Recent searches
Search options
Administered by:
️(he/him) The HICPAC meeting that was November 14/15, 2024 downgraded their recommendations.
People's CDC documents this: https://peoplescdc.substack.com/p/cdc-hicpac-nov-2024-meeting-concludes
Link to the HICPAC meeting: https://www.cdc.gov/hicpac/php/meeting-materials/index.html
The very first question makes it clear HICPAC does not consider N95 or higher necessary for airborne diseases. This goes against the science on airborne diseases.
I really don't know how to put this any other way. This is a downgrade from what CDC currently says. #Mask #Airborne #Covid
Now let's look at the guantlet article from my thread: https://disabled.social/@Aaidanbird/113614057834422601
The author writes: "Now, HICPAC is continuing to insist that surgical-style masks are equivalent to N-95 respirators as it pushes forward with its draft guidelines. This decision is emblematic of its commitment to preserving ineffective droplet-based infection control in spite of new information and evidence."
Then they discuss WHO as an example of this bucking the science in favor of the 'cost-saving.'
The author of the guantlet then examines what the HICPAC is doing with WHO's template. You can read here: "Why would HICPAC equate surgical masks with respirators? HICPAC’s draft was not designed to protect patients; it was designed to protect the status quo and allow hospitals to continue to infect patients with COVID and other airborne diseases."
The CDC's pushback is likely only because of our upcry. HICPAC however is still PART OF THE CDC. It's the advising committee.
The guantlet author then points out results of November meeting:
"However, despite months of pushback, the tears of suffering and scared patients, the word of the experts who design respirators, as well as the input of occupational safety leaders, HICPAC remains unmoved on the subject.
In a series of votes held last month, HICPAC stuck to their guns. Lisa Baum of the New York State Nurses’ Association was the sole dissenting member of the committee, as reported by Judy Stone of Forbes."
Continued from the gauntlet article: "She not only voted against the anti-science equating of surgical and N95 masks, but also against allowing COVID positive staff to return to work 3 days after a positive test. The 3-day time frame has absolutely no scientific basis, and return to work should be based on negative tests, not on an arbitrary time window or symptoms."
The People's CDC link says the same thing in their analysis. HICPAC, the advising committee of CDC, downgraded recommendations.
Why am I hammering this drum so much? Why am I quoting these articles in such depth?
Because if the HICPAC guidance becomes the new policies of the CDC (which they likely will), then healthcare workers will be subjected to false information on efficacy of masks, less protection, hospital-infections more frequent (they're already high), and all of us will suffer.
All because HICPAC cares more about cost-saving than science and patients.
I want to absolutely clear, and I am spelling it out in agonizing detail so people don't just glance over and miss the point of these analyses.
HICPAC recommendations for the new CDC guidelines are worse than what the CDC currently recommends. This is bad. It goes against the science and the needs of healthcare workers and patients alike.
Fight this. People's CDC has a template for letters. Barrage the CDC. Barrage HICPAC. Write articles. Don't let them get away with this. Thanks for reading.