This viral headline leaves the impression that infectious disease experts are condoning the protests. In reality, this was a Google doc written mostly by non-epidemiological experts, is highly contradictory and not based on science. 
The NPR headline and article takes just a sliver from the letter, simply claiming it was endorsed by public health and disease experts. But, in the article, the very expert they were using didn’t even sign it!
npr.org/sections/coron…
npr.org/sections/coron…
The Google doc was written by 4 professors, only one of whom seems to be a credible medical expert, a professor of internal medicine. One is a director for the Center for the Study of Racism, Social Justice & Health.
lasocialscience.ucla.edu/2020/04/02/ope…
lasocialscience.ucla.edu/2020/04/02/ope…
Another a prof whose research and practice are focused on the socio-political roots of health and the intersecting relationships between health and politics. “Through her pedagogy, she cultivates critical thinking and conversations that complicate ideas of wellness and sickness.”
She “infuses history, critical theory, lessons from social movements, and eco-social thinking into her public health and research practice.” Another teaches at a nursing school but research entails structural racism & health, health equity & “research-based theatre interventions”
The letter was signed “by 1,288 public health professionals, infectious disease professionals & community stakeholders.” But most are college students, activists & professors of various fields. Some are MDs & epidemiologists, but that’s not something that bodes well for them.
The letter begins by pointing out that recently “heavily armed and predominantly white protesters entered the State Capitol building in Lansing, Michigan.” Which they said should be condemned by health experts due to COVID-19.
docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAI…
docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAI…
But with the latest protests and riots it says “A public health response to these demonstrations is also warranted, but this message must be wholly different from the response to white protesters resisting stay-home orders.”
Why, you ask? “Infectious disease and public health narratives adjacent to demonstrations against racism must be consciously anti-racist, and infectious disease experts must be clear and consistent in prioritizing an anti-racist message.”
The letter thus departs from any sort of medical science & enters the realm of activism & social commentary. It admits that infectious disease experts don’t condone large gatherings, but says that when the gatherings are for racial justice it shouldn’t be condemned. Why? 🤷♂️
The letter goes on to contradict itself again. “This should not be confused with a permissive stance on all gatherings, particularly protests against stay-home orders. Those actions not only oppose public health interventions, but are also rooted in white nationalism”
So, someone wanting to open their business is harmful to public health, but cramped protests of thousands aren’t. Again, no citation or medical evidence is presented for this distinction.
The letter continues with weak, almost laughable suggestions to support the health of protesters. Including providing chalk or rope to mark 6 ft intervals. They know these will not be followed. They also suggest donating to bail out those arrested, not specifying for which crimes
Nowehere in the letter did it mention any riots, destruction, or damage these demonstrations have caused. Nor acknowledge that it could prevent people from obtaining food, medicine or medical care, not to mention the several deaths that have already resulted from them.
