Thread: some early (its early) thoughts on CDC guidelines released without fanfare late last night. First, timing. In a crisis that follows normal planning, an incident command (WH has inserted itself instead) has a planning cell that is guiding policies for days ahead @cnn 1/
It makes sense. You want to have a group not overwhelmed by the day-to-day who are determining how the response would want to position itself in the future, let alone transition to recovery. In other words, what we do today should head towards a plan for tomorrow. 2/
All states have decided that they are "opening up" in some fashion already. The CDC guidelines posit conditions for that opening up that should have been disclosed weeks ago. It's all so late; we are always so late (testing, supply chain, closing, etc) during this response. 3/
Second, the absence of religious institutions is just so flagrantly political it is shocking. The CDC wasn't "targeting" places of worship when it first proposed the recommendations; it was targeting places where people often congregate, regularly. 4/
The omission of religious institutions -- knowing what we know about outbreaks at choirs/churches -- taints entire document. Ironically, Trump could actually influence subset of this group (fundamentalists, religious right) but instead doesn't want to put any burdens on them. 5/
Finally, as between no guidance and guidance, it is a good effort by the CDC. Again, hard to see how some of these institutions satisfy some of the pre-condition recommendations. For those who have been following along, there isn't much surprising. 6/
Gratefully, its tone is pretty cautious, even suggesting that offices remain committed to telework if they can, schools not rush, and large gatherings be postponed indefinitely (looking at you Boston Marathon). That's good. @theatlantic
theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/…
7/
theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/…
7/
It would be much more effective if this were embraced by the WH with enthusiasm. Instead, it was posted without fanfare late last night amidst tensions between CDC and the WH. That, in the end, is probably its most significant contribution: proof of a WH at war with science 8/8
