The coronavirus edition In response to the global coronavirus outbreak, President Trump has been a font of misinformation and fishy data. It was only a matter of time before he cast blame on former president Barack Obama. "The Obama administration made a decision on testing that turned out to be very detrimental to what we're doing," Trump said at the White House this week. "And we undid that decision a few days ago so that the testing can take place in a much more accurate and rapid fashion." We gave Four Pinocchios to Trump. There was no Obama rule, simply "guidance" documents from 2014 that were never acted on because Congress stepped in and decided to write legislation instead. The Trump administration, in fact, has been working with Congress on such legislation. The question revolves around laboratory-developed tests (LDTs). These are generally described as in vitro diagnostic tests (think of a test tube) designed, manufactured and used within a single laboratory. The Food and Drug Administration, under a 1976 law, regulates medical devices, but generally did not regulate LDTs. Then, in 2014, the FDA released "draft guidance" making the case for phasing in LDT regulations. There was immediate blowback from the medical community, and the FDA essentially punted on its effort to write regulations and deferred to Congress. The 2014 guidance was formally withdrawn before Trump took office. For the full fact check, click here.
You can also sign up for The Post's Coronavirus Updates newsletter to track the outbreak. Murphy's LawIn a viral tweet, Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) claimed that Trump "shut down 37 of 47 global anti-pandemic programs" and added that the president "made a choice to make us vulnerable … to this pandemic and the next one and the next one." The tweet packed a punch. It got nearly 60,000 retweets and likes — and similar figures, though more carefully worded, appeared in news articles and opinion columns. Murphy's staff said the source of its information was a Washington Post article from early 2018. That article said, "The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is dramatically downsizing its epidemic prevention activities in 39 out of 49 countries because money is running out." Similar articles appeared in the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal, all of which said the administration was planning to scale back or end activities in 39 out of 49 countries. Murphy's staff did not explain why his numbers were slightly different. Nor did they explain why they were relying on an article from 2018 when, presumably, a senator or his staff could quickly find out whether the funding reductions occurred. Murphy jumped to conclusions and got Three Pinocchios. At issue was an initiative called the Global Health Security Agenda (GHSA), which sought to help countries prepare to detect and respond to infectious diseases. The U.S. contribution was largely funded by a supplemental package passed in 2015 after the Ebola crisis that provided about $600 million to the CDC for global-health security work — and the money was running out in 2018. But it turns out the shutdown likely did not happen — in large part because of the publicity from the articles and the work of advocacy groups. "The good news is that global health security programs have seen their numbers go up," said health expert Carolyn Reynolds. For the full fact check, click here. Enjoy this newsletter? Forward it to someone else who'd like it! If this email was forwarded to you, sign up here. Did you hear something fact-checkable? Send it here; we'll check it out. We're always looking for fact-check suggestions. You can reach us via email, Twitter (@GlennKesslerWP, @rizzoTK, @mmkelly22, @SarahCahlan) or Facebook. Read about our process and rating scale here, and sign up for the newsletter here. Scroll down for this week's Pinocchio roundup. | 
Email 
No comments:
Post a Comment