What's new

Trump Collides With Science On Coronavirus, says mortality rate under 1%

beijingwalker

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Nov 4, 2011
Messages
65,195
Reaction score
-55
Country
China
Location
China
Trump's Gut Collides With Science On Coronavirus Messaging
March 5, 20202:32 PM ET
gettyimages-1204945530-1d18f4b1d85e7243620d4ca6d8b50aaa14b06a53-s800-c85.jpg

President Trump listens to Anthony Fauci, director of the NIH National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, after a tour earlier this week.

Brendan Smialowski/AFP via Getty Images

President Trump is known to say what's on his mind, to go with his gut and accentuate the positive. That approach is now colliding with a public health emergency in the form of coronavirus.

The challenge posed by Trump's breezy style was on full display Wednesday night in an interview in which he disputed the World Health Organization's recent coronavirus death rate estimate of 3.4%.

"Well, I think the 3.4% is really a false number," Trump told Sean Hannity on Fox News. "Now, this is just my hunch, and — but based on a lot of conversations with a lot of people that do this, because a lot of people will have this, and it's very mild. They will get better very rapidly. They don't even see a doctor."

"Personally, I would say, the number is way under 1%," Trump said.

Public health experts have said there actually is a lot of uncertainty about the mortality rate of coronavirus because it is so new, testing remains limited and the severity of illness varies widely. They say the mortality rate could decrease as more is understood about the disease.

"We are still very early in understanding. All the evidence isn't there," said Adm. Brett Giroir, an assistant health secretary in charge of public health. Giroir told reporters on Capitol Hill that modeling suggests that the death rate is likely lower than 1%. That's higher than the death rate for the seasonal flu, which is typically around 0.1% and 0.15%.

The WHO rate compares the number of deaths with the number of people tested. But many people who have the virus do not show serious symptoms and do not get tested, said Anthony Fauci, head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

But, as Trump tried to explain this in his interview, he added confusion by discussing how people with a mild case of the disease caused by coronavirus may not be tested for it.

"So, if we have thousands or hundreds of thousands of people that get better just by, you know, sitting around and even going to work — some of them go to work, but they get better," Trump said.

Trump's upbeat tone made it seem as though he was suggesting it was a good thing that people with coronavirus could go to work.

Meanwhile, major employers in Washington state, where there has been a cluster of coronavirus cases, are telling employees to stay home to avoid further spread of the virus.

Facing backlash, Trump clarified what he said he meant in a tweet on Thursday morning. "I NEVER said people that are feeling sick should go to work," Trump said.


An administration official told NPR on the condition of anonymity that when Trump said sick people go to work, he was talking about telecommuting.

During the interview, Trump also revealed that he was concerned that repatriating Americans from the Diamond Princess cruise ship that was held in Japan last month would "look bad" because it would increase the total number of coronavirus cases in the United States. "I felt we had to do it. And, in one way, I hated to do it statistically," Trump said.

Trump has continued to boast about the United States having fewer cases of the virus than other countries do, even as infectious disease experts say numbers are likely to go up significantly once testing is more widespread.

It's a challenge for any politician to accurately convey public health messages: to encourage preparedness and avoid inciting fear without underplaying or overselling the risks. That challenge is particularly acute for Trump given his free-flowing communications style.

For Trump, it would be best if he didn't vocalize his hunches and instead let people such as Fauci do the talking, said Saad Omer, who directs the Yale Institute for Global Health. Fauci, an immunologist, has decades of experience communicating with the public about health crises.

"In these kinds of public health emergencies, we need to be able to trust our leaders, be it public health, scientific or political leaders," Omer said. This will become particularly important in the coronavirus outbreak if there comes a time when the government needs to recommend major lifestyle adjustments to curtail the spread of the disease.

"That's why it's import to maintain that trust — and you maintain that trust by how you communicate before you share those recommendations," Omer told NPR.

Have the politicians talk to the public about practical things they can do to reduce their risks, like washing hands and cleaning surfaces, he said. And, when asked a technical question, have an expert on hand to answer it.

"People understand if the president or any of the political leaders are not experts in everything," he said.

In Washington state, Vice President Pence modeled that approach as he talked to reporters after meeting with Gov. Jay Inslee and local officials responding to the outbreak there.

Asked whether he backed Trump's hunch on the mortality rate being lower than the WHO estimates, Pence turned to Debbie Birx, an experienced scientist working with his task force whom he calls "our right arm" on the coronavirus response.

"Let me let our expert Deborah Birx address that," Pence said.

https://www.npr.org/2020/03/05/812519679/trumps-gut-collides-with-science-on-coronavirus-messaging
 
Trump's devaluing of science is a danger to US coronavirus response, experts warn
Efforts to address the outbreak risk are being undermined by an exodus of scientists and a leader who regularly distorts facts

Fri 6 Mar 2020 09.00 GMT

4686.jpg

Dr Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases, attends a Senate committee hearing on the coronavirus. Photograph: Andrew Harnik/Associated Press

The Trump administration’s jettisoning of scientific expertise and the president’s habit of spreading misinformation means the US is in a much weaker position to deal with the threat of coronavirus, experts have warned.

There are now at least 149 known coronavirus cases across 13 states, with 11 deaths. US lawmakers have put together an $8.3bn emergency bill to help contain the virus, with laboratories set to be allowed to develop their own coronavirus tests without seeking regulatory approval first.

But the efforts to address the outbreak risk being undermined by three years of a Trump administration that has seen an exodus of scientists from a variety of agencies, the scrapping and remodeling of scientific panels to favor industry interests and a president who regularly dismisses or distorts scientific facts – from the climate crisis to whether the moon is part of Mars – in public.

“The US is badly positioned; the federal government isn’t up to the task,” said Judith Enck, a former regional administrator for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). “When I learned more about this virus my heart sank because I know the Trump administration doesn’t value basic science, it doesn’t understand it and it tends to reject it when it conflicts with its political narrative.”

Enck said that Trump “doesn’t seem to understand what a clinical trial is”, a reference to a White House meeting with pharmaceutical executives and public health officials on Monday where the president urged the attendees to release the anti-coronavirus drugs they are working on. “So you have a medicine that’s already involved with the coronaviruses, and now you have to see if it’s specifically for this,” Trump said. “You can know that tomorrow, can’t you?”

In the meeting, Trump wondered aloud why the flu vaccine can’t just be used for coronavirus. When told by Anthony Fauci, the head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, that it could be up to 18 months before a vaccine is available to the public, Trump responded: “I mean, I like the sound of a couple months better, if I must be honest.”

At a political rally in Charlotte later that day, Trump told the crowd that a vaccine will be available “relatively soon” before adding that there are “fringe globalists that would rather keep our borders open than keep our infection – think of it – keep all of the infection, let it come in.”

Trump followed this with an interview with Fox News host Sean Hannity on Wednesday in which he said the World Health Organization’s figure of a 3.4% death rate from coronavirus is “really a false number” and that his “hunch” is that the level is “way under 1%.” He offered no evidence for his contradiction of the world’s leading health body.

This sort of rhetoric, mixing inaccuracies, wild speculation and blunt nationalism, has raised concerns that many Americans, including ardent Trump supporters, are not getting the right information to deal with the virus outbreak.

“The scientific ‘truth’ about the virus may not match what the administration wants to hear, so the scientific ‘truth’ is at risk of being compromised before it is made public,” said Wendy Wagner, a University of Texas expert in how policy-makers use science.

Wagner noted there are no requirements that a president provide accurate information about a public health issue, enabling Trump to freely misreport that a vaccine will shortly be available.

This situation is exacerbated by a downsizing of scientific expertise within the US government. The EPA’s staff numbers, for example, are a third smaller than they were when Trump took power. In the first two years of the Trump administration, more than 1,600 federal scientists left various government agencies, according to Office of Personnel Management employment data.

The administration has attempted even deeper cuts: Trump’s 2021 budget proposal, submitted just days after international alarm was raised over the coronavirus, included a 16% reduction in funding for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Trump has said that the CDC and other agencies could rapidly restaff if needed but this concept runs counter to the standard practices of government-run research.

“Since Trump has been trying to shrink them, moreover, I worry that the agency directors are currently not well-positioned to act swiftly to expand the staff,” Wagner said. “The agencies may also fail to attract the best scientists going forward because of Trump’s poor track record with the ‘deep state’ and science more generally.”

Enck said that previous disasters, such as hurricanes, have seen a “seamless” response from federal, state and local governments but the current situation may now require states, businesses and academia to fill the void where once the federal government provided leadership.

“There’s definitely been a brain drain in this administration, there has been an attack on science that doesn’t bode well for what we are seeing now,” she said. “Others are going to have to step up. The best thing the president could do right now is to stop talking.”

Joel Clement, a former policy director at the Department of Interior who left government after the Trump administration reassigned him from his climate-focused role, said the administration had undermined efforts to deal with threats such as pandemics.

Clement said Trump should bolster public trust in the civil servants dealing with the coronavirus outbreak, restore the scientific strength of the federal government and fund programs that will help prevent the spread of threats like the virus.

“In other words, he needs to do the opposite of what we know he will do,” Clement said. “He is more concerned about the safety of his fragile ego than he is about the safety of Americans.”

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...-administration-brain-drain-impeding-response
 
Back
Top Bottom