We couldn't predict #COVID19, but CDC scientists did predict a pandemic and our lack of preparedness. My new @PLOSONE paper with @UCSJacob has important findings that inform decisionmakers actions now. Here's some key points from our paper released today. journals.plos.org/plosone/articl…
In 2018, we worked with @IowaStateU to ask 63,000 scientists at the @CDCgov, @USEPA, @Interior and other federal science agencies about scientific integrity. We learned a lot that could have predicted the many science policy challenges the nation now faces.
More than any other agency, CDC respondents reported White House interference as a top barrier to science-based decisions—an alarming finding in the midst of a global pandemic where CDC scientists’ ability to conduct science is an immediate matter of life and death. 
Interference of the White House has now been a consistent problem on #COVID19 response. From early news that virus communication would be filtered through VP Pence, to yesterday's news that a Vaccine Chief was allegedly dismissed for defending science.
Nearly half of CDC scientists responding (445 CDC experts) told us they must obtain preapproval before communicating with journalists. This may be why we have not heard from CDC scientists on the pandemic as much as we need to. blog.ucsusa.org/anita-desikan/…
Scientists also reported shifting of resources away politically contentious programs. The Trump administration, for example, shifted funding and resources away from global health and international collaboration on infectious diseases.
Some scientists reported being excluded from conversations they would normally be a part of (especially at the EPA). We recently saw this happen when the White House excluded public health experts from Coronavirus discussions. blog.ucsusa.org/michael-halper…
Presciently, several CDC scientists warned us all in their open responses on the 2018 survey that recent administration actions were going to leave us unprepared for the next pandemic. These are so telling, I'm going to tweet them individually:
“The idiotic myopia of not wanting to fund 'global health' work will certainly come home to roost, with the next flu, Ebola, SARS, Zika, whatever else pandemic.”
“Reductions in funding for specific programs (like Global Health Security) inhibit our ability to protect the country by stopping outbreaks and epidemics at the source before they get here.”
“Talk of defunding global health initiatives has caused my division to start terminating research collaborations with international laboratories that function as infectious disease surveillance sites in Africa and Asia.”
“Proposed funding cuts limits our capacity for responding to infectious disease overseas and domestically. These cuts don’t just affect our ability to prepare and respond at a federal level either. These will disproportionately affect smaller state & local health departments...”
“The real issue is lack of funding for global work, which will ultimately [lead] to an increased risk of infectious diseases entering the USA from abroad.”
The point here is not that scientists told us so, but to make clear that the Trump administration took actions years ago that led us to our current challenges. Many of #COVID19 detection and response issues we are now living through could have been prevented or mitigated.
When we don't protect scientists' right to speak the truth, when we don't allow them to work without politics intruding, when we don't create a culture that values scientific integrity, we create conditions that weaken our ability to fight public health threats like COVID.
We know how to keep federal science and scientists supported so they can keep us all best protected from the next threats to public health and safety. We just need decision makers who are will do it.
The study makes clear we should listen to the experts. The pandemic makes clear what's at stake if we don't. The next time you see support for government science questioned, remember this time. Remember how much we need scientists' advice to stay safe now. Our lives depend on it.
