The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to
COVID-19, broadly construed, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Deborah Birx article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
Indef block
|
---|
This article is being aggressively targeted by trolls motivated by hatred of accomplished women and/or by hatred of the White House. ChulaOne ( talk) 23:08, 20 March 2020 (UTC) I noticed that there's a paucity of reliably sourced info on this obviously notable person. The last deletions have been by an IP editor, without explanation. They weren't the first. A prior editor likely is a relative, hence possible COI problems. I think because of the legitimate notability of the subject and her vaulting into the spotlight this past week, the article should remain, but it sure needs work. It might need protection as well. Should it be tagged? Activist ( talk) 11:32, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
|
This page should not be speedily deleted because... (your reason here) -- 2601:246:5800:9250:AD35:C34B:2428:8178 ( talk) 23:40, 16 March 2020 (UTC) Consider having article name be Deborah Birx instead.
It appears that the inclusion of the information re: Dr. Birx's participation in COVID-19 control is controversial. Specifically, editors have been removing a paragraph which describes Dr. Birx presenting a flowchart while President Trump made statements that were later shown to be untruthful. Apart from the issue which arises from removing information which is reliably sourced (for what appear to be political reasons, not "fixing damage caused by trolls" or "fake news"), I must point out that the deletion of the article's final paragraph has the effect of breaking the reference ":0" which is used elsewhere in the article. Perhaps we can build consensus as to the wording of this article's text? RexSueciae ( talk) 02:06, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
@ MelanieN:As mentioned by Rex above, the current version of the article and the version that ChulaOne keeps reverting to breaks the ":0: reference. Would it be possible for you to restore to a stable version to fix this? Also, in the RPP you said that you fully protected this page due to a lack of talk page discussion. However, it's not Rex's fault that ChulaOne hasn't responded. In fact Chula continued to revert without responding to Rex. So I feel like the full page protection has unintentionally rewarded disruptive editing. Bait30 Talk 2 me pls? 03:38, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
I feel like we're going to much into whether or not the Google thing turned out to be true. I feel like both sides are given WP:UNDUE weight to the event. Instead, I feel like a good compromise would be to mention how her announcement led to some sort of miscommunication between Google and the White House. That way we avoid giving undue weight to the Jared Kushner poster and to the website itself. Bait30 Talk 2 me pls? 23:40, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
ChulaOne is indeffed NOTHERE. I have copyedited, cleaned up citations, and cited the uncited. I am unclear what else is being requested here. The article is clean, and I am not clear what the remaining problem is. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 18:44, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved ( non-admin closure) ~SS49~ {talk} 12:12, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
Deborah L. Birx → Deborah Birx – This should be changed from "Deborah L. Birx" to "Deborah Birx" per WP:CONCISE. Another editor has made the argument that it shouldn't be moved due to the fact that reliable sources refer to her with the middle initial. However, I can find just as many reliable sources that refer to her without the initial( [4], [5], [6]) compared to with the initial ( [7], [8], [9]). Also, some of these "reliable sources" that were used to revert the page move are not WP:INDEPENDENT. That is why I believe that WP:CONCISE takes precedent over WP:MIDDLE Bait30 Talk 2 me pls? 02:17, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Deborah L. Birx has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Requesting edit to the first reference on this page and change it to the following:
<ref name=":0">{{cite news |title=Pence announces White House coronavirus response coordinator |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2020/02/27/coronavirus-live-updates/#link-GQ4MEYISNNARPHRS5RR4VZNMYY |accessdate=27 February 2020 |publisher=Washington Post |date=27 February 2020}}</ref>
Recent attempts by certain editors to delete content from this page resulting in their deletion of the above, causing the reference which remained on the page to break. Perhaps the most elegant way to repair the broken <ref></ref> tags would be to restore this page to revision 945943284 by User:Bait30. I have attempted to seek consensus on this issue ( [11] [12]) and stepped back to avoid falling afoul of WP:3RR, but my attempts were ignored. I do think that the edit summaries demonstrate which version is closest to community consensus.
Regardless of the composition of the final paragraph, though, that first reference on the page is broken and probably ought to be fixed. Thank you. RexSueciae ( talk) 03:37, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
I have restored the reference. You all need to discuss whether to include the disputed material or not. -- MelanieN ( talk) 15:37, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Deborah L. Birx has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change the lead sentence from:
Also, align [[File:Vice President Pence meets with the White House Coronavirus Response Coordinator (49615654717).jpg]] to the left Bait30 Talk 2 me pls? 17:11, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
Sources
|
---|
The image cannot be aligned to the left without breaching MOS and causing sandwiched text. More content would need to be added to balance the image (which I don't believe is helpful anyway). SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 18:41, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
There are a lot of problems with the citations on this article. There is a lot of WP:PRIMARY and a lack of WP:CS1 templates. I've even found a dead link. Could some editors help out with this? Thanks. Bait30 Talk 2 me pls? 05:09, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
Done (but they weren't that bad). Several things need to be noted here. Citation templates are NOT required, period, and the article did NOT originally use them. Per WP:CITEVAR, I did not have to convert all citations to templates; we could have stuck with the original style, and if the original editor of the article asks for that, I will convert them back. Please do not insist on changing citation style unnecessarily; see WP:CITEVAR. And the use of one primary source to "what Birx said herself" is fine. And finally, when you find a dead link, archive.org can usually cough it up. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 19:41, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
this FACT does not even exist in article
Dr. Deborah Birx Tells Select Subcommittee that “Dangerous Ideas” Undermined Trump Administration Coronavirus Response — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.38.155.134 ( talk) 22:59, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
This series of edits introduced classic WP:SYNTH, WP:OR; the sources that claim to contradict Birx do not even mention here. I have rewritten and added it to the correct place in the article (we don't need to concoct a "controversy" where the sources have not), but the citations still need be formatted from bare URLs. [14] BrooklynBen reverted without discussion [15] on an article that is under discretionary sanctions. @ El C: could you please notify the editor. BrooklynBen, this article is under sanctions that I suggest you read; you might want to self-revert as you have introduced original research into a WP:BLP. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 12:57, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
BrooklynBen, you need to discuss your changes here in a substantive way, and you need to observe
WP:ONUS — especially the part that reads: the onus to achieve consensus for inclusion is upon those seeking to include disputed content
. Otherwise, you risk sanctions, including but not limited to a ban
from this page or even the
entire topic area. Thanks in advance for your close attention.
El_C 15:13, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
There are three references to Deborah "Brix" in the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ripleymj ( talk • contribs) 00:43, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
Is some type of disambiguation page needed for Birx and Deborah Birx? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro ( talk) 21:06, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
S T C Jones, it is unclear what you are attempting to do. Your edits introduced some good changes, but along with those good changes, you removed some citations to what was a fully cited article, created short stubby paragraphs with WP:PROSELINE, switched the ref names to long convoluted names, converted prosified awards to a list (which is less desirable), and switched date formats on an article about an American subject (mdy) to international dates (dmy). I corrected some of those issues, and added citation needed tags in places where you added uncited info, and cleaned up the dreadful formatting in the Selected works list. But, with this edit, you removed all of those corrections. Could you explain? I see you are a very new editor, and putting up an entire draft, rewriting an article to your own style, is a strange way to start. If I could understand your aims, I might be able to help. But now we are back to uncited text, incorrect date format, and short stubby paras we you basically just wholesale reverted my selective corrections to your edits. Also, please review the discretionary sanctions on this article; you should never be wholesale reverting, and certainly not here. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 09:20, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
Brianna Keilar calls out Dr. Birx's post-Trump reputation rehab tour on CNN. Ikan Kekek ( talk) 06:11, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
The first sentence currently includes "...an American physician and diplomat as well as a quack...". Is this an appropriate NPOV?
On one hand, many of her statements and orders as the Coronavirus Response Coordinator were untrue, misleading, evasive, or contradictory.
On the other hand, quack suggests an attempt to profit; there's no evidence for that by Birx. There's no evidence that these were her true professional opinions; to the contrary, it appears that she had no freedom to express such opinions under Trump. Nor did she spread discredited information in her prior (e.g. Obama's Global AIDS Coordinator) or later (e.g. George W. Bush Institute) roles. Thus, the term quack is not appropriate.
My suggested wording for the opening sentence uses the term discredited instead:
Deborah Leah Birx (born April 4, 1956) is an American physician and diplomat who served as the discredited White House Coronavirus Response Coordinator under President Donald Trump from 2020 to 2021.
173.25.226.55 ( talk) 16:28, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
Science magazine had a series of long articles, mostly critical, about Birx' management of the covid-19 data system. This has become particularly important, because, according to an editorial by cardiologist Eric Topol Science 375:245 and an article in the Washington Post ("White House frustrates grow over health chief Becerra's handling of pandemic"), even under Biden the U.S. still doesn't have a tracking system capable of providing basic information such as hospitalizations and deaths among the vaccinated.
Federal system for tracking hospital beds and COVID-19 patients provides questionable data
HHS Protect data, which influence how pandemic supplies and support are allocated, conflict with state or other federal data, Science has found
BY CHARLES PILLER
Science
29 NOV 2020
CDC had a long-running, if imperfect, hospital data tracking system in place when the pandemic started, but the Trump administration and White House Coronavirus Task Force Coordinator Deborah Birx angered many in the agency when they shifted much of the responsibility for COVID-19 hospital data in July to private contractors. TeleTracking Technologies Inc., a small Pittsburgh-based company, now collects most of the data, while Palantir, based in Denver, helps manage the database. At the time, hundreds of public health organizations and experts warned the change could gravely disrupt the government's ability to understand the pandemic and mount a response.
The feared data chaos now seems a reality, evident when recent HHS Protect figures are compared with public information from states or data documented by another hospital tracking system run by the HHS Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR).....
https://www.science.org/content/article/inside-story-how-trumps-covid-19-coordinator-undermined-cdc
Illustration: Deborah Birx and Donald Trump destroy the base of a rocky structure, atop of which stands a group of scientists
UNDERMINING CDC
Deborah Birx, President Donald Trump's COVID-19 coordinator, helped shake the foundation of a premier public health agency.
BY CHARLES PILLER
Science
14 OCT 2020
On the morning of 13 July, more than 20 COVID-19 experts from across the U.S. government assembled in a conference room at the Department of Health and Human Services, steps from the Capitol. The group conferred on how best to gather key data on available beds and supplies of medicine and protective gear from thousands of hospitals. Around the table, masks concealed their expressions, but with COVID-19 cases surging out of control in some parts of the country, their grave mood was unmistakable, say two people who were in the room.
The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to
COVID-19, broadly construed, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Deborah Birx article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
Indef block
|
---|
This article is being aggressively targeted by trolls motivated by hatred of accomplished women and/or by hatred of the White House. ChulaOne ( talk) 23:08, 20 March 2020 (UTC) I noticed that there's a paucity of reliably sourced info on this obviously notable person. The last deletions have been by an IP editor, without explanation. They weren't the first. A prior editor likely is a relative, hence possible COI problems. I think because of the legitimate notability of the subject and her vaulting into the spotlight this past week, the article should remain, but it sure needs work. It might need protection as well. Should it be tagged? Activist ( talk) 11:32, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
|
This page should not be speedily deleted because... (your reason here) -- 2601:246:5800:9250:AD35:C34B:2428:8178 ( talk) 23:40, 16 March 2020 (UTC) Consider having article name be Deborah Birx instead.
It appears that the inclusion of the information re: Dr. Birx's participation in COVID-19 control is controversial. Specifically, editors have been removing a paragraph which describes Dr. Birx presenting a flowchart while President Trump made statements that were later shown to be untruthful. Apart from the issue which arises from removing information which is reliably sourced (for what appear to be political reasons, not "fixing damage caused by trolls" or "fake news"), I must point out that the deletion of the article's final paragraph has the effect of breaking the reference ":0" which is used elsewhere in the article. Perhaps we can build consensus as to the wording of this article's text? RexSueciae ( talk) 02:06, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
@ MelanieN:As mentioned by Rex above, the current version of the article and the version that ChulaOne keeps reverting to breaks the ":0: reference. Would it be possible for you to restore to a stable version to fix this? Also, in the RPP you said that you fully protected this page due to a lack of talk page discussion. However, it's not Rex's fault that ChulaOne hasn't responded. In fact Chula continued to revert without responding to Rex. So I feel like the full page protection has unintentionally rewarded disruptive editing. Bait30 Talk 2 me pls? 03:38, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
I feel like we're going to much into whether or not the Google thing turned out to be true. I feel like both sides are given WP:UNDUE weight to the event. Instead, I feel like a good compromise would be to mention how her announcement led to some sort of miscommunication between Google and the White House. That way we avoid giving undue weight to the Jared Kushner poster and to the website itself. Bait30 Talk 2 me pls? 23:40, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
ChulaOne is indeffed NOTHERE. I have copyedited, cleaned up citations, and cited the uncited. I am unclear what else is being requested here. The article is clean, and I am not clear what the remaining problem is. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 18:44, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved ( non-admin closure) ~SS49~ {talk} 12:12, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
Deborah L. Birx → Deborah Birx – This should be changed from "Deborah L. Birx" to "Deborah Birx" per WP:CONCISE. Another editor has made the argument that it shouldn't be moved due to the fact that reliable sources refer to her with the middle initial. However, I can find just as many reliable sources that refer to her without the initial( [4], [5], [6]) compared to with the initial ( [7], [8], [9]). Also, some of these "reliable sources" that were used to revert the page move are not WP:INDEPENDENT. That is why I believe that WP:CONCISE takes precedent over WP:MIDDLE Bait30 Talk 2 me pls? 02:17, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Deborah L. Birx has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Requesting edit to the first reference on this page and change it to the following:
<ref name=":0">{{cite news |title=Pence announces White House coronavirus response coordinator |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2020/02/27/coronavirus-live-updates/#link-GQ4MEYISNNARPHRS5RR4VZNMYY |accessdate=27 February 2020 |publisher=Washington Post |date=27 February 2020}}</ref>
Recent attempts by certain editors to delete content from this page resulting in their deletion of the above, causing the reference which remained on the page to break. Perhaps the most elegant way to repair the broken <ref></ref> tags would be to restore this page to revision 945943284 by User:Bait30. I have attempted to seek consensus on this issue ( [11] [12]) and stepped back to avoid falling afoul of WP:3RR, but my attempts were ignored. I do think that the edit summaries demonstrate which version is closest to community consensus.
Regardless of the composition of the final paragraph, though, that first reference on the page is broken and probably ought to be fixed. Thank you. RexSueciae ( talk) 03:37, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
I have restored the reference. You all need to discuss whether to include the disputed material or not. -- MelanieN ( talk) 15:37, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Deborah L. Birx has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change the lead sentence from:
Also, align [[File:Vice President Pence meets with the White House Coronavirus Response Coordinator (49615654717).jpg]] to the left Bait30 Talk 2 me pls? 17:11, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
Sources
|
---|
The image cannot be aligned to the left without breaching MOS and causing sandwiched text. More content would need to be added to balance the image (which I don't believe is helpful anyway). SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 18:41, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
There are a lot of problems with the citations on this article. There is a lot of WP:PRIMARY and a lack of WP:CS1 templates. I've even found a dead link. Could some editors help out with this? Thanks. Bait30 Talk 2 me pls? 05:09, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
Done (but they weren't that bad). Several things need to be noted here. Citation templates are NOT required, period, and the article did NOT originally use them. Per WP:CITEVAR, I did not have to convert all citations to templates; we could have stuck with the original style, and if the original editor of the article asks for that, I will convert them back. Please do not insist on changing citation style unnecessarily; see WP:CITEVAR. And the use of one primary source to "what Birx said herself" is fine. And finally, when you find a dead link, archive.org can usually cough it up. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 19:41, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
this FACT does not even exist in article
Dr. Deborah Birx Tells Select Subcommittee that “Dangerous Ideas” Undermined Trump Administration Coronavirus Response — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.38.155.134 ( talk) 22:59, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
This series of edits introduced classic WP:SYNTH, WP:OR; the sources that claim to contradict Birx do not even mention here. I have rewritten and added it to the correct place in the article (we don't need to concoct a "controversy" where the sources have not), but the citations still need be formatted from bare URLs. [14] BrooklynBen reverted without discussion [15] on an article that is under discretionary sanctions. @ El C: could you please notify the editor. BrooklynBen, this article is under sanctions that I suggest you read; you might want to self-revert as you have introduced original research into a WP:BLP. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 12:57, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
BrooklynBen, you need to discuss your changes here in a substantive way, and you need to observe
WP:ONUS — especially the part that reads: the onus to achieve consensus for inclusion is upon those seeking to include disputed content
. Otherwise, you risk sanctions, including but not limited to a ban
from this page or even the
entire topic area. Thanks in advance for your close attention.
El_C 15:13, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
There are three references to Deborah "Brix" in the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ripleymj ( talk • contribs) 00:43, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
Is some type of disambiguation page needed for Birx and Deborah Birx? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro ( talk) 21:06, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
S T C Jones, it is unclear what you are attempting to do. Your edits introduced some good changes, but along with those good changes, you removed some citations to what was a fully cited article, created short stubby paragraphs with WP:PROSELINE, switched the ref names to long convoluted names, converted prosified awards to a list (which is less desirable), and switched date formats on an article about an American subject (mdy) to international dates (dmy). I corrected some of those issues, and added citation needed tags in places where you added uncited info, and cleaned up the dreadful formatting in the Selected works list. But, with this edit, you removed all of those corrections. Could you explain? I see you are a very new editor, and putting up an entire draft, rewriting an article to your own style, is a strange way to start. If I could understand your aims, I might be able to help. But now we are back to uncited text, incorrect date format, and short stubby paras we you basically just wholesale reverted my selective corrections to your edits. Also, please review the discretionary sanctions on this article; you should never be wholesale reverting, and certainly not here. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 09:20, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
Brianna Keilar calls out Dr. Birx's post-Trump reputation rehab tour on CNN. Ikan Kekek ( talk) 06:11, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
The first sentence currently includes "...an American physician and diplomat as well as a quack...". Is this an appropriate NPOV?
On one hand, many of her statements and orders as the Coronavirus Response Coordinator were untrue, misleading, evasive, or contradictory.
On the other hand, quack suggests an attempt to profit; there's no evidence for that by Birx. There's no evidence that these were her true professional opinions; to the contrary, it appears that she had no freedom to express such opinions under Trump. Nor did she spread discredited information in her prior (e.g. Obama's Global AIDS Coordinator) or later (e.g. George W. Bush Institute) roles. Thus, the term quack is not appropriate.
My suggested wording for the opening sentence uses the term discredited instead:
Deborah Leah Birx (born April 4, 1956) is an American physician and diplomat who served as the discredited White House Coronavirus Response Coordinator under President Donald Trump from 2020 to 2021.
173.25.226.55 ( talk) 16:28, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
Science magazine had a series of long articles, mostly critical, about Birx' management of the covid-19 data system. This has become particularly important, because, according to an editorial by cardiologist Eric Topol Science 375:245 and an article in the Washington Post ("White House frustrates grow over health chief Becerra's handling of pandemic"), even under Biden the U.S. still doesn't have a tracking system capable of providing basic information such as hospitalizations and deaths among the vaccinated.
Federal system for tracking hospital beds and COVID-19 patients provides questionable data
HHS Protect data, which influence how pandemic supplies and support are allocated, conflict with state or other federal data, Science has found
BY CHARLES PILLER
Science
29 NOV 2020
CDC had a long-running, if imperfect, hospital data tracking system in place when the pandemic started, but the Trump administration and White House Coronavirus Task Force Coordinator Deborah Birx angered many in the agency when they shifted much of the responsibility for COVID-19 hospital data in July to private contractors. TeleTracking Technologies Inc., a small Pittsburgh-based company, now collects most of the data, while Palantir, based in Denver, helps manage the database. At the time, hundreds of public health organizations and experts warned the change could gravely disrupt the government's ability to understand the pandemic and mount a response.
The feared data chaos now seems a reality, evident when recent HHS Protect figures are compared with public information from states or data documented by another hospital tracking system run by the HHS Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR).....
https://www.science.org/content/article/inside-story-how-trumps-covid-19-coordinator-undermined-cdc
Illustration: Deborah Birx and Donald Trump destroy the base of a rocky structure, atop of which stands a group of scientists
UNDERMINING CDC
Deborah Birx, President Donald Trump's COVID-19 coordinator, helped shake the foundation of a premier public health agency.
BY CHARLES PILLER
Science
14 OCT 2020
On the morning of 13 July, more than 20 COVID-19 experts from across the U.S. government assembled in a conference room at the Department of Health and Human Services, steps from the Capitol. The group conferred on how best to gather key data on available beds and supplies of medicine and protective gear from thousands of hospitals. Around the table, masks concealed their expressions, but with COVID-19 cases surging out of control in some parts of the country, their grave mood was unmistakable, say two people who were in the room.