3 ms·

Because in the initial days, the CDC had a valid point. The W.H.O/Chinese test wasn't that reliable (at the time) and it wasn't unreasonable for the US to make

Because in the initial days, the CDC had a valid point. The W.H.O/Chinese test wasn't that reliable (at the time) and it wasn't unreasonable for the US to make their own. It wasn't until week after week went by, with the CDC straight up lying to the FDA/HHS, that the real failure became apparent. The second the CDC realized it wasn't up to the job, it should have begged the FDA to allow labs/companies to make their own tests. Instead they lied for weeks, wasting the most critical time in the US's portion of the pandemic getting nothing done. It wasn't until UC Davis broke the law and tested a patient and the governor of California dared the FDA to do anything about it, that Trump put Pence in charge and things started to move forward and responsibility for testing was moved away from the CDC. I don't know if Dr. Redfeild of the CDC made these calls, but either way, he should have been replaced immediately, because he'll make the history books for the amount of lives this will cost.

Svip 7y ago
> Because in the initial days, the CDC had a valid point. The W.H.O/Chinese test wasn't that reliable (at the time) and it wasn't unreasonable for the US to make their own. It wasn't until week after week went by, with the CDC straight up lying to the FDA/HHS, that the real failure became apparent. The initial test was developed in Germany, and was ready by 17 January. This test proved able to isolate the virus from other coronaviruses, and thus received the recommendation of the WHO. CDC published its protocol on 28 January, a test that was less efficient and reliable than the German test. In the mean time, WHO had recommended countries use the German protocol.
eyegor 7y ago
> Because in the initial days, the CDC had a valid point. The W.H.O/Chinese test wasn't that reliable (at the time) and it wasn't unreasonable for the US to make their own. How would this be an excuse not to start using the WHO tests while the CDC was developing theirs? Even if the test was hot garbage (as you imply), surely something is better than nothing.
- Symmetry 7y ago
  The CDC test was mostly pretty good. My impression from This Week In Virology was that some aspects were too clever which is why it took so long to come out but the parts of it that involved the detection of SARS-Covid-2 worked just fine. The problem was that there were some bad reagents in the part of the test that looked for other respiratory illnesses so the third part of the test that wasn't directly concerned with the Coronavirus didn't work. And it would be illegal to run a test that didn't conform to protocol - simply skipping the relatively useless part of the test that didn't work. The CDC deserves some blame for taking 3 weeks to produce a gold-plated test that had a part that didn't work but I think we ought to blame the FDA more for preventing any of the qualified labs from doing any tests until the CDC finished taking its sweet time to make a test and then that test didn't work to FDA standards. There are tons of competent hospitals, universities, and companies that could have made a test to WHO standards in under a week and gotten us testing early. Well, the FDA managed to prevent most testing but Dr. Helen Chu was willing to break the law and alerted us to the Seattle outbreak. She saved countless lives and I hope she doesn't go to jail for it.

Svip 7y ago

> Because in the initial days, the CDC had a valid point. The W.H.O/Chinese test wasn't that reliable (at the time) and it wasn't unreasonable for the US to make their own. It wasn't until week after week went by, with the CDC straight up lying to the FDA/HHS, that the real failure became apparent. The initial test was developed in Germany, and was ready by 17 January. This test proved able to isolate the virus from other coronaviruses, and thus received the recommendation of the WHO. CDC published its protocol on 28 January, a test that was less efficient and reliable than the German test. In the mean time, WHO had recommended countries use the German protocol.

eyegor 7y ago

> Because in the initial days, the CDC had a valid point. The W.H.O/Chinese test wasn't that reliable (at the time) and it wasn't unreasonable for the US to make their own. How would this be an excuse not to start using the WHO tests while the CDC was developing theirs? Even if the test was hot garbage (as you imply), surely something is better than nothing.

Symmetry 7y ago
The CDC test was mostly pretty good. My impression from This Week In Virology was that some aspects were too clever which is why it took so long to come out but the parts of it that involved the detection of SARS-Covid-2 worked just fine. The problem was that there were some bad reagents in the part of the test that looked for other respiratory illnesses so the third part of the test that wasn't directly concerned with the Coronavirus didn't work. And it would be illegal to run a test that didn't conform to protocol - simply skipping the relatively useless part of the test that didn't work. The CDC deserves some blame for taking 3 weeks to produce a gold-plated test that had a part that didn't work but I think we ought to blame the FDA more for preventing any of the qualified labs from doing any tests until the CDC finished taking its sweet time to make a test and then that test didn't work to FDA standards. There are tons of competent hospitals, universities, and companies that could have made a test to WHO standards in under a week and gotten us testing early. Well, the FDA managed to prevent most testing but Dr. Helen Chu was willing to break the law and alerted us to the Seattle outbreak. She saved countless lives and I hope she doesn't go to jail for it.