🧵One of the most remarkable aspects of science advice in the COVID-19 pandemic was how utterly unprepared the US government was ... I look back at how this happened from Bush to Obama to Trump in this post ... here is a short thread as well ...
The US government paid little attention to pandemic planning before Pres GHW Bush, who read a book on summer vacation in 2005 that sparked his interest
In fact, during his presidency in his public remarks Ronald Reagan only mentioned the word "pandemic" 1 time and GHWB not at all. Climate mentioned "pandemic" 16x, then GWB at 214
GWB proposed a new national pandemic strategy in Nov 2005, and this got Congress interested
That is often how presidential leadership works
But Congressional attention flagged
It ticked up during/after 2009/10 H1N1 epidemic and then dropped
Incredibly, science advice for pandemic planning is a gaping hole in US pandemic planning, the attention of GWB to pandemic and H1N1 lead to an increased focus, but that dropped to almost nil by 2012
Mentions in FACA documents shown below
Similarly the US NAS followed political interest up and then down after H1N1
We can compare NAS attention to pandemic to that of climate change, an undeniably important topic, and see that pandemic was viewed as much less important (even during H1N1)
I conclude that we still have work to do to institutionalize expert advisory mechanisms for pandemic planning and response
Your comments welcomed!
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I was curious
So I graphed percent of CONUS in drought according to the US drought monitor, data is weekly from 1/2000 droughtmonitor.unl.edu/CurrentMap.aspx
In 2016, at 1:15:50 of video linked, Peter Daszak describes research done by Chinese colleagues to increase the pathogenicity of SAR-like viruses ("you insert the spike protein") from bats to produce viruses that "really do look like killers" c-span.org/video/?404875-…
We can now conclude with certainty
a) There exists a reservoir of pathogenic SARS-like viruses among bats in caves in Yunnan
b) There exists a reservoir of pathogenic SARS-like viruses among labs in Wuhan
Both reservoirs could be proximal origins of Covid-19
That's just logic
#DRASTIC documents the taking down of the WIV database associated w/ work discussed by Daszak above
The database was taken down 12 Sept 2019 & never put back online
Its characterization was changed 30 Dec 2019 when China announced 1st case
🧵
Last month my op-ed in @FT on outdated climate scenarios of the NGFS used by central banks around the world to assess future climate risk & climate policy risk
I argued that the NGFS baseline scenario projected an implausible future for CO2 emissions ft.com/content/a82a7b…
Today the NGFS has published newly updated climate scenarios ... and guess what? I was correct and to their credit, they are moving their baseline scenarios in the right direction
👀I was blocked by an academic at the center of the Covid lab leak questions for asking the question below
People are free to block whomever they want, but publicly-funded researchers send an interesting message when blocking peers for asking reasonable questions
Apparently Andersen was also caught out today selectively deleting old Tweets (in addition to blocking me)
This is not the behavior of someone interested in transparency, I wonder what is up
I've never met Andersen and my interactions with him consist of two friendly Tweets
This is an exceptionally well done documentary on COVID-19 origins, with English subtitles
Sars-Cov2 anatomia di un complotto - PresaDiretta 29/03/2021 via @YouTube
This is the most remarkable new information I learned from it
Chinese government views the publication of scientific research on COVID-19 like “moves in a game of chess”
This just further supports the need to carefully analyze the research record — that in public and that behind the scenes — to better under stand these “moves in a game of chess”
Science has been enlisted in a propaganda “game” in plain sight