The following is a guest post by my friend Brittany Klein.
The CDC has a long history of playing on trend politics. If no other good comes from the current pandemic maybe COVID 19 will at least shine a light on some of the problems with the CDC and their often ideological motivated overspending for narrow pet projects, as well as the systemic reasons they failed to test people in the midst of a once-in-a-century global pandemic.
The issues at the CDC are not new. Let’s look at another epidemic, AIDS. For almost a decade between the1980s and 1990s, between1500-2000 babies were born a year HIV positive and their mothers were never told. The hospital knew the babies were positive since they secretly tested both baby and mother. Yet the mothers were never informed that they were even tested yet alone that they were HIV positive. And according to then guidelines all of this was on the up and up.
The story was still being actively quashed In 1996 when almost as an oversight the Washington Post ran a tiny piece hinting at a large-scale chilling problem—dying children. The Post noted that: “In recent years, several New York newspapers and magazines have reported the rage and hopelessness of women, many black and Latina, who have discovered for the first time that their very young children are infected with the HIV virus.”They should have told me,” said one furious woman, “so I could have taken care of myself — and him.”
Back then New York State assembly woman Nettie Myerson said: “over one thousand babies in New York State tested positive for AIDS or HIV antibodies every year but medical professionals were not allowed to reveal the results to anyone, including the mother.” For this Myerson became an object of hate among the left and especially with the AIDs community despite her pro-gay positions.
AIDS activists and the then SOGI (sexual orientation gender identity) organizations with the support of the ACLU (they argued privacy) and the CDC (under pressure from activists groups) repeatedly blocked all lifesaving legislation to women and their newborns. A conservative estimate is that AIDS activists, the ACLU and the CDC oversaw the deaths of 20,000 babies and their mothers in New York alone.
“This was going on across the country.” Nettie Myerson said in 1996. She added “ This lethal secrecy, it should be noted, has also been going on in many other states.”
The story made news only briefly in New York, and Washington. An early casualty of silencing more familiar today than it was in 1996.
After The AIDs Baby Bill passed, The Washington Post noted that: “the ACLU has expressed no regrets to certain grieving mothers. But as one of the mothers put it “We should not have been protected to death.”
The AIDS Baby Bill points up some consistent ideological valuesof the CDC and how political pressure, cultural trends lead to choices, and guidelines that are not in the interest of public health. They used the legal claim of “privacy” to leverage laws that killed women and children.
Nobody has any idea how many women and babies were denied access treatment. They were not tracked by design.
To put it in perspective, the now famous Tuskegee study pales in comparison to the lives lost before the AIDS Baby Bill. Congress found Tuskegee Study to be “ethically unjustified” and the victims and survivors were paid damages and reparations. In the case of the AIDS baby Bill the victims are thrown down the rainbow“equality” memory hole.
After almost a decade since the problem had begun, when the AIDS Baby Bill in NY finally passed, State Rep Nettie Myerson said: “Every infected HIV baby will finally be able to access health care and treatment that really can prolong and enhance their lives. And under my law, infants who are not infected will be protected from getting infected through breast feeding. And if treatment is early enough, an infant with the virus may be able to escape AIDS. Since infected newborns now will qualify for the quality of treatment that adults with AIDS rightfully demand, one would think that AIDS activists would have fought for the infected infants all along. But they have not.”
The American Thinker noted last year that: “The NIH admits that HIV/AIDS funding at 10% of the entire budget year after year is disproportionate relative to the impact. . .” How does this break down now in dollars? At the federal level NIH spent 638,000,000 in 2016 for Alzheimers.
They spent 3.1 Billion on AIDS, an increase of 100 million from the year before. Given that blood supply and blood products no longer pose a heath risk for the population AIDS is pretty much 99% avoidable. In 2016, 15,807 died from AIDS and an estimated 700,000 died with Alzheimers. COVID 19 has a high rate of contagion and is transmitted through a cough or a sneeze making it far from avoidable.
There’s some real problems now. The week of February 23, the CDC only tested 20 people for COVID-19. The media claimed this was the result of Trump’s budget cuts. It begs the question: how badly do those with power and those looking for power want to smear The White House and the administration? People need to pay attention. The Senate hearings with the CDC exposed the budget cuts were cuts mostly for construction on the CDC campus. The CDC like the rest of us have known since December 2019 that this virus would be here. Moving forward, what happened with testing may be the first in what will be a list of questions.
Some illness are political power for some groups. Special treatment coexists alongside deadly neglect. How uneven and how political does it continue to be? AIDS is no longer categorized as a fatal disease. Yet by law, New York State will be paying up to 70% HIV-infected people’s housing expense for a normal life expediency. No actually fatal disease in NY state provides such financial benefits. Not even people including children suffering from actually fatal diseases are provided for comparably.
How will the CDC bureaucratic agendas inform guidelines? That will decide who lives and who does not just as it has in the past.
The CDC plans to address the issues in testing for COVID 19. Certainly by today’s standard the story of The AIDS Baby Bill deserves to be filed alongside the Tusgee experiment. We can yet again consider the indifference to human life and roil over the stunning hypocrisy of slogans like“Silence is Death”.
Nettie Myerson was not wrong when she called the law that gay activists, the CDC and the ACLU fought to keep “cruel and irrational.” Will that same cruel and irrational pattern reemerge in the CORONA 19 crisis?
Why bring this up now? Well, the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. The CDC and activists alike needed a law passed otherwise they would have continued to deny women and their children access to medication and treatment.
The Chinese found that antivirals, some used for AIDS, have shown promise in treating COVID 19. Do we have wonder that over the past several weeks a wave of prescriptions increased the dosages as a way to stockpile a few months supply? This could create a shortage of widely needed medication. Representatives of the CDC issued statements about “panic”. One piece of advice was that people with prescriptions fill them . . . in case. Did that also mean that doctors should place triple dosages “on paper” to ensure some have a personal supply? Given the concern about anticipated medications shortages, it would be remiss to not monitor supplies. How bad could the CDC et al make Trump look then?
State and city public health departments need to be watchful for unusual and excessive dispensing of certain drugs in order to protect the public from running out and hoarding. They need make sure that treatment is not denied again because of the power of some groups. Does a nearly decade long death policy, that LGB activists, the CDC and the ACLU fought furiously to preserve fly in the face of anything the average person think of as protecting the public in times of a health crisis?