tell me if you were aware the president described his "injection inside" comment as sarcastic when making your previous posts, they don't really seem consistent. What do you mean by the phrase "musing questions" .

 

[probinson]

The pressure on the top two FDA officials from the Biden administration to approve COVID boosters was so intense that they resigned in protest.

The US Food and Drug Administration announced the resignations of two top vaccine officials on Tuesday, and reports said the two were leaving in anger over the Biden administration's plan to roll out COVID-19 booster shots before officials had a chance to approve it.​

​

2 top FDA officials resigned over the Biden administration's booster-shot plan, saying it insisted on the policy before the agency approved it, reports say

The FDA announced the resignations of Marion Gruber and Philip Krause on Tuesday but didn't give a reason for their exits.

www.businessinsider.com

​

What this shows us is that both the FDA and CDC are not merely public health agencies, but are also subject to political pressures that have absolutely nothing to do with science regardless of who is in power.

 

[rambot]

The pressure on the top two FDA officials from the Biden administration to approve COVID boosters was so intense that they resigned in protest.

The US Food and Drug Administration announced the resignations of two top vaccine officials on Tuesday, and reports said the two were leaving in anger over the Biden administration's plan to roll out COVID-19 booster shots before officials had a chance to approve it.​

​

2 top FDA officials resigned over the Biden administration's booster-shot plan, saying it insisted on the policy before the agency approved it, reports say

The FDA announced the resignations of Marion Gruber and Philip Krause on Tuesday but didn't give a reason for their exits.

www.businessinsider.com

​

What this shows us is that both the FDA and CDC are not merely public health agencies, but are also subject to political pressures that have absolutely nothing to do with science regardless of who is in power.

One former senior FDA leader told Endpoints that Gruber and Krause were leaving because they felt that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention was making vaccine decisions that should have been left to the FDA and were upset with Marks, the leader of their division, for not insisting on the agency's oversight.

The source said the final straw was the Biden administration's announcing the booster-shot plan before the FDA had officially signed off on it.

A former FDA official told Politico that the resignations were tied to anger over the FDA's lack of autonomy in booster planning, while a current official told the outlet that the pair were leaving over differences with Marks.

Your categorization that the FDA and CDC oversight "have absolutely nothing to do with the science" seems, far fetched when a specific quote is pulled from the article.

 

[essentialsaltes]

The pressure on the top two FDA officials from the Biden administration to approve COVID boosters was so intense that they resigned in protest.

Where is the evidence that pressure was put on these FDA officials? That is not the gist of the story.

 

[probinson]

Your categorization that the FDA and CDC oversight "have absolutely nothing to do with the science" seems, far fetched when a specific quote is pulled from the article.

I've posted this before, but if you'd like to see the timing and circumstances surrounding the approval of booster vaccines, this article has the receipts.

Boosters for Men 16-40: A Regulatory Gamble

2 Senior FDA officials have resigned & are writing op eds

vinayprasadmdmph.substack.com

 

[probinson]

Where is the evidence that pressure was put on these FDA officials? That is not the gist of the story.

The incredibly long headline says this (emphasis added).

2 top FDA officials resigned over the Biden administration's booster-shot plan, saying it insisted on the policy before the agency approved it, reports say​

The Biden administration insisted on the policy before the FDA approved it. Sounds like "pressure" to me.

Philip Krause, along with some from the WHO, published this in the Lancet.

Considerations in boosting COVID-19 vaccine immune responses

A new wave of COVID-19 cases caused by the highly transmissible delta variant is exacerbating the worldwide public health crisis, and has led to consideration of the potential need for, and optimal timing of, booster doses for vaccinated populations.1 Although the idea of further reducing the...

www.thelancet.com

Stat had this to say about the paper (emphasis added).

The paper is sure to add to debate about whether the White House got ahead of its scientific agencies in outlining plans for general boosters, which the Biden administration had signaled would start rolling out next Monday.​

​

FDA vaccine regulators argue against Covid-19 vaccine boosters in new international review

A group of international experts — including, notably, two outgoing FDA vaccine regulators — argues in a new paper against offering Covid-19 vaccine boosters to the general population.

www.statnews.com

​

​

Additionally, the WHO was not on board with boosters.

The World Health Organization called Wednesday for a temporary moratorium on the use of Covid-19 vaccine booster shots by wealthy countries, saying the global priority should be on increasing supplies of first doses to countries that are still struggling to protect health workers and older adults.​

​

WHO calls for a temporary moratorium on administering booster shots of Covid-19 vaccines

The WHO has called for a temporary moratorium on the use of Covid-19 vaccine booster shots by wealthy countries.

www.statnews.com

​

Now I suppose you can pretend that they were just "following the science" here, but it's pretty obvious there was political pressure to approve boosters.

 

[essentialsaltes]

The Biden administration insisted on the policy before the FDA approved it. Sounds like "pressure" to me.

The main bone seems to be that the administration announced the policy before the FDA approved it (but the CDC had). It doesn't sound like pressure, especially when the main complaint was that their boss was disengaged.

But sources told Endpoints and Politico that Gruber and Krause were upset with Biden administration's booster-shot plan. The administration announced last month that most people would be offered a COVID-19 booster shot about eight months after vaccination.

One former senior FDA leader told Endpoints that Gruber and Krause were leaving because they felt that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention was making vaccine decisions that should have been left to the FDA and were upset with Marks, the leader of their division, for not insisting on the agency's oversight.

The source said the final straw was the Biden administration's announcing the booster-shot plan before the FDA had officially signed off on it.

 

[probinson]

The main bone seems to be that the administration announced the policy before the FDA approved it (but the CDC had). It doesn't sound like pressure, especially when the main complaint was that their boss was disengaged.

False. On Wednesday, August 18, 2021, the Biden administration announced that booster doses would be available on September 20, 2021. Neither the CDC or the FDA had approved anything. In fact, the announcement from the White House said that boosters would be available pending FDA approval. This was Biden saying boosters will be ready if the FDA approves. That put enormous pressure on the FDA to approve booster doses. It's awfully difficult to judge the application impartially when the White House is running around telling everyone to get ready for their boosters on September 20.

On September 3, 2021, the FDA advisory committee approved boosters for people 65 and older and specific "high-risk populations". CDC's ACIP was also reluctant to authorize boosters for all and said only those >50 should get them, but CDC Director Walensky overrode the recommendations from both the FDA and the CDC committees.

Though the committee voted against broadening the recommendation for people 18 to 64 who are at higher risk because of their occupations, Walensky overrode that decision.​

​

CDC Director Expands Boosters, Urges Unvaccinated to Get Shots

CDC Director Rochelle Walensky, MD, late Thursday overruled her agency’s advisory panel to make boosters available to front-line workers. But unless the unvaccinated get their shots, the extra protection will not be enough, she said at a Friday briefing.

www.webmd.com

​

The Biden administration pressured the FDA to approve boosters. The top two vaccine regulators at the FDA resigned in protest because of it. The CDC's ACIP committee advised against a broad recommendation and favored only recommending to older populations. And yet the CDC director overrode them all to make Biden's promise of boosters for all a reality. That's probably why they didn't convene any advisory committees a few months later when they expanded booster authorization to even younger populations.

Even with all of this evidence, there are still people pretending like there was nothing political about any of this. But what this clearly shows is that agencies like the FDA and the CDC do not operate independently and are subject to political pressures no matter who is in power.

This thread is a rare example where I agree with your OP. It's clear to me that Trump interfered with the operation of the FDA and the CDC. But so did Biden. And if you only call out one while ignoring the other, then I question whether you really care if the agencies operate independently, or if you're just looking for yet another reason to post against Trump.

 

[essentialsaltes]

FIn fact, the announcement from the White House said that boosters would be available pending FDA approval. This was Biden saying boosters will be ready if the FDA approves. That put enormous pressure on the FDA to approve booster doses.

How? Everybody understand if-then statements.

 

[probinson]

How? Everybody understand if-then statements.

Yes, they do. If the FDA had not approved the boosters that the Biden administration had said were so desperately needed, then the Biden administration could have pointed the finger at the FDA and said, they're the reason we don't have them. Don't blame us! It's those pesky FDA regulators that won't let you get your booster fix!

Why do you support the Biden administration not only announcing that boosters would be available by a certain date, but then having a promotional media blitz to push them... BEFORE the FDA had reviewed the data and the application and approved it? There was no emergency to get 18-year olds boosted. This was simply the administration coercing the agencies to fulfill Biden's premature promise of boosters for all. Only the committees didn't capitulate. They held fast, recommending boosters only for older populations. No matter. Biden-appointed Walensky was more than happy to overrule both committees' recommendations to ensure Biden's promise was fulfilled on time.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Don't blame us! It's those pesky FDA regulators that won't let you get your booster fix!

 

[probinson]

Just imagine if Trump was in office and this same thing happened. You have the top two vaccine regulators saying we don't need boosters for everyone, but Trump is out there advertising that boosters will be available, and then his CDC director overrides the committees' recommendations to fulfill his promise.

Actually, we don't have to imagine. Democrats regularly cast doubt on the efficacy of the vaccines based on Trump's proclamations, saying we needed "independent" verification. They were right. But as soon as Biden got in office, suddenly Biden's proclamation of the need for boosters for all without data and against agency recommendations is a big nothingburger.

I often wonder how people become so blind to their own apparent hypocritical positions. I suspect much of it has to do with tribalism, but I think there's got to be more to it than that.

 

[rambot]

Just imagine if Trump was in office and this same thing happened. You have the top two vaccine regulators saying we don't need boosters for everyone, but Trump is out there advertising that boosters will be available, and then his CDC director overrides the committees' recommendations to fulfill his promise.

Actually, we don't have to imagine. Democrats regularly cast doubt on the efficacy of the vaccines based on Trump's proclamations, saying we needed "independent" verification. They were right. But as soon as Biden got in office, suddenly Biden's proclamation of the need for boosters for all without data and against agency recommendations is a big nothingburger.

I often wonder how people become so blind to their own apparent hypocritical positions. I suspect much of it has to do with tribalism, but I think there's got to be more to it than that.

Everyone has their blind spots, I guess.

 

[probinson]

Everyone has their blind spots, I guess.

Agreed! I think the important thing is whether or not one is willing to acknowledge the potential existence of said blind spots. It's so very easy to find ourselves in an echo chamber where we only hear what we want to hear. This is one of the reasons I post here. I know from experience this is an environment hostile to most of my positions. So I like to see and hear other perspectives as opposed to just posting with a bunch of people who agree with me.

Anyway, I digress.

Hopefully the last few posts I've made have provided the evidence that the FDA and CDC have, sadly, been politicized by both parties.

 

[rambot]

Agreed! I think the important thing is whether or not one is willing to acknowledge the potential existence of said blind spots. It's so very easy to find ourselves in an echo chamber where we only hear what we want to hear. This is one of the reasons I post here. I know from experience this is an environment hostile to most of my positions. So I like to see and hear other perspectives as opposed to just posting with a bunch of people who agree with me.

Anyway, I digress.

Hopefully the last few posts I've made have provided the evidence that the FDA and CDC have, sadly, been politicized by both parties.

It's unfortunate that these bodies get influenced for sure.

If I can be brutally honest, when Trump was saying some pretty "unclear" to straight up wacky stuff about treating COVID (disinfectant and bright lights), to see the health officials having to quietly sit there and sleepily gesticulate instead of just correcting or straight up setting someone straight, that was when I became a bit jaded by health officials. Kinda made me assume this was going to be normal now.

It kinda makes me think of Star Trek next generation where doctor Crusher was the only person on the ship able to give captain Picard an order (in regards to his personal health) that he would have to follow. Science needs to trump politics in how we make our decisions when it comes to health.