theintercept--2020-03-24--After Trump Hyped Chloroquine as a Covid-19 Cure, a Man Died Trying to Self-Medicate

Three times last week , Donald Trump defied expert advice and touted anecdotal evidence that the anti-malaria drug chloroquine phosphate might cure Covid-19 .
“ It ’ s been around for a long time , ” the president said on Thursday , “ so we know that if things don ’ t go as planned , it ’ s not going to kill anybody.
” President Trump on Hydroxychloroquine : `` It 's been around for a long time , so we know if things do n't go as planned it 's not going to kill anybody ...
It 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and we 're going to be able to make that drug available almost immediately . ''
pic.twitter.com/Q7C8dk7gnd Nigeria also reported two cases of chloroquine poisoning after Trump boosted the anti-malaria drug as a Covid-19 cure .
The African nation ’ s Center for Disease Control warned Nigerians on Friday that chloroquine has not been approved as a treatment for the disease by the World Health Organization .
Brooks told The Arizona Republic that his group ’ s poison centers were getting calls from people asking if they can use medications or household @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the calls were about chloroquine , prompted by what Brooks called , “ misinformation that they ’ re obtaining from the interweb and television.
” A spokesperson for the hospital that treated the couple said that she did not know where they got the idea that the chloroquine phosphate used to clean aquariums was safe for human consumption , but a Fox News web headline last week blurred the difference .
“ Drug cleared by Trump , FDA for coronavirus testing also found in fish tanks , ” Fox told its readers .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ released by the Banner Health hospital where they were treated , and it is not yet known where they obtained the chloroquine phosphate , although the social-media news agency Storyful reported last week that bottles of the pills commonly used in aquariums had shot up in price on eBay from $ 9.99 to $ 1,250 on Thursday .
“ Given the uncertainty around Covid-19 , we understand that people are trying to find new ways to prevent or treat this virus , but self-medicating is not the way to do so , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the Banner Poison and Drug Information Center in Phoenix , said in a statement .
On Sunday , chloroquine phosphate killed somebody .
An elderly couple in Arizona , who feared that they had been infected by the coronavirus but apparently had not , procured a version of the chemical used to clean fish tanks and swallowed it .
Within 30 minutes , both fell ill and had to be rushed to a Phoenix-area hospital , where the man died and his wife remains under critical care .
# FactsNotFear @ WHO @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for # COVID19 management .
Scientists are working hard to confirm the safety of several drugs for this disease .
Please DO NOT engage in self-medication .
This will cause harm and can lead to death .
# COVID19Nigeria pic.twitter.com/K6kljq0VtW On Friday , Trump had downplayed warnings from Dr. Anthony Fauci , the nation ’ s top immunologist , who said that even though the drug is also used to treat rheumatoid arthritis and lupus , without large scale , randomized clinical trials , it was not yet possible to be sure that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ suffering from Covid-19 , the pandemic respiratory illness .
While chloroquine was only rarely dangerous for people with malaria , Fauci said , “ what we don ’ t know , is when you put it in the context of another disease , whether it ’ s safe.
” “ We ’ re trying to strike a balance , ” Fauci said , “ between making something with a potential of an effect to the American people available , at the same time that we do it under the auspices of a protocol @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if it ’ s truly safe and truly effective.
” On Saturday , Trump ignored that caution and tweeted that a combination therapy of hydroxychloroquine , a less toxic derivative of chloroquine , and the antibiotic azithromycin — which was administered to six patients who recovered from Covid-19 this month in France — has “ a real chance to be one of the biggest game changers in the history of medicine.
” “ The president is talking about hope for people , ” Fauci said when asked about the tweet at a briefing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as a scientist , ” he added , “ is to ultimately prove , without a doubt , that a drug is not only safe by that it actually works.
” The preliminary research touted by Trump was conducted by Professor Didier Raoult , a French virologist who directs the Mediterranean Infectious and Tropical Disease Institute in Marseille .
According to a non-peer-reviewed draft paper posted online last week , Raoult and his colleagues began treating 26 Covid-19 patients with hydroxychloroquine earlier this month .
After six days , 14 of them “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who were also treated with azithromycin , compared to just two of a control group of 16 patients who did not get the drugs .
Raoult ’ s claim that the study proves the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine on Covid-19 has been questioned for its very small size and some odd choices in how it was conducted .
Then there is the fact that six of the patients treated with hydroxychloroquine had adverse reactions within three days : one died , three were removed from the study when they were transferred to intensive care @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and one stopped the treatment because of nausea .
Those failures were simply dropped from the study ’ s statistics .
The Centers for Disease Control described Raoult ’ s work as “ a small study ” that reported “ hydroxychloroquine alone or in combination with azithromycin reduced detection of ” the coronavirus “ in upper respiratory tract specimens compared with a non-randomized control group but did not assess clinical benefit.
” As Matthew Herper of Stat News explained , “ three-quarters of the time , medicines against infectious disease that looked promising @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had side effects that made them unusable ” after larger clinical trials .
Raoult , a self-described maverick who bears a passing resemblance to Dr. Harold Bornstein , Trump ’ s former personal physician , based his work on research done in China earlier this year .
Researchers from the Wuhan Institute of Virology and Wuhan National Biosafety Laboratory reported that hydroxychloroquine can inhibit infections of the novel coronavirus in lab conditions .
As the CDC notes , the researchers in China “ reported that chloroquine treatment of Covid-19 patients had clinical and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” which led to the drug being recommended as an antiviral treatment there .
According to the French newsweekly Le Nouvel Observateur , while he is the most influential microbiologist in France , Raoult ’ s outsized personality and love of a fight colors how his work is perceived by peers and public health officials .
A climate change denier , he has scoffed at the global response to the pandemic , saying the virus “ does not justify measures worthy of an atomic catastrophe.
” His scorn for this sort of approach @ @ @ @ @ @ @ modelers , like those whose work prompted the current shutdown of public life in the United Kingdom and the United States , are “ charlatans , ” he told Science magazine in 2012 .
“ There are zero examples in infectious diseases of something that has been predicted by a model , ” he added .
Raoult even has a new book about the coronavirus out this week , “ Epidemics , Real Dangers and False Alarms , ” in which he argues that “ this panic is largely due to the exaggerations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fear ‘ sells . '
” Rather than universal confinement , Raoult suggests , a better response would be to emulate South Korea — and Germany — by ramping up testing so much that infected individuals can be identified and isolated , cutting the death toll .
As the Irish Times correspondent Lara Marlowe noted , Raoult “ shares a certain arrogance with Trump ” and Brazil ’ s president , Jair Bolsonaro , who ordered the nation ’ s army to produce mass quantities of chloroquine on Saturday .
“ In my @ @ @ @ @ @ @ worldwide , ” he told the newspaper La Provence .
“ I don ’ t give a damn what others think .
I am not an outsider .
I ’ m streaks ahead of the others.
” Like Trump and Bolsonaro , Raoult also scoffs at predictions of climate catastrophe and is a less-than-stellar boss .
A dozen subordinates in the institute he runs signed a letter of complaint in 2017 saying they were “ frequently belittled , mocked , humiliated , subjected to macho talk , inappropriate attitudes and verbal altercations.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s YouTube channel begins with Raoult boasting of his high-ranking on a website called Expertscape .
Still , Trump and Bolsonaro are not the only people anxious to find out if chloroquine might work .
On Sunday , Gov .
Andrew Cuomo of New York announced that the state had obtained 750,000 doses of chloroquine , 70,000 doses of hydroxychloroquine and 10,000 doses of azithromycin and would undertake its own drug trial .
Amid reports that the drug is already being hoarded , Cuomo issued an executive order on Monday barring any @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trials .
“ No pharmacist shall dispense hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine except when written as prescribed for an FDA-approved indication ; or as part of a state approved clinical trial related to Covid-19 for a patient who has tested positive for Covid-19 , with such test result documented as part of the prescription , ” the order said .
“ No other experimental or prophylactic use shall be permitted , and any permitted prescription is limited to one fourteen day prescription with no refills.
” Nevan Krogan , a biologist at the University of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ studying possible drug treatments for Covid-19 told The New York Times that doctors “ need to be careful ” with chloroquine because the drug seems to target many human cellular proteins and could have many toxic side effects .
On Sunday , Fauci , the director of National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases , gave an interview to Science magazine in which he described the difficulty of keeping Trump from saying things that are not true during briefings .
“ I can ’ t jump in front of the microphone and push @ @ @ @ @ @ @ On Sunday night , the government ’ s most senior immunologist was attacked on Fox News by Steve Hilton , a former adviser to David Cameron , the British prime minister who introduced sweeping austerity measures .
Hilton , who supported massive cuts to social programs in Britain when he was in government , accused Fauci and other public health officials of “ pushing us towards another Great Depression .
”

Three times last week, Donald Trump defied expert advice and touted anecdotal evidence that the anti-malaria drug chloroquine might cure Covid-19. “It’s been around for a long time,” the president said on Thursday, “so we know that if things don’t go as planned, it’s not going to kill anybody.”
President Trump on Hydroxychloroquine: "It's been around for a long time, so we know if things don't go as planned it's not going to kill anybody…It's shown very, very encouraging early results, and we're going to be able to make that drug available almost immediately." pic.twitter.com/Q7C8dk7gnd — CSPAN (@cspan) March 19, 2020
On Sunday, a couple in Arizona who had heard the president describe the drug on television, and were afraid of dying from Covid-19, discovered that they had a non-medical version of the chemical chloroquine phosphate, used to clean fish tanks, among their pet supplies. Mistakenly believing that the chemical sold to pet owners, which is available online, was exactly the same as the anti-malaria drug prescribed for humans — it is not — the man, who was 68, and his wife, who was 61, tried to self-medicate by mixing one teaspoon of the bitter tasting chemical with soda and swallowing it.
Within 30 minutes, both fell ill and had to be rushed to a Phoenix-area hospital, where the man died and his wife remains under critical care.
Trump’s press conference statement about the possible benefit of the form of chloroquine prescribed by doctors for malaria “was on a lot,” the woman told Vaughn Hillyard of NBC News by phone from her hospital bed. “They kept saying that it was approved for other things and, you know, Trump kept saying it was basically pretty much a cure.”
Woman in ICU: "Trump kept saying it was basically pretty much a cure."
NBC: "What would be your message to the American public?"
Woman: "Oh my God. Don't take anything. Don't believe anything. Don’t believe anything that the President says & his people…call your doctor." https://t.co/C8EiTQQ3r1 pic.twitter.com/UAOXBNsS4t — Vaughn Hillyard (@VaughnHillyard) March 24, 2020
“I was in the pantry stacking dog food and I just saw it sitting in the back shelf and thought, ‘Hey, isn’t that the stuff they’re talking about on TV?'” the woman said.
Asked what her message to the American people would be from her devastating experience, the woman said: “Don’t believe anything the President says, and his people, because they don’t know what they’re talking about. And don’t take anything — be so careful — and call your doctor. I mean, this is a heartache I’ll never get over.”
“Given the uncertainty around Covid-19, we understand that people are trying to find new ways to prevent or treat this virus, but self-medicating is not the way to do so,” Dr. Daniel Brooks, the medical director of the Banner Poison and Drug Information Center in Phoenix, said in a statement.
Last Thursday, the social-media news agency Storyful reported that bottles of the chemical commonly used in aquariums had shot up in price on eBay from the usual $9.99 to hundreds of dollars.
https://twitter.com/samueloakford/status/1240674011056672768
A spokesperson for the hospital that treated the couple said that she did not know where they got the incorrect idea that the chloroquine phosphate used to clean aquariums was safe for human consumption, but a New York Post headline that popped up on Google on Thursday read: “Fish tank additive could treat coronavirus, studies say.” The headline on the Post’s website still reads: “Sales of fish tank additive skyrocket after studies say it could treat coronavirus.” A headline on the Fox News website last week also blurred the difference between the drug used by doctors and the chemical available at pet stores. “Drug cleared by Trump, FDA for coronavirus testing also found in fish tanks,” Fox told its readers.
Brooks told The Arizona Republic that his group’s poison centers were getting calls from people asking if they can use medications or household products to treat Covid-19. Some of the calls were about chloroquine, prompted by what Brooks called, “misinformation that they’re obtaining from the interweb and television.”
Since the Centers for Disease Control says on its website that the active ingredient in the antimalarial drug referred to as choloroquine is chloroquine phosphate, it is not hard to see how desperate, worried people with access to the internet but no medical knowledge could convince themselves to swallow a form of that chemical used to kill parasites on fish, even if it was labeled “not for human consumption.”
Nigeria also reported two cases of chloroquine poisoning after Trump boosted the anti-malaria drug as a Covid-19 cure. The African nation’s Center for Disease Control warned Nigerians on Friday that chloroquine has not been approved as a treatment for the disease by the World Health Organization.
#FactsNotFear@WHO has NOT approved the use of chloroquine for #COVID19 management. Scientists are working hard to confirm the safety of several drugs for this disease. Please DO NOT engage in self-medication. This will cause harm and can lead to death.#COVID19Nigeria pic.twitter.com/K6kljq0VtW — NCDC (@NCDCgov) March 20, 2020
When Trump was asked about chloroquine at a news conference on Friday, the president told reporters, “we have millions of units ordered” from Bayer and other companies — an apparent reference to Bayer’s announcement the day before that it would donate three million tablets of its drug Resochin to the American government.
The active ingredient in Resochin — which was developed in 1934 but has recently been available only in Pakistan — is chloroquine phosphate. As of last week, the drug was not approved for use in the United States, but Bayer was working to secure an emergency use authorization to make it available to Americans.
The Swiss drug company Novartis and Israel’s Teva Pharmaceutical Industries also plan to donate millions of doses of hydroxychloroquine sulfate tablets. Another drug maker, Mylan said it would restart production of hydroxychloroquine at its West Virginia manufacturing facility to meet the potential for increased demand.
At the same news conference, Trump also downplayed warnings from Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation’s top immunologist, who said that even though the drug is also used to treat rheumatoid arthritis and lupus, without large scale, randomized clinical trials, it was not yet possible to be sure that chloroquine was effective or safe for people suffering from Covid-19, the pandemic respiratory illness. While chloroquine was only rarely dangerous for people with malaria, Fauci said, “what we don’t know, is when you put it in the context of another disease, whether it’s safe.”
“We’re trying to strike a balance,” Fauci said, “between making something with a potential of an effect to the American people available, at the same time that we do it under the auspices of a protocol that would give us information to determine if it’s truly safe and truly effective.”
On Saturday, Trump ignored that caution and tweeted that a combination therapy of hydroxychloroquine, a less toxic derivative of chloroquine, and the antibiotic azithromycin — which was administered to six patients who recovered from Covid-19 this month in France — has “a real chance to be one of the biggest game changers in the history of medicine.”
“The president is talking about hope for people,” Fauci said when asked about the tweet at a briefing on Saturday. “My job, as a scientist,” he added, “is to ultimately prove, without a doubt, that a drug is not only safe by that it actually works.”
The preliminary research touted by Trump was conducted by Professor Didier Raoult, a French virologist who directs the Mediterranean Infectious and Tropical Disease Institute in Marseille. According to a non-peer-reviewed draft paper posted online last week, Raoult and his colleagues began treating 26 Covid-19 patients with hydroxychloroquine earlier this month. After six days, 14 of them “were virologicaly cured,” including six who were also treated with azithromycin, compared to just two of a control group of 16 patients who did not get the drugs.
Raoult’s claim that the study proves the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine on Covid-19 has been questioned for its very small size and some odd choices in how it was conducted. Then there is the fact that six of the patients treated with hydroxychloroquine had adverse reactions within three days: one died, three were removed from the study when they were transferred to intensive care, one tested negative for the virus and one stopped the treatment because of nausea. Those failures were simply dropped from the study’s statistics.
The Centers for Disease Control described Raoult’s work as “a small study” that reported “hydroxychloroquine alone or in combination with azithromycin reduced detection of” the coronavirus “in upper respiratory tract specimens compared with a non-randomized control group but did not assess clinical benefit.”
As Matthew Herper of Stat News explained, “three-quarters of the time, medicines against infectious disease that looked promising in small studies either were ineffective or had side effects that made them unusable” after larger clinical trials.
The results in France were contradicted by those of another small study in China, which indicated that hydroxychloroquine was no more effective than other treatments for Covid-19. As AFP reported on Wednesday, the Chinese study, published in the Journal of Zhejiang University, involved treating half of a group of 30 Covid-19 patients with hydroxychloroquine for seven days. After a week of treatment, 13 of the 15 patients given the malaria drug tested negative for the coronavirus; but so did 14 of the 15 Covid-19 patients who didn’t get hydroxychloroquine.
Raoult, a self-described maverick who bears a passing resemblance to Dr. Harold Bornstein, Trump’s former personal physician, based his work on research done in China earlier this year.
Researchers from the Wuhan Institute of Virology and Wuhan National Biosafety Laboratory reported that hydroxychloroquine can inhibit infections of the novel coronavirus in lab conditions. As the CDC notes, the researchers in China “reported that chloroquine treatment of Covid-19 patients had clinical and virologic benefit versus a comparison group,” which led to the drug being recommended as an antiviral treatment there.
According to the French newsweekly Le Nouvel Observateur, while he is the most influential microbiologist in France, Raoult’s outsized personality and love of a fight colors how his work is perceived by peers and public health officials. A climate change denier, he has scoffed at the global response to the pandemic, saying the virus “does not justify measures worthy of an atomic catastrophe.”
His scorn for this sort of approach to pandemics is not new. Epidemic modelers, like those whose work prompted the current shutdown of public life in the United Kingdom and the United States, are “charlatans,” he told Science magazine in 2012. “There are zero examples in infectious diseases of something that has been predicted by a model,” he added.
Raoult even has a new book about the coronavirus out this week, “Epidemics, Real Dangers and False Alarms,” in which he argues that “this panic is largely due to the exaggerations of the press, which knows that fear ‘sells.'” Rather than universal confinement, Raoult suggests, a better response would be to emulate South Korea — and Germany — by ramping up testing so much that infected individuals can be identified and isolated, cutting the death toll.
As the Irish Times correspondent Lara Marlowe noted, Raoult “shares a certain arrogance with Trump” and Brazil’s president, Jair Bolsonaro, who ordered the nation’s army to produce mass quantities of chloroquine on Saturday. “In my field, I am a star, worldwide,” he told the newspaper La Provence. “I don’t give a damn what others think. I am not an outsider. I’m streaks ahead of the others.”
Like Trump and Bolsonaro, Raoult’s contrarianism also extends to scoffing at predictions of climate catastrophe and is a less-than-stellar boss. A dozen subordinates in the institute he runs signed a letter of complaint in 2017 saying they were “frequently belittled, mocked, humiliated, subjected to macho talk, inappropriate attitudes and verbal altercations.” A video interview posted on his institute’s YouTube channel begins with Raoult boasting of his high-ranking on a website called Expertscape.
Still, Trump and Bolsonaro are not the only people anxious to find out if chloroquine might work.
On Sunday, Gov. Andrew Cuomo of New York announced that the state had obtained 750,000 doses of chloroquine, 70,000 doses of hydroxychloroquine and 10,000 doses of azithromycin and would undertake its own drug trial.
Amid reports that the drug is already being hoarded, Cuomo issued an executive order on Monday barring any experimental use of the drug outside state-approved trials. “No pharmacist shall dispense hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine except when written as prescribed for an FDA-approved indication; or as part of a state approved clinical trial related to Covid-19 for a patient who has tested positive for Covid-19, with such test result documented as part of the prescription,” the order said. “No other experimental or prophylactic use shall be permitted, and any permitted prescription is limited to one fourteen day prescription with no refills.”
Nevan Krogan, a biologist at the University of California, San Francisco, who is studying possible drug treatments for Covid-19 told The New York Times that doctors “need to be careful” with chloroquine because the drug seems to target many human cellular proteins and could have many toxic side effects.
On Sunday, Fauci, the director of National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, gave an interview to Science magazine in which he described the difficulty of keeping Trump from saying things that are not true during briefings. “I can’t jump in front of the microphone and push him down,” Fauci said.
On Sunday night, the government’s most senior immunologist was attacked on Fox News by Steve Hilton, a former adviser to David Cameron, the British prime minister who introduced sweeping austerity measures. Hilton, who supported massive cuts to social programs in Britain when he was in government, accused Fauci and other public health officials of “pushing us towards another Great Depression.”
I suspect that Trump all-caps tweet is a livetweet of Fox from tonight (though obviously @MattGertz would know for sure). Host Steve Hilton used similar language. (No way that Trump read that Medium piece) pic.twitter.com/VS0I29Xgqx — John Whitehouse (@existentialfish) March 23, 2020
“You know that famous phrase, the cure is worse than the disease?” Hilton asked, arguing that the total shutdown of the economy was an overreaction.
A short time later, Trump tweeted, in all caps, “WE CANNOT LET THE CURE BE WORSE THAN THE PROBLEM ITSELF.” He then suggested that he might overrule the public health officials soon and end the economic shutdown on March 30. “AT THE END OF THE 15 DAY PERIOD, WE WILL MAKE A DECISION AS TO WHICH WAY WE WANT TO GO!”
Fauci was notably absent from the White House briefing room on Monday, when Trump said the lockdown might need to end soon and cited another anecdotal report, in the form of a New York Post story about a man with Covid-19 in Florida who convinced a doctor to give him chloroquine and is now apparently recovering.
After Trump restated his inclination to restart the economy by easing social distancing guidance, even if that helps the virus spread, the president was asked where Fauci was and if he agreed.
“No, he doesn't not agree,” President Trump says when asked if Dr. Anthony Fauci agrees with him on the need to reopen the economy soon by easing social distancing guidance amid COVID-19 crisis. https://t.co/lGOEv2hiVt pic.twitter.com/OQfo9CvZJ2 — ABC News (@ABC) March 23, 2020
“I was just with him, for a long time,” Trump said. “He doesn’t not agree.”
Updated: Tuesday, March 24, 10:41 a.m. EDT
This article was updated to add information from NBC News and to further clarify, in the headline and text, that the version of the chemical chloroquine phosphate that killed a man in Arizona was not the drug used by doctors to treat malaria and other illnesses, but one sold for use in fish tanks that is not intended for human consumption.
Updated: Wednesday, March 25, 4:09 p.m. EDT
This article was updated to add information from a small Chinese study which suggested that an antimalarial drug, hydroxychloroquine, was no more effective in fighting Covid-19 than other methods.


theintercept--2020-03-24--Coronavirus Treatment Developed by Gilead Sciences Granted “Rare Disease” Status, Potentially Limiti

Coronavirus Treatment Developed by Gilead Sciences Granted “Rare Disease” Status, Potentially Limiting Affordability

Experts warn the designation , reserved for treating “ rare diseases , ” could block supplies of the antiviral medication from generic drug manufacturers and provide a lucrative windfall for Gilead Sciences , which maintains close ties with President Donald Trump ’ s task force for controlling the coronavirus crisis .
Joe Grogan , who serves on the White House coronavirus task force , lobbied for Gilead from 2011 to 2017 on issues including the pricing of pharmaceuticals .
This afternoon , the Food and Drug Administration granted Gilead Sciences “ orphan ” drug status for its antiviral drug , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ company to profit exclusively for seven years from the product , which is one of dozens being tested as a possible treatment for Covid-19 , the disease caused by the new coronavirus .
“ It ’ s absurd that this would happen in the middle of an epidemic when everything is in short supply.
” The distinction could severely limit supply of remdesivir by granting Gilead Sciences exclusive protection over the drug and complete control of its price .
Other pharmaceutical firms , including India-based pharmaceutical firm Cipla , are reportedly working towards @ @ @ @ @ @ @ patients in the U.S. could be prevented from buying generics with lower prices now that Gilead Sciences ’ drug has been designated an orphan .
The 1983 Orphan Drug Act gives special inducements to pharmaceutical companies to make products that treat rare diseases .
In addition to the seven-year period of market exclusivity , “ orphan ” status can give companies grants and tax credits of 25 percent of the clinical drug testing cost .
The law is reserved for drugs that treat illnesses that affect fewer than 200,000 people in the U.S @ @ @ @ @ @ @ treat more common illnesses to be classified as orphans if the designation is given before the disease reaches that threshold .
As of press time , there were more than 40,000 confirmed cases of Covid-19 in the U.S , and some 366,000 worldwide .
“ They ’ re talking about potentially half the population of the United States , ” said Love , adding that “ it ’ s absurd that this would happen in the middle of an epidemic when everything is in short supply.
” “ The Orphan Drug Act is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about as an extreme opposite of a rare disease you can possibly dream up , ” said James Love , the director of Knowledge Ecology International , a watchdog on pharmaceutical patent abuse .
Today , Gilead abruptly announced that it would no longer provide emergency access to remdesivir , telling the New York Times that “ overwhelming demand ” left it unable to process requests for the drug through its compassionate use program .
Hours later , the Food and Drug Administration gave the drug orphan status .
Almost immediately , Gilead @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Gilead did not immediately respond to a request for comment .
The White House , on behalf of Grogan , declined to comment on the record .
The special orphan designation to remdesivir was granted despite hefty support by the government for the development of the drug .
Gilead Sciences ’ remdesivir was developed with at least $ 79 million in U.S. government funding , according to a paper published last week by KEI .
The origins of the drug came after the 2014 Ebola outbreak in western Africa , which spurred research @ @ @ @ @ @ @ potential pandemics .
Early promising results from the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Disease revealed that Rhesus monkeys infected with Ebola survived after undergoing an antiviral treatment using GS-5734 , the compound now known as remdesivir .
The U.S. National Institute Allergies and Infectious Diseases ( NIAID ) continued providing significant taxpayer funding to subsidize the development of remdesivir .
NIAID grants to Columbia University , Vanderbilt University , University of North Carolina – Chapel Hill , and the University of Alabama subsequently found that remdesivir prevents virus replication in a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Although the Orphan Drug Act was designed to solve a real problem — a lack of treatments for uncommon illnesses — pharmaceutical companies have for years exploited it for gain .
Rather than treating AIDS or HIV infection , drugs were framed as treating diarrhea or tuberculosis in HIV-infected people , thus narrowing their scope .
And companies have extended their exclusive marketing rights by repurposing drugs that are already patented for other purposes to treat rare diseases .
Orphan drugs now generate more than $ 100 billion in annual sales , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the law , more than 90 percent of rare diseases lack treatments approved by the Food and Drug Administration .
The Orphan Drug Act has helped pharmaceutical industry profits soar .
In 2018 , the median cost for a year of treatment with an orphan drug was $ 98,500 compared to $ 5,000 for drugs that don ’ t have the designation , according to Gerald Posner , author of “ Pharma : Greed , Lies , and the Poisoning of America.
” Grogan , who in 2016 earned over $ 800,000 in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ under scrutiny in 2018 for his work , also at Gilead , on a Medicare payment model for a cancer treatment .
The company has also come under fire for its pricing schemes .
In 2014 , Gilead sparked a controversy over listing its hepatitis C drug , Sovaldi , for $ 84,000 for a 12-week course therapy .
The company had purchased the patent from another firm and proceeded to nearly triple the price .
Gilead also sells Truvada , a drug to help prevent the transmission of HIV , for almost @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that it costs only $ 6 to manufacture .
Gilead Sciences presented earlier this month at the Cowen & Co .
Annual Health Care Conference , an investor event for major pharmaceutical and health care corporations .
The Intercept previously reported that investment bankers at the event quizzed Gilead Sciences executives over whether they could develop a “ commercial strategy for remdesivir ” in the near future .
In response , Johanna Mercier , executive vice president of Gilead , noted that the company is focused on increasing capacity to meet demands for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ opportunity , ” Mercier added , “ might come if this becomes a seasonal disease or stockpiling comes into play , but that ’ s much later down the line.
” “ Gilead probably feels like now ’ s the time to cash in before somebody comes up with a better drug or a vaccine is done , ” said Love .
“ They ’ re going to be very aggressive in how they go after this .
”

On Monday afternoon, the Food and Drug Administration granted Gilead Sciences “orphan” drug status for its antiviral drug, remdesivir. The designation allows the pharmaceutical company to profit exclusively for seven years from the product, which is one of dozens being tested as a possible treatment for Covid-19, the disease caused by the new coronavirus.
Experts warn that the designation, reserved for treating “rare diseases,” could block supplies of the antiviral medication from generic drug manufacturers and provide a lucrative windfall for Gilead Sciences, which maintains close ties with President Donald Trump’s task force for controlling the coronavirus crisis. Joe Grogan, who serves on the White House coronavirus task force, lobbied for Gilead from 2011 to 2017 on issues including the pricing of pharmaceuticals.
“It’s absurd that this would happen in the middle of an epidemic when everything is in short supply.”
“The Orphan Drug Act is for a rare disease, and this is about as an extreme opposite of a rare disease you can possibly dream up,” said James Love, director of Knowledge Ecology International, a watchdog on pharmaceutical patent abuse.
“They’re talking about potentially half the population of the United States,” said Love, adding that “it’s absurd that this would happen in the middle of an epidemic when everything is in short supply.”
The 1983 Orphan Drug Act gives special inducements to pharmaceutical companies to make products that treat rare diseases. In addition to the seven-year period of market exclusivity, “orphan” status can give companies grants and tax credits of 25 percent of the clinical drug testing cost. The law is reserved for drugs that treat illnesses that affect fewer than 200,000 people in the U.S. But a loophole allows drugs that treat more common illnesses to be classified as orphans if the designation is given before the disease reaches that threshold. As of press time, there were more than 40,000 confirmed cases of Covid-19 in the U.S, and some 366,000 worldwide.
The distinction could severely limit supply of remdesivir by granting Gilead Sciences exclusive protection over the drug and complete control of its price. Other pharmaceutical firms, including India-based pharmaceutical firm Cipla, are reportedly working toward a generic form of remdesivir, but patients in the U.S. could be prevented from buying generics with lower prices now that Gilead Sciences’s drug has been designated an orphan.
Today, Gilead abruptly announced that it would no longer provide emergency access to remdesivir, telling the New York Times that “overwhelming demand” left it unable to process requests for the drug through its compassionate use program. Hours later, the FDA gave the drug orphan status. Almost immediately, Gilead’s stock price shot up. Gilead did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The White House, on behalf of Grogan, declined to comment on the record.
The special orphan designation, which can also be granted to drugs when there is little reasonable expectation that a company will recoup its research costs, was given to remdesivir despite hefty support by the government for the development of the drug.
Gilead Sciences’ remdesivir was developed with at least $79 million in U.S. government funding, according to a paper published last week by KEI. The origins of the drug came after the 2014 Ebola outbreak in western Africa, which spurred research into potential antiviral medications to control future potential pandemics. Early promising results from the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Disease revealed that Rhesus monkeys infected with Ebola survived after undergoing an antiviral treatment using GS-5734, the compound now known as remdesivir.
The U.S. National Institute Allergies and Infectious Diseases continued providing significant taxpayer funding to subsidize the development of remdesivir. NIAID grants to Columbia University, Vanderbilt University, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, and the University of Alabama subsequently found that remdesivir prevents virus replication in a range of coronaviruses in human lung cells.
Although the Orphan Drug Act was designed to solve a real problem — a lack of treatments for uncommon illnesses — pharmaceutical companies have for years exploited it for gain. Rather than treating AIDS or HIV infection, drugs were framed as treating diarrhea or tuberculosis in HIV-infected people, thus narrowing their scope. And companies have extended their exclusive marketing rights by repurposing drugs that are already patented for other purposes to treat rare diseases. Orphan drugs now generate more than $100 billion in annual sales, and even though companies are increasingly using the law, more than 90 percent of rare diseases lack treatments approved by the FDA.
Read Our Complete Coverage The Coronavirus Crisis
The Orphan Drug Act has helped pharmaceutical industry profits soar. In 2018, the median cost for a year of treatment with an orphan drug was $98,500 compared to $5,000 for drugs that don’t have the designation, according to Gerald Posner, author of “Pharma: Greed, Lies, and the Poisoning of America.”
Grogan, who in 2016 earned over $800,000 in salary and bonuses at Gilead, came under scrutiny in 2018 for his work, also at Gilead, on a Medicare payment model for a cancer treatment.
The company has also come under fire for its pricing schemes. In 2014, Gilead sparked a controversy over listing its hepatitis C drug, Sovaldi, for $84,000 for a 12-week course therapy. The company had purchased the patent from another firm and proceeded to nearly triple the price. Gilead also sells Truvada, a drug to help prevent the transmission of HIV, for almost $2,000 a month despite the fact that it costs only $6 to manufacture.
Gilead Sciences presented earlier this month at the Cowen & Co. Annual Health Care Conference, an investor event for major pharmaceutical and health care corporations. The Intercept previously reported that investment bankers at the event quizzed Gilead Sciences executives over whether they could develop a “commercial strategy for remdesivir” in the near future.
In response, Johanna Mercier, executive vice president of Gilead, noted that the company is focused on increasing capacity to meet demands for patients and government access. “Commercial opportunity,” Mercier added, “might come if this becomes a seasonal disease or stockpiling comes into play, but that’s much later down the line.”
“Gilead probably feels like now’s the time to cash in before somebody comes up with a better drug or a vaccine is done,” said Love. “They’re going to be very aggressive in how they go after this.”
Update: March 24, 2020
The orphan designation can also be given in cases in which there is little expectation that the company will be able to recoup the cost of the drug’s development. (Remdesivir, which was reportedly developed using at least $79 million in federal funding, is expected to generate up to $2.5 billion in revenue.) This story has been updated to reflect this possibility under the law.
Update: March 28, 2020
Gilead Sciences announced on March 25 that it had submitted a request to the Food and Drug Administration to rescind the exclusive marketing rights it had secured for remdesivir.


theintercept--2020-03-24--Time’s Up Said It Could Not Fund a #MeToo Allegation Against Joe Biden, Citing Its Nonprofit Status

Time’s Up Said It Could Not Fund a #MeToo Allegation Against Joe Biden, Citing Its Nonprofit Status and His Presidential Run

Tara Reade watched as a familiar conversation around her former boss , Joe Biden , and his relationship with personal space unfolded on the national stage .
Nevada politician Lucy Flores alleged that Biden had inappropriately sniffed her hair and kissed the back of her head as she waited to go on stage at a rally in 2014 .
Biden , in a statement in response , said that “ not once ” in his career did he believe that he had acted inappropriately .
But Flores ’ s allegation sounded accurate to Reade , she said , because Reade @ @ @ @ @ @ @ staffer in Biden ’ s Senate office years earlier .
After she saw an episode of the ABC show “ The View , ” in which most of the panelists stood up for Biden and attacked Flores as politically motivated , Reade decided that she had no choice but to come forward and support Flores .
She gave an interview to a local reporter , describing several instances in which Biden had behaved similarly toward her , inappropriately touching her during her early- ’ 90s tenure in his Senate office .
In that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a piece of the story , she said , that matched what had happened to Flores — plus , she had filed a contemporaneous complaint , and there were witnesses , so she considered the allegation bulletproof .
The short article brought a wave of attention on her , along with accusations that she was doing the bidding of Russian President Vladimir Putin .
So Reade went quiet .
As the campaign went on , Reade , who first supported Sen. Elizabeth Warren and then Sen. Bernie Sanders , began to reconsider staying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ she wanted her daughter to live in and decided that she wanted to continue telling her story and push back against what she saw as online defamation .
To get legal help , and manage what she knew from her first go-around would be serious backlash , she reached out to the organization Time ’ s Up , established in the wake of the # MeToo movement to help survivors tell their stories .
The Time ’ s Up Legal Defense Fund was the recipient of an outpouring of donations over the past @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as a 501 ( c ) 3 nonprofit housed within the National Women ’ s Law Center .
It was launched in December 2017 and was the most successful GoFundMe in the site ’ s history , raising more than $ 24 million .
Among the accusers backed so far by Time ’ s Up are some of those assaulted by Harvey Weinstein , as well scores of others with allegations against executives in male-dominated industries .
The group has committed more than $ 10 million toward funding cases .
In January of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ program director at NWLC , Ellie Driscoll , and was encouraged by the conversation .
The fact that she was a Sanders supporter and had come forward previously in incomplete fashion didn ’ t dissuade Time ’ s Up .
Driscoll referred her to outside attorneys , Reade said , and suggested that the Time ’ s Up Legal Defense Fund might be able to provide funding for PR and subsidize legal assistance .
Driscoll shared with Reade the note she planned to forward to attorneys , which read , in part : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ experienced in April 2019 but was attacked … online including by Richard Painter ( Univ .
of MN law professor who worked in the Obama administration ) and journalist Edward-Isaac Dovere for being a Russian operative .
There is more to the story of the harassment that she did not feel safe sharing at that time .
She is looking for support in sharing her story and guidance on any possible legal action she may be able to take against online harassers .
[ Editor ’ s note : Painter served in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and ran for Senate in 2018 as a Democrat . ]
The references to Dovere , a reporter with The Atlantic , and Painter stem from their Twitter posts that highlighted favorable comments Reade had made about Putin in a now-deleted post on Medium .
“ What if I told you that everything you learned about Russia was wrong ?
” she had written in one 2018 post .
“ President Putin scares the power elite in America because he is a compassionate , caring , visionary leader .
… To President Putin @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the beautiful future and maybe , just maybe America will come to see Russia as I do , with eyes of love .
To all my Russian friends , happy holiday and Happy New Year.
” Reade says that she learned about Russia and Putin through a Russian friend in her creative-writing group ; she is currently writing a novel set in Russia .
She wrote the post in the spirit of world peace and solidarity with her friend , she said , adding that the writing should have nothing to do with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mother had raised her to oppose American imperialism and be skeptical of American exceptionalism .
She hoped that Time ’ s Up would be able to help push back against the attacks she knew would be coming .
By February , she learned from a new conversation with Time ’ s Up , which also involved Director Sharyn Tejani , that no assistance could be provided because the person she was accusing , Biden , was a candidate for federal office , and assisting a case against him could jeopardize the organization ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Driscoll wrote to Reade that she “ wanted to let you know that after our conversation I talked further with our Director , Sharyn Tejani , about our ability to offer funding or public relations support in your case .
Unfortunately , the Fund ’ s decision remains the same .
… Please know how much I appreciate your courage in speaking out and appreciate what you shared over the phone , that you are speaking out so that your daughter and other young people can start their careers free of harassment.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Intercept , Driscoll referred questions to a NWLC spokesperson , Maria Patrick , who said that the organization has legal constraints .
“ As a nonprofit 501 ( c ) ( 3 ) charitable organization , the National Women ’ s Law Center is restricted in how it can spend its funds , including restrictions that pertain to candidates running for election , ” Patrick responded , when asked why the organizing declined to provide funds to Reade .
“ Our decision on whether or not to provide certain types of support to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our validation or doubt of the truthfulness of the person ’ s statements .
Regardless , our support of workers who come forward regarding workplace sexual harassment remains unwavering.
” Ruling out federal candidates marks as off-limits any member of Congress running for reelection , as well as President Donald Trump .
Ellen Aprill , a professor of tax law at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles , said that Time ’ s Up ’ s analysis is too conservative , and the group wouldn ’ t be putting its tax-exempt status at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ candidate for federal office as long as it followed its standard criteria for taking on cases .
“ As a legal matter , if the group is clear regarding the criteria used as to whom it is taking to court , show that these are long-established neutral criteria , and they are being applied to individuals completely independent of their running for office , it would not be a violation of tax law .
Groups are allowed to continue to do what they have always done , ” she said .
The public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Time ’ s Up Legal Defense Fund is SKDKnickerbocker , whose managing director , Anita Dunn , is the top adviser to Biden ’ s presidential campaign .
A spokesperson for Biden declined to comment .
The SKDK spokesperson assigned to Time ’ s Up referred questions back to the NWLC .
As for influencing the election , Reade said that she was deeply conflicted about continuing to come forward , given that Biden ’ s opponent in the general election is someone she sees as far worse politically .
“ I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But what can I do ?
” she said .
“ All I can do is stand on my truth .
”

Last April, Tara Reade watched as a familiar conversation around her former boss, Joe Biden, and his relationship with personal space unfolded on the national stage. Nevada politician Lucy Flores alleged that Biden had inappropriately sniffed her hair and kissed the back of her head as she waited to go on stage at a rally in 2014. Biden, in a statement in response, said that “not once” in his career did he believe that he had acted inappropriately. But Flores’s allegation sounded accurate to Reade, she said, because Reade had experienced something very similar as a staffer in Biden’s Senate office years earlier.
After she saw an episode of the ABC show “The View,” in which most of the panelists stood up for Biden and attacked Flores as politically motivated, Reade decided that she had no choice but to come forward and support Flores. She gave an interview to a local reporter, describing several instances in which Biden had behaved similarly toward her, inappropriately touching her during her early-’90s tenure in his Senate office. In that first interview, she decided to tell a piece of the story, she said, that matched what had happened to Flores — plus, she had filed a contemporaneous complaint, and there were witnesses, so she considered the allegation bulletproof. The short article brought a wave of attention on her, along with accusations that she was doing the bidding of Russian President Vladimir Putin. So Reade went quiet.
To get legal help, Tara Reade reached out to Time’s Up, established in the wake of the #MeToo movement to help survivors tell their stories.
As the campaign went on, Reade, who first supported Sen. Elizabeth Warren and then Sen. Bernie Sanders, began to reconsider staying silent. She thought about the world she wanted her daughter to live in and decided that she wanted to continue telling her story and push back against what she saw as online defamation. To get legal help, and manage what she knew from her first go-around would be serious backlash, she reached out to the organization Time’s Up, established in the wake of the #MeToo movement to help survivors tell their stories.
The Time’s Up Legal Defense Fund was the recipient of an outpouring of donations over the past two-plus years, and is set up as a 501(c)3 nonprofit housed within the National Women’s Law Center. It was launched in December 2017 and was the most successful GoFundMe in the site’s history, raising more than $24 million. Among the accusers backed so far by Time’s Up are some of those assaulted by Harvey Weinstein, as well scores of others with allegations against executives in male-dominated industries. The group has committed more than $10 million toward funding cases.
In January of this year, Reade spoke with a program director at NWLC and was encouraged by the conversation. The fact that she was a Sanders supporter and had come forward previously in incomplete fashion didn’t dissuade Time’s Up. The program director referred her to outside attorneys, Reade said, and suggested that the Time’s Up Legal Defense Fund might be able to provide funding for PR and subsidize legal assistance.
The program director shared with Reade the note she planned to forward to attorneys, which read, in part:
She began publicly sharing the harassment she experienced in April 2019 but was attacked … online including by Richard Painter (Univ. of MN law professor who worked in the Obama administration) and journalist Edward-Isaac Dovere for being a Russian operative. There is more to the story of the harassment that she did not feel safe sharing at that time. She is looking for support in sharing her story and guidance on any possible legal action she may be able to take against online harassers. [Editor’s note: Painter served in the Bush, not Obama, administration, and ran for Senate in 2018 as a Democrat.]
The references to Dovere, a reporter with The Atlantic, and Painter stem from their Twitter posts that highlighted favorable comments Reade had made about Putin in a now-deleted post on Medium. “What if I told you that everything you learned about Russia was wrong?” she had written in one 2018 post. “President Putin scares the power elite in America because he is a compassionate, caring, visionary leader. … To President Putin, I say keep your eyes to the beautiful future and maybe, just maybe America will come to see Russia as I do, with eyes of love. To all my Russian friends, happy holiday and Happy New Year.”
Reade says that she learned about Russia and Putin through a Russian friend in her creative-writing group; she is currently writing a novel set in Russia. She wrote the post in the spirit of world peace and solidarity with her friend, she said, adding that the writing should have nothing to do with her allegation. Reade’s leftist mother had raised her to oppose American imperialism and be skeptical of American exceptionalism. She hoped that Time’s Up would be able to help push back against the attacks she knew would be coming.
Photo: Courtesy of Tara Reade
By February, she learned from a new conversation with Time’s Up, which also involved Director Sharyn Tejani, that no assistance could be provided because the person she was accusing, Biden, was a candidate for federal office, and assisting a case against him could jeopardize the organization’s nonprofit status.
On February 11, the NWLC program director wrote to Reade that she “wanted to let you know that after our conversation I talked further with our Director, Sharyn Tejani, about our ability to offer funding or public relations support in your case. Unfortunately, the Fund’s decision remains the same. … Please know how much I appreciate your courage in speaking out and appreciate what you shared over the phone, that you are speaking out so that your daughter and other young people can start their careers free of harassment.”
When reached for comment by The Intercept, the program director Reade had spoken to referred questions to a NWLC spokesperson, Maria Patrick, who said that the organization has legal constraints. “As a nonprofit 501(c)(3) charitable organization, the National Women’s Law Center is restricted in how it can spend its funds, including restrictions that pertain to candidates running for election,” Patrick responded, when asked why the organizing declined to provide funds to Reade. “Our decision on whether or not to provide certain types of support to an individual should not be interpreted as our validation or doubt of the truthfulness of the person’s statements. Regardless, our support of workers who come forward regarding workplace sexual harassment remains unwavering.”
By February, Reade learned that no assistance could be provided because Biden was a candidate for federal office, and assisting a case against him, Time’s Up said, could jeopardize the organization’s nonprofit status.
Ruling out federal candidates marks as off-limits any member of Congress running for reelection, as well as President Donald Trump. Ellen Aprill, a professor of tax law at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles, said that Time’s Up’s analysis is too conservative, and the group wouldn’t be putting its tax-exempt status at risk by taking a case involving a candidate for federal office as long as it followed its standard criteria for taking on cases. “As a legal matter, if the group is clear regarding the criteria used as to whom it is taking to court, show that these are long-established neutral criteria, and they are being applied to individuals completely independent of their running for office, it would not be a violation of tax law. Groups are allowed to continue to do what they have always done,” she said.
The public relations firm that works on behalf of the Time’s Up Legal Defense Fund is SKDKnickerbocker, whose managing director, Anita Dunn, is the top adviser to Biden’s presidential campaign. A spokesperson for Biden declined to comment. The SKDK spokesperson assigned to Time’s Up referred questions back to the NWLC.
As for influencing the election, Reade said that she was deeply conflicted about continuing to come forward, given that Biden’s opponent in the general election is someone she sees as far worse politically. “I don’t want to help Trump. But what can I do?” she said. “All I can do is stand on my truth.”
Update: March 26, 2020
Reade has given an interview with podcast host Katie Halper, describing her time in Biden’s office, and what she described as a sexual assault in 1993. At the time, she told her mother, brother, and a friend who worked in Sen. Ted Kennedy’s office about the incident. Her mother has since passed away, but both her friend and brother told The Intercept they recalled hearing about it from her at the time. Reade’s friend, who asked to remain anonymous so as not to be part of the public blowback, said she discouraged Reade from coming forward at all, concerned that she would be attacked and would never get the apology she was hoping for. Reade and her brother, Collin Moulton, both said that their mother urged her to call the police, but her brother urged her to move on instead. “Woefully, I did not encourage her to follow up,” he said. “I wasn’t one of her better advocates. I said let it go, move on, guys are idiots.” (Moulton, who lives in Georgia, said he voted for Gary Johnson in 2016 and has no intention to vote for either Biden or Donald Trump.)
The experience in Biden’s office derailed her life, Reade’s friend said. “Back then people assumed girls just get over it,” she said. “But no, it plants a seed and lives can spin out of control. Yes, everybody’s an adult, but guess what, so is he.” At the time, there was just no way that Reade’s effort to right the wrong could succeed, her friend said, but this time, she’s determined to be heard. “It was the ‘90s,” she said. “There was no Me Too. There was no Time’s Up.”
Update: March 27, 2020
The Biden campaign has denied the allegation, releasing two statements, one from Communications Director Kate Bedingfield and the other from former executive assistant to then-Senator Biden Marianne Baker, who served him from 1982-2000.
Bedingfield’s statement:
Women have a right to tell their story, and reporters have an obligation to rigorously vet those claims. We encourage them to do so, because these accusations are false.
Baker’s statement:


theintercept--2020-03-24--Kaiser Permanente Threatened to Fire Nurses Treating Covid-19 Patients for Wearing Their Own Masks,

Kaiser Permanente Threatened to Fire Nurses Treating Covid-19 Patients for Wearing Their Own Masks, Unions Say

Permanente hospitals and clinics in California could be fired immediately for wearing their own face masks , according to unions representing nurses at the facilities .
The news comes after nurses were ordered to reuse disposable protective gear to save supplies in the face of shortages brought on by the coronavirus pandemic .
The California Nurses Association and National Nurses United sent a flyer to members noting that Kaiser had threatened nurses with firing if they wear their own N95 masks , which offer a high level of protection from airborne contaminants , to work .
“ Kaiser has told @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wearing their personal N95 masks , they could be fired ‘ on the spot ’ for insubordination , ” the flyer read .
The unions did not immediately respond to a request for comment .
Kaiser spokesperson Marc Brown said firing nurses for using their own N95 gear is not the company ’ s official policy .
Asked if nurses would not be disciplined if they wear their own masks , Brown did not provide an answer .
“ That is not our policy .
We provide the appropriate medical-grade protective equipment for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ being provided .
We can not assure the integrity of protective equipment not provided by Kaiser Permanente , ” Brown wrote in a statement to The Intercept .
“ We want them to wear equipment we can be sure is effective.
” Kaiser nurses last week received guidelines downgrading protective standards and giving instructions on how to reuse certain types of eyewear and masks .
That change came after the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention earlier this month downgraded from protocols for airborne contamination to protocols for droplet contamination , noting that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than science .
Close to 100 nurses and family members gathered outside Kaiser ’ s Oakland Medical Center on Monday night to protest the new guidelines , saying that they put both patients and critical staff at risk .
Staff at the center have been caring for patients from the Grand Princess cruise ship , which had at least 21 passengers test positive for Covid-19 , the disease caused by the coronavirus .
Local police and Kaiser facility security observed the protest , according to one nurse who attended and asked for anonymity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ California went into lockdown last week , meaning that large gatherings are strongly discouraged .
“ For our workplace to be saying , ‘ Hey , you know , we ’ re taking the bare minimum that we can give you guys and giving it to you , ’ was really disheartening , ” the nurse said .
As nurses told The Intercept last week , staff at the Oakland facility have also downgraded the level of protection of the gowns they ’ re using to care for staff .
“ The gowns @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decreased in their protective ability as those have kind of become , quote-unquote , unavailable , ” the nurse said .
“ The gowns that we ’ re currently being given , they went from being less permeable to totally permeable gowns that have an open back .
So those gowns , how are those supposed to protect us when we ’ re going in rooms , we ’ re supposed to maneuver between equipment to try and care for these patients , and our entire backsides is being exposed .
And then @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in chairs .
Completely inadequate.
” Kaiser said it has the necessary supplies to protect nurses , but the nurse said that hasn ’ t always felt like the case .
“ We were not having , it felt like , adequate supply .
You could get what you needed , you had to fight for it .
And it ’ s exhausting , ” the nurse said .
With materials in short supply , things have gone missing , and so management is locking them away , they said .
“ What @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to that office isn ’ t there at the moment ?
Delay in patient care .
… That ’ s just extra time spent searching for these things .
”

Nurses at Kaiser Permanente hospitals and clinics in California could be fired immediately for wearing their own face masks, according to unions representing nurses at the facilities. The news comes after nurses were ordered to reuse disposable protective gear to save supplies in the face of shortages brought on by the coronavirus pandemic.
The California Nurses Association and National Nurses United sent a flyer to members noting that Kaiser had threatened nurses with firing if they wear their own N95 masks, which offer a high level of protection from airborne contaminants, to work. “Kaiser has told nurses that if they’re seen wearing their personal N95 masks, they could be fired ‘on the spot’ for insubordination,” the flyer read. The unions did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Kaiser spokesperson Marc Brown said firing nurses for using their own N95 gear is not the company’s official policy. Asked if nurses would not be disciplined if they wear their own masks, Brown did not provide an answer. “That is not our policy. We provide the appropriate medical-grade protective equipment for the protocols and level of patient care being provided. We cannot assure the integrity of protective equipment not provided by Kaiser Permanente,” Brown wrote in a statement to The Intercept. “We want them to wear equipment we can be sure is effective.”
Kaiser nurses last week received guidelines downgrading protective standards and giving instructions on how to reuse certain types of eyewear and masks. That change came after the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention earlier this month downgraded from protocols for airborne contamination to protocols for droplet contamination, noting that the change was based on supply rather than science.
Close to 100 nurses and family members gathered outside Kaiser’s Oakland Medical Center on Monday night to protest the new guidelines, saying that they put both patients and critical staff at risk. Staff at the center have been caring for patients from the Grand Princess cruise ship, which had at least 21 passengers test positive for Covid-19, the disease caused by the coronavirus.
Local police and Kaiser facility security observed the protest, according to one nurse who attended and asked for anonymity to avoid retaliation from their employer. California went into lockdown last week, meaning that large gatherings are strongly discouraged.
Image: Provided to The Intercept
“For our workplace to be saying, ‘Hey, you know, we’re taking the bare minimum that we can give you guys and giving it to you,’ was really disheartening,” the nurse said.
As nurses told The Intercept last week, staff at the Oakland facility have also downgraded the level of protection of the gowns they’re using to care for staff. “The gowns that they are giving us have dramatically decreased in their protective ability as those have kind of become, quote-unquote, unavailable,” the nurse said. “The gowns that we’re currently being given, they went from being less permeable to totally permeable gowns that have an open back. So those gowns, how are those supposed to protect us when we’re going in rooms, we’re supposed to maneuver between equipment to try and care for these patients, and our entire backsides is being exposed. And then we’re going out and sitting in chairs. Completely inadequate.”
Kaiser said it has the necessary supplies to protect nurses, but the nurse said that hasn’t always felt like the case. “We were not having, it felt like, adequate supply. You could get what you needed, you had to fight for it. And it’s exhausting,” the nurse said.
With materials in short supply, things have gone missing, and so management is locking them away, they said. “What happens when the person with the key to that office isn’t there at the moment? Delay in patient care. … That’s just extra time spent searching for these things.”


theintercept--2020-03-24--Anti-Abortion Politicians Are Exploiting the Coronavirus Outbreak to Shutter Health Clinics

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton posted a warning to “ all licensed health care professionals and all licensed health care facilities , including abortion providers , ” that they must “ postpone all surgeries and procedures that are not immediately medically necessary.
” The legal opinion came less than 24 hours after Gov .
Greg Abbott issued an executive order loosening regulations to help increase capacity in the state ’ s hospitals .
The order , slated to remain in effect until April 21 , called for health care providers to postpone “ surgeries and procedures that are not immediately @ @ @ @ @ @ @ regarding elective surgeries released by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services on March 18 .
Neither that guidance nor Abbott ’ s order specifies a list of banned procedures .
Still , Abbott ’ s order was met with a quick response from the anti-abortion group Texas Right to Life , which declared that the governor ’ s action would “ stop all surgical elective abortions.
” The group claimed that the “ abortion industry ” was partly responsible for worsening conditions for providers on the front lines of the coronavirus epidemic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ supplies.
” “ Texas Right to Life is grateful that the loss of life during the Covid-19 outbreak will be decreased thanks to the halt in abortions , ” the group said , also calling for a ban on medication abortion .
In reality , however , Abbott ’ s order does not mention abortion .
The order is designed to help health care professionals stay safe while expanding their ability to provide care , for example , by allowing hospitals to increase patient-room capacity .
And while it says providers “ shall @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to “ correct a serious medical condition ” or prevent “ serious adverse medical consequences or death , as determined by the patient ’ s physician , ” it also provides a caveat : It does not apply to any procedure that “ performed in accordance with the commonly accepted standard of clinical practice , would not deplete the hospital capacity or the personal protective equipment needed to cope with the Covid-19 disaster.
” Medical experts say abortion fits squarely into the category of procedures that should not be affected by such an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ component of comprehensive health care , ” reads a statement released last week by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists , the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology , and six other groups representing reproductive health providers .
“ It is also a time-sensitive service for which a delay of several weeks , or in some cases days , may increase the risks or potentially make it completely inaccessible .
The consequences of being unable to obtain an abortion profoundly impact a person ’ s life , health , and well-being.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ attempt to address hospital-based procedures and free up additional PPE , is being weaponized by anti-abortion groups and politicians trying to further their ideological cause in the midst of a pandemic .
Indeed , it appears that Texas ’ s anti-abortion crusaders are taking their cues from a controversy playing out in Ohio .
In the wake of a March 17 order from Ohio Department of Health Director Amy Acton telling providers that they should end “ non-essential surgery , ” a lawyer in Attorney General Greg Yost ’ s office penned a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The letters , sent out on March 20 and 21 , said that the state had received “ a complaint that your facility has been performing or continues to offer to perform surgical abortions , which necessarily involve the use of PPE.
” The letters demanded that the providers “ stop performing non-essential and elective surgical abortion .
Non-essential surgical abortions are those that can be delayed without undue risk to the current or future health of a patient.
” If the providers failed to comply , “ the Department of Health will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio immediately responded to the letter , according to a statement from PPSWO and Planned Parenthood of Greater Ohio , which operate two of the three clinics contacted by the AG ’ s office .
They assured the state that they were complying with the content of Acton ’ s order .
“ Abortion is an essential , time-sensitive medical procedure , ” the statement reads .
Under the order , “ Planned Parenthood can still continue providing essential procedures , including surgical abortion , and our health centers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that our patients depend on .
Our doors remain open for this care.
” Politicians opposed to reproductive autonomy in both Texas and Ohio have already made sure that access to abortion is frighteningly limited .
A series of draconian measures Texas passed in 2013 led to the closure of half the state ’ s abortion facilities before the laws were deemed unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2016 .
Last spring , Ohio Gov .
Mike DeWine signed a ban on all abortion after six weeks of pregnancy — long before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pregnant .
A federal judge blocked that law from taking effect last summer , describing it as “ unconstitutional on its face.
” Both states require coercive ( and often medically inaccurate ) patient “ counseling ” and a 24-hour waiting period before abortions can be carried out , which means two separate clinic trips .
They also severely limit abortion coverage in health insurance policies and mandate extra , medically unnecessary ultrasound examinations .
Texas bans telemedicine for the provision of medication abortion .
Ninety-three percent of Ohio counties do not have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the state ’ s women live in those counties .
Ninety-six percent of Texas counties , home to 43 percent of the state ’ s women , are without an abortion provider .
“ Abortion care is a time-sensitive service that can not be significantly deferred without profound consequences for women and their families , ” the National Abortion Federation stated .
“ It is an essential health service.
” “ An individual and family decide to end a pregnancy for a complex constellation of reasons that include the impact of pregnancy and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ work , and strained economic circumstances , ” the National Abortion Federation stated on March 17 .
“ These are conditions that do not go away — and are likely heightened — in pandemic conditions .
Denying or deferring abortion care places an immediate burden on patients , their families , and the health care system , and can have profound and lasting consequences.
” Roughly half of all U.S. pregnancies are unplanned and nearly 20 percent of pregnancies end in abortion .
A spokesperson for the Ohio attorney general wrote in an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s actions have not been politically driven .
“ This is not an abortion issue , ” Bethany McCorkle wrote , noting that the office had also sent a letter to a “ urology group that was allegedly performing elective surgeries.
” Nonetheless , it appears that another Texas anti-abortion group , Texas Alliance for Life , is actively seeking to gin up complaints that can be filed with the state health department in a similar effort to shutter abortion clinics across the state .
In a tweet posted Sunday night the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ If you know of abortions performed at abortion facilities anywhere in Texas , please contact us with info and documentation .
”

On Monday afternoon, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton posted a warning to “all licensed health care professionals and all licensed health care facilities, including abortion providers,” that they must “postpone all surgeries and procedures that are not immediately medically necessary.”
The legal opinion came less than 24 hours after Gov. Greg Abbott issued an executive order loosening regulations to help increase capacity in the state’s hospitals. The order, slated to remain in effect until April 21, called for health care providers to postpone “surgeries and procedures that are not immediately medically necessary.”
The order mimics guidance regarding elective surgeries released by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services on March 18. Neither that guidance nor Abbott’s order specifies a list of banned procedures.
Still, Abbott’s order was met with a quick response from the anti-abortion group Texas Right to Life, which declared that the governor’s action would “stop all surgical elective abortions.” The group claimed that the “abortion industry” was partly responsible for worsening conditions for providers on the front lines of the coronavirus epidemic and accused it of “hoarding medical supplies.”
“Texas Right to Life is grateful that the loss of life during the Covid-19 outbreak will be decreased thanks to the halt in abortions,” the group said, also calling for a ban on medication abortion.
Paxton’s warning followed quickly.
In reality, however, Abbott’s order does not mention abortion. The order is designed to help health care professionals stay safe while expanding their ability to provide care, for example, by allowing hospitals to increase patient-room capacity. And while it says providers “shall” halt procedures that are not necessary to “correct a serious medical condition” or prevent “serious adverse medical consequences or death, as determined by the patient’s physician,” it also provides a caveat: It does not apply to any procedure that “performed in accordance with the commonly accepted standard of clinical practice, would not deplete the hospital capacity or the personal protective equipment needed to cope with the Covid-19 disaster.”
Medical experts say abortion fits squarely into the category of procedures that should not be affected by such an order. “Abortion is an essential component of comprehensive health care,” reads a statement released last week by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology, and six other groups representing reproductive health providers. “It is also a time-sensitive service for which a delay of several weeks, or in some cases days, may increase the risks or potentially make it completely inaccessible. The consequences of being unable to obtain an abortion profoundly impact a person’s life, health, and well-being.”
Abbott’s order, primarily an attempt to address hospital-based procedures and free up additional PPE, is being weaponized by anti-abortion groups and politicians trying to further their ideological cause in the midst of a pandemic.
Indeed, it appears that Texas’s anti-abortion crusaders are taking their cues from a controversy playing out in Ohio.
Read Our Complete Coverage The Coronavirus Crisis
In the wake of a March 17 order from Ohio Department of Health Director Amy Acton telling providers that they should end “non-essential surgery,” a lawyer in Attorney General Greg Yost’s office penned a series of letters to abortion providers. The letters, sent out on March 20 and 21, said that the state had received “a complaint that your facility has been performing or continues to offer to perform surgical abortions, which necessarily involve the use of PPE.” The letters demanded that the providers “stop performing non-essential and elective surgical abortion. Non-essential surgical abortions are those that can be delayed without undue risk to the current or future health of a patient.” If the providers failed to comply, “the Department of Health will take all appropriate measures.”
A lawyer for Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio immediately responded to the letter, according to a statement from PPSWO and Planned Parenthood of Greater Ohio, which operate two of the three clinics contacted by the AG’s office. They assured the state that they were complying with the content of Acton’s order. “Abortion is an essential, time-sensitive medical procedure,” the statement reads. Under the order, “Planned Parenthood can still continue providing essential procedures, including surgical abortion, and our health centers continue to offer other health care services that our patients depend on. Our doors remain open for this care.”
Politicians opposed to reproductive autonomy in both Texas and Ohio have already made sure that access to abortion is frighteningly limited. A series of draconian measures Texas passed in 2013 led to the closure of half the state’s abortion facilities before the laws were deemed unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2016. Last spring, Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine signed a ban on all abortion after six weeks of pregnancy — long before many women even know they’re pregnant. A federal judge blocked that law from taking effect last summer, describing it as “unconstitutional on its face.”
Both states require coercive (and often medically inaccurate) patient “counseling” and a 24-hour waiting period before abortions can be carried out, which means two separate clinic trips. They also severely limit abortion coverage in health insurance policies and mandate extra, medically unnecessary ultrasound examinations. Texas bans telemedicine for the provision of medication abortion.
Ninety-three percent of Ohio counties do not have an abortion provider; 55 percent of the state’s women live in those counties. Ninety-six percent of Texas counties, home to 43 percent of the state’s women, are without an abortion provider.
“Abortion care is a time-sensitive service that cannot be significantly deferred without profound consequences for women and their families,” the National Abortion Federation stated. “It is an essential health service.”
“An individual and family decide to end a pregnancy for a complex constellation of reasons that include the impact of pregnancy and birth on their health, ability to work, and strained economic circumstances,” the National Abortion Federation stated on March 17. “These are conditions that do not go away — and are likely heightened — in pandemic conditions. Denying or deferring abortion care places an immediate burden on patients, their families, and the health care system, and can have profound and lasting consequences.” Roughly half of all U.S. pregnancies are unplanned and nearly 20 percent of pregnancies end in abortion.
A spokesperson for the Ohio attorney general wrote in an email to The Intercept that the AG’s actions have not been politically driven. “This is not an abortion issue,” Bethany McCorkle wrote, noting that the office had also sent a letter to a “urology group that was allegedly performing elective surgeries.”
Nonetheless, it appears that another Texas anti-abortion group, Texas Alliance for Life, is actively seeking to gin up complaints that can be filed with the state health department in a similar effort to shutter abortion clinics across the state. In a tweet posted Sunday night the group encouraged its followers to gather intel. “If you know of abortions performed at abortion facilities anywhere in Texas, please contact us with info and documentation.”


theintercept--2020-03-24--Donald Trump Says America’s Ventilator Shortage Was “Unforeseen.” Nothing Could Be

Donald Trump Says America’s Ventilator Shortage Was “Unforeseen.” Nothing Could Be Further From the Truth.

Except , of course , somebody did think that .
A lot of somebodies , actually , and for a very long time .
Almost every federal agency you can imagine has , in fact , warned about shortages — and some have offered specific and sobering estimates of need — for the better part of two decades .
“ We have tremendous numbers of ventilators , but there ’ s never been an instance like this where no matter what you have , it ’ s not enough , ” Trump said on March 18 .
“ It sounds @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a very unforeseen thing .
Nobody ever thought of these numbers.
” A day later , he doubled down , noting that “ nobody in their wildest dreams would have ever thought that we ’ d need tens of thousands of ventilators .
” In recent days , President Donald Trump has repeatedly defended his administration against the suggestion that the government is failing to secure enough ventilators , medical devices that help Covid-19 patients breathe and can save the lives of those suffering serious respiratory distress .
Almost 15 years ago , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Human Services published a 400-page Pandemic Influenza Plan that was nothing if not explicit .
Analyzing models based on flu pandemics in 1957 and 1968 , which suggested that there could be more than 900,000 hospitalizations under a similar scenario , HHS determined that “ demand for inpatient and intensive-care unit ( ICU ) beds and assisted ventilation services could increase by more than 25 % .
” If that happened , the department predicted , “ mechanical ventilation ” would be needed in as many as 64,875 instances .
A more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could result in ventilator shortages which , in turn , could lead to difficult questions about rationing .
How many ventilators might be needed to stave that off ?
A staggering 742,500 .
That startling report was just one of many to sound the alarm .
Most were written in the wake of 2003 SARS outbreak or the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic .
A May 2003 report by the Government Accountability Office noted that “ few hospitals have adequate medical equipment , such as the ventilators that are often needed for respiratory infections @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the number of patients that may result.
” Another GAO report issued a few months later similarly warned that “ few hospitals reported having the equipment and supplies needed to handle a large-scale infectious disease outbreak.
” Half of the 2,000 hospitals surveyed by the GAO had “ for every 100 staffed beds , fewer than 6 ventilators.
” A 2005 Congressional Research Service report echoed those concerns in relation to H1N1 avian flu .
“ If this strain were to launch a pandemic … large numbers of victims may require intensive care @ @ @ @ @ @ @ capacity to provide this level of care , ” the report said .
A July 2006 Congressional Budget Office report warned that the United States had only about 100,000 ventilators , with three-quarters of them in use on any given day .
That number may have remained stable for the last 14 years , according to Vice President Mike Pence , who referenced the “ more than 100,000 ventilators that are in health care facilities and hospitals around America today ” in a briefing on Saturday .
( The New York Times puts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 160,000 . )
Meanwhile , according to the 2006 CBO report , HHS had calculated that “ a severe influenza pandemic like the one in 1918 would require 750,000 ventilators to treat victims.
” In August 2006 , the Defense Department rolled out its “ Implementation Plan for Pandemic Influenza , ” offering both a prescient prediction and important advice : “ Considerable demand for ventilators is likely , especially in the event that the pandemic occurs before a vaccine is available .
Where feasible , consideration should be given to stockpiling instead @ @ @ @ @ @ @ numbers of ventilators.
” A year later , President George W. Bush ’ s White House warned that “ a severe influenza pandemic would place a tremendous burden on the U.S. healthcare system ” and that the “ projected demand for inpatient and intensive care unit beds and mechanical ventilation services would overwhelm ” the health care system .
In November 2007 , the Interior Department issued a “ Pandemic Influenza Plan , ” noting that a pandemic could lead to a shortage of ventilators .
The list of overlooked warnings from federal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration , which predicted that , in the event of a pandemic , “ healthcare facilities can be overwhelmed , creating a shortage of hospital staff , beds , ventilators and other supplies.
” A report by President Barack Obama ’ s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology about the H1N1 flu , pointed out that “ [ d ] uring the peak , 1 or 2 out of every 2,000 Americans might be hospitalized , ” and that patients “ requiring mechanical ventilation … could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , requiring 50 to 100 percent or more of the total ICU capacity available in the United States and placing great stress on a system that normally operates at 80 percent of capacity .
”

In recent days, President Donald Trump has repeatedly defended his administration against the suggestion that the government is failing to secure enough ventilators, medical devices that help Covid-19 patients breathe and can save the lives of those suffering serious respiratory distress.
“We have tremendous numbers of ventilators, but there’s never been an instance like this where no matter what you have, it’s not enough,” Trump said on March 18. “It sounds like a lot, but this is a very unforeseen thing. Nobody ever thought of these numbers.” A day later, he doubled down, noting that “nobody in their wildest dreams would have ever thought that we’d need tens of thousands of ventilators.”
Except, of course, somebody did think that. A lot of somebodies, actually, and for a very long time. Almost every federal agency you can imagine has, in fact, warned about shortages — and some have offered specific and sobering estimates of need — for the better part of two decades.
Almost 15 years ago, for example, the Department of Health and Human Services published a 400-page Pandemic Influenza Plan that was nothing if not explicit. Analyzing models based on flu pandemics in 1957 and 1968, which suggested that there could be more than 900,000 hospitalizations under a similar scenario, HHS determined that “demand for inpatient and intensive-care unit (ICU) beds and assisted ventilation services could increase by more than 25%.” If that happened, the department predicted, “mechanical ventilation” would be needed in as many as 64,875 instances. A more severe pandemic like the flu of 1918-19 could result in ventilator shortages which, in turn, could lead to difficult questions about rationing. How many ventilators might be needed to stave that off? A staggering 742,500.
That startling report was just one of many to sound the alarm. Most were written in the wake of 2003 SARS outbreak or the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic.
A May 2003 report by the Government Accountability Office noted that “few hospitals have adequate medical equipment, such as the ventilators that are often needed for respiratory infections … to handle the large increases in the number of patients that may result.”
Another GAO report issued a few months later similarly warned that “few hospitals reported having the equipment and supplies needed to handle a large-scale infectious disease outbreak.” Half of the 2,000 hospitals surveyed by the GAO had “for every 100 staffed beds, fewer than 6 ventilators.”
A 2005 Congressional Research Service report echoed those concerns in relation to H1N1 avian flu. “If this strain were to launch a pandemic … large numbers of victims may require intensive care and ventilatory support, likely exceeding national capacity to provide this level of care,” the report said.
A July 2006 Congressional Budget Office report warned that the United States had only about 100,000 ventilators, with three-quarters of them in use on any given day. That number may have remained stable for the last 14 years, according to Vice President Mike Pence, who referenced the “more than 100,000 ventilators that are in health care facilities and hospitals around America today” in a briefing on Saturday. (The New York Times puts the number of hospital ventilators at about 160,000.) Meanwhile, according to the 2006 CBO report, HHS had calculated that “a severe influenza pandemic like the one in 1918 would require 750,000 ventilators to treat victims.”
In August 2006, the Defense Department rolled out its “Implementation Plan for Pandemic Influenza,” offering both a prescient prediction and important advice: “Considerable demand for ventilators is likely, especially in the event that the pandemic occurs before a vaccine is available. Where feasible, consideration should be given to stockpiling instead of ‘just-in-time’ acquisition of adequate numbers of ventilators.”
A year later, President George W. Bush’s White House warned that “a severe influenza pandemic would place a tremendous burden on the U.S. healthcare system” and that the “projected demand for inpatient and intensive care unit beds and mechanical ventilation services would overwhelm” the health care system. In November 2007, the Interior Department issued a “Pandemic Influenza Plan,” noting that a pandemic could lead to a shortage of ventilators.
The list of overlooked warnings from federal agencies goes on: A 2009 report by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, which predicted that, in the event of a pandemic, “healthcare facilities can be overwhelmed, creating a shortage of hospital staff, beds, ventilators and other supplies.” A report by President Barack Obama’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology about the H1N1 flu, pointed out that “[d]uring the peak, 1 or 2 out of every 2,000 Americans might be hospitalized,” and that patients “requiring mechanical ventilation … could reach 10 to 25 per 100,000 population, requiring 50 to 100 percent or more of the total ICU capacity available in the United States and placing great stress on a system that normally operates at 80 percent of capacity.”
Read Our Complete Coverage The Coronavirus Crisis
More recently, Trump reportedly ignored increasingly alarming updates from the U.S. intelligence community about the danger and spread of Covid-19.
Trump’s falsehoods about coronavirus preparedness aren’t confined to his contention that “nobody has ever heard of a thing like this,” of course. He has also claimed that automakers including Ford, GM, and Tesla are lending a hand to produce ventilators “fast” to make up the shortfall. It just isn’t true. And ventilators are just the start. Trump has responded similarly to criticism about the alarming shortage of specialized N95 masks needed by health care workers on the front lines of the pandemic.
When asked how doctors in a country as wealthy and powerful as the United States could be left without crucial masks, he resorted to his go-to defense: “This is unprecedented or just about unprecedented. As time goes by, we’re seeing it’s really at a level that nobody would’ve believed. … We started with very few masks. … And now we’re making tens of millions of masks and other things.”
But the need for large stockpiles of masks, like the need for ventilators, has been no secret. “As occurred during the SARS outbreak in Canada, hospitals would especially need N95 particulate respirators to protect medical staff against infection,” according to the 2006 CBO report. “Widely adopted just-in-time practices … leave too small an inventory margin to accommodate the increased demand for supplies that would accompany an influenza pandemic.”