posted by Damozel |
Hurray! Tired of hints and names unnamed, I rejoice to see right here in WaPo the smiling face of the official who (allegedly!) blocked Dr. Richard Carmona's 2006 report that "called on Americans to help tackle global health problems"(Washington Post). I am glad to put a face to some of Dr. Carmona's allegations. ( Ex-Surgeon General Dr. Richard Carmona: "Muzzled." (Updated!)) And a very nice face it is, bearing an apparent resemblance to Jude Law's.
My colleague, Crux, has already provided the necessary backstory on young William Steiger (Attacking Healthcare Experts). Dr. Carmona has said that the report he commissioned, "Call to Action on Global Health" did not have the requisite "political twist" and was for this reason suppressed. Carmona didn't name names, but he did say that "as he fought to release the document, he was "called in and again admonished . . . via a senior official who said, 'You don't get it.' " He said a senior official told him that "this will be a political document, or it will not be released." (Washington Post).
Dr. Steiger---a specialist in Latin American studies and education (worthy!)---- told The Washington Post that political considerations did not delay the report. (Washington Post). He simply didn't think it was sufficiently well written or well-analyzed and he feared that the data wasn't up to date. (Washington Post) In other words, he didn't want it to go out till it met his (rightly, I'm sure) exacting standards of clarity, accuracy and coherence; it was "often inaccurate or out-of-date and it lacked analysis and focus." (Washington Post) Not on his watch!
Glancing quickly through the draft report, I must say it doesn't seem inferior in style and syntax and analysis to other government reports I've seen, but I am willing to defer to Dr. Steiger on these points; after all, he's the head of the Global Health Office and a specialist in education so he must know.
Dr. Steiger confirmed that he "sharply disagreed with Carmona on the issue of how much the report should promote Bush Administration policies." (Washington Post) Dr. Steiger just wanted the taxpayers (i.e., you and me) reading the report on global health challenges to "know what their generosity is already doing in helping to solve those challenges." (Washington Post) So I'm still wondering: Where is it now? Surely it wouldn't take a whole year for them to list all the ways we're already combating the global health challenges which Dr. Carmona's report enumerated?
Sadly, the Administration seems to be running low on writing/editing specialists because the report---which I'm guessing we taxpayers financed (?)--- is still not in satisfactory form to meet the taxpayers' needs. Couldn't they just add in the bits that show all the good things the Administration has accomplished through the taxpayers' generosity? I guess I don't understand why it's still being held up (?) An HHS spokewoman told WaPo that the 2006 report is still "under development." (Washington Post) Come on, Global Health Office, let's get our thumbs out!
After all, who paid for it? And when I'm feeling anxious or blue, there's nothing I like better than curling up with the taxpayer-funded report of a government agency. It sounds really interesting, but who wants to read a draft report which the GHO's spokesman says is "often inaccurate or out-of-date and it lacked analysis and focus"? In terms of substance, it definitely contains much of interest to this generous taxpayer:
The draft report itself, in language linking public health problems with violence and other social ills, says "we cannot overstate . . . that problems in remote parts of the globe can no longer be ignored. Diseases that Americans once read about as affecting people in regions . . . most of us would never visit are now capable of reaching us directly. The hunger, disease, and death resulting from poor food and nutrition create social and political instability . . . and that instability may spread to other nations as people migrate to survive."
In 65 pages, the report charts trends in infectious and chronic disease; reviews efforts to curb AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria; calls for the careful monitoring of public health to safeguard against bioterrorism; and explains the importance of proper nutrition, childhood immunizations and clean air and water, among other topics. Its underlying message is that disease and suffering do not respect political boundaries in an era of globalization and mass population movements.
The report was compiled by government and private public-health experts from various organizations, including the National Institutes of Health, the Catholic Medical Mission Board and several universities(Washington Post)
See there: that's good, stirring stuff, guaranteed to take a person's mind off her petty troubles and get it well and truly focused on the terrifying big picture. Which is a good thing, of course. Forewarned is forearmed, etc.
But I wouldn't want to pressure the GHO. Since "Steiger's global health office provided the funding and staff to lead the effort because the surgeon general's office has no budget and few staff members of its own," it's fine with me if Dr. Steiger's minions want to polish it up for public consumption. But while I always think any piece of writing can benefit from a good blue pencilling by an alert editor, if they wait much longer the information really will be out of date! It will definitely be really interesting to see how the final product compares with the draft report.
How bad can it be? Three people who worked on an initial draft back in 2005 said---well, they would, wouldn't they?----"it received largely positive reviews from global health experts both inside and outside the government, prompting wide optimism that the report would be publicly released that year." (Washington Post).
But a former HHS official, Richard Stalling, who oversaw the draft report says that ""Steiger always had his political hat on.... I don't think public health was what his vision was. As far as the international office was concerned, it was a political office of the secretary. . . . What he was looking for, and in general what he was always looking for, was, 'How do we promote the policies and the programs of the administration?' This report didn't focus on that.""(Washington Post).
Is this unfair? "Public health advocates have accused Steiger of political meddling before."(Washington Post). When I googled Steiger's name, I found this June 2004 letter from Henry A. Waxman among the House Oversight Documents. It's addressed to The Honorable Tommy G. Thompson , then the Secretary of Health and Human Services, now a candidate for the presidency.
I am writing to urge you to rescind a new policy that politicizes the process of providing
the expert advice of U.S. scientists to the international community. I have obtained a letter from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) that bars the World Health Organization (WHO) from asking experts in the U.S. government to serve as scientific or technical advisors. Instead, WHO must now ask the HHS Office of Global Health, a political office, to pick which federal employee, if any, can provide assistance. This unprecedented process will delay and politicize cooperation on a range of critical public health issues.
The new policy is the latest in a series of actions that restrict the participation of U.S.
scientists in international health activities. This spring, HHS sharply limited the number of its scientists participating in the International AIDS Conference. According to conference
organizers, this decision led to the cancellation of more than 40 scientific presentations on such key topics as preventing HIV infection, countering the stigma of AIDS, and monitoring for HIV resistance....
The Administration also withdrew at the last moment from a major conference on global
health held in Washington from June 1st to June 4th. HHS's withdrawal came in the wake of misleading ideological accusations from conservative groups, and represented the first time the United States has not supported the conference in 30 years. The trend of increasing political control over scientific exchange is fundamentally misguided. The Administration should not pander to narrow political and ideological interests at a time when global health collaboration can improve the health of millions of people around the world....
I have obtained a recent letter to WHO from William Steiger, Director of the Office of Global Health and Special Assistant to the HHS Secretary for International Affairs. This letter, a copy of which is attached, states that your agency is changing its policy on WHO access to experts.
WHO had until now been able to invite specific HHS officials to serve as short-term advisors or technical consultants. Under the new policy, WHO must give the HHS Office of Global Health "the terms of reference and other relevant information for each consultation," and may only "suggest" specific experts that the Office "will be pleased to consider."Th e Office of Global Health will then, along with other HHS divisions, select an expert "who can best serve both of our organizations." Director Steiger concludes by reminding WHO that all HHS experts represent the U.S. government "at all times" and are required to "advocate U.S. Government policies."
This policy is unprecedented. For the first time, political appointees will routinely be
able to keep the top experts in their field from responding to WHO requests for guidance on
international health issues. This is a raw attempt to exert political control over scientists and
scientific evidence in the area of international health. [pdf file; html version (emphasis added]
The "Union of Concerned Scientists" likewise expressed concern.
So, there you go. The Global Health Office really is all about the politics. I for one blame Dr. Carmona for asking them to fund his report. What was he thinking? On June 2006, one of his aides sent the following email:
"While we believe the subject matter of the draft is important, we disagree with the style, tone and messaging.... We believe this document should be focused tightly on the Administration's major priorities in global health so the American public can understand better why these issues should be important to them. As such, the draft should be a policy statement, albeit one that is evidence based and draws on the best available science." (Washington Post).
In the meantime, Dr. Steiger clearly still isn't satisfied that the report is doing its bit to show that our Administration is on the ball where World Health is concerned. Actual experts in the field are impatient with this, lacking---as they surely do---Steiger's expertise in assessing which science is good for the Bush Administration and which is not.
"I fought for my last year to try to get it out and couldn't get it past the initial vetting," Carmona testified earlier this month. "I refused to release it [with the requested changes] . . . because it would tarnish the office of the surgeon general when our colleagues saw us taking a political stand."
Thomas Novotny, a former assistant surgeon general who ran the global health office before Steiger, said, "It's embarrassing, just ridiculous that the report hasn't come out." Novotny, who served at HHS in the Clinton and in both Bush administrations, said that many nations have made health issues central to their foreign relations and trade policies, but that the United States has been reluctant to embrace that idea.
"It made perfect sense for the surgeon general to take up the issue because the U.S. used to be a leader in this field," Novotny said. "For the nation's top doctor to be unable to release the report shows that leadership is gone." (Washington Post).
Which just shows what happens when you let an assistant surgeon general run the Global Health Office; medical people---like Carmona---just don't get it. What's good for the Bush Administration is good for the world. You can't have one without the other!
P.S. The Crux does not agree.
PREVIOUS BN-POLITICS NOTES
- Ex-Surgeon General Dr. Richard Carmona: "Muzzled." (Updated!)
- The Muzzling of Carmona: Other Reactions
- Attacking Healthcare Experts: When will Bush's Spokespeople Learn?
RELATED ARTICLES
- Christopher Lee and Marc Kaufman, Bush Aide Blocked Report (Washington Post)
- Kevin Freking, Carmona Says Administration Muzzled Him (Washington Post)
- Ex-Surgeon General Says White House Hushed Him (Washington Post)
BACKSTORY
- Draft Report, The Surgeon General's Call to Action on Global Health (at WaPo)
- United States Department of Health and Human Services (Biography of Vice Admiral Richard H. Carmona, M.D., M.P.H., F.A.C.S.)
- Dave Kopel & Timothy Wheeler , This One's a General (National Review Online)
- HHS Seeks Right of Approval Over Experts on WHO Health Panels (Union of Concerned Scientists)
- Committee on Oversight and Government Reform (Henry A. Waxman, Chair)
- Tommy G. Thompson (19th Secretary of HHS)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/28/AR2007072801420.html?wpisrc=newsletter
Comments