Zika Virus, Diane
Rehm and the CDC
Be afraid, be very, very afraid – terrified even. Stay
inside, bathe yourself in DEET, wear long sleeves, embrace GMO mosquitoes,
don’t travel to South or Central America, especially not Brazil, or go to certain
parts of Miami, or maybe avoid Miami altogether as well as Puerto Rico, and maybe the Caribbean. Don’t get pregnant for a year or maybe two, or have unprotected sex
with your spouse for 6 months……. But the
Olympics – oh the Olympics in Rio, Brazil? Yeah! Be
sure to go to the Olympics! But before you go, how about an extra $1.9 Billion
for the CDC?!
Oh, the Zika virus – where to start? My Inner Angry Wonk has been
simmering about this since day one (just ask my poor sister), but over the last
couple of weeks I have hit the boiling point. On August 3rd, driving home from taking my youngest
to Shakespeare Camp, listening to the Diane Rehm show on our local NPR station
I was dismayed to hear them talking, yet again, about the latest CDC horror
show known as the Zika virus. Among those on her panel that day were Dr.
Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the National Institutes of Health, and Dr. Irina Burd, director of the Integrated
Research Center for Fetal Medicine at Johns Hopkins University Hospital. In
between all the pearl clutching and hand wringing over 15 Zika cases
in Florida, they gave call-in advice to panicky mothers of small children
living near those cases (listen at 18:55). To protect their very small babies, and infants as
young as 2 months old, these doctors were recommending that these mothers keep their babies in
long sleeves and long pants at all times and when taking them outside
slather their exposed skin – i.e. their hands and faces with both sunscreen
and a DEET containing insecticide – where it will undoubtedly wind up in their
tiny mouths. Can you hear my Inner Wonk screaming?????
The CDC has been studying autism since the epidemic they
refuse to acknowledge began almost 30 years ago - growing in incidence from 1 in 10,000 in the 1980's to the current rates of 1 in 68 over all, 1 in 42 boys and a
shocking 1 in 28 in the children of Somalia immigrants living in and around
Minneapolis. Yet despite the untold millions they have spent on research, the
CDC remains stubbornly clueless about the causes of autism, not even certain if
this dramatic increase in numbers represents a real rise or simply better counting and diagnosis (?!?!), and absurdly suggesting their best guess is that there is
a strong genetic component in a condition that has increased exponentially in
just one generation!?!. Nowhere on the CDC autism pages is it even entertained that
maybe, just maybe there could be some sort of environmental factor involved –
or maybe even factors…..
However, unlike the impenetrable mystery that is autism, a few short months into the current Zika outbreak and the apparent increase in microcephaly cases in Brazil, the CDC is certain – absolutely, completely, unequivocally certain – that Zika and Zika alone, is the sole cause of a profoundly devastating birth
defect. A virus that has been around since at least the 1940’s (If not longer...Western medicine has a maddening tendency to equate their finding and naming something with the definitive starting point of said disease or condition….) that
is so mild and harmless that 80% of the people who have had it didn’t actually
notice, is suddenly harming fetuses, causing
miscarriages and striking others with Guillame-Barre syndrome. However, despite
their certainty, their pronouncement was remarkably, frustratingly, data light and only asks one question – could Zika cause birth defects? No other
possibility is even entertained. In the paper the CDC itself actually admits there
is no “smoking gun” linking the Zika virus to the cases of microcephaly. This
lack of data has not, however, stopped the CDC from issuing a long list of unprecedented
recommendations and advice – which the news media has gleefully, breathlessly. reported far and wide – impacting untold millions of people, many countries and communities
with wide-ranging and significant - some might even say profound -personal and economic consequences. Not to
mention that $1.9 Billion funding request and the burgeoning coffers of bug spray, GMO mosquito companies and vaccine developers.
How data light are we talking? Let’s start to break this
sketchy story down.
First off, as I said above, there seems to be an apparent increase in microcephaly cases.
To document an actual increase, what do you need first? You need a baseline - a
“before” number. Well, pretty much every media report or article I cite in this
series of posts is missing the before number. Why? Because Brazil apparently
did not have a very well-documented “before” number. One of the very few news reports that
I could find with a before count was an article in Nature which reports that
the number of microcephaly cases recorded in Brazil in 2014 was 147 – a number,
the article points out, so low as to be unbelievable given the number of microcephaly cases which occur
annually worldwide (for example, approximately 25,000
babies are diagnosed with microcephaly every year in the US). The paper cited in the CDC report, used as the CDC basis for their "before" number, claims the number of
microcephaly births in Brazil to average 157.3 cases per year from 2000 – 2014, also unrealistically low. So much for the "before" number.
Even as a skeptic, however, one cannot deny the existence of
the heartbreaking pictures of the babies and sad, painful stories of mothers and fathers truly suffering in Brazil. They exist. They are hurting. They need help and
services. And they deserve answers – truthful answers. Exactly how many babies
and families are we talking about? Good question – that is another disquieting
piece of this story. You would think if the CDC is telling every woman of
child-bearing age in the Americas to panic, consider terminating pregnancies and demanding Congress come back in
the middle of August recess in an election year to approve emergency funding, they would
have a pretty good handle on this – but no, again.
The number of cases reported have varied wildly since the
CDC and the press began hyping this story. In February 2016 the NY Times reported the numbers
were upwards of 4,783. The Nature article from March 21st cites 6,398. The next day, in the Washington Post the
number dipped much lower, maybe only 2,500. Then there was talk of how to “define”
microcephaly. Wait, what? There wasn't even an agreed upon definition of microcephaly to begin with? No, apparently
not. In the beginning, Brazilian health authorities asked doctors to report a
case of microcephaly when a newborn baby’s head measured 33 centimeters (cm) or smaller. Then
it was decided that measurement was too inclusive and the number changed to 32
cm. Eventually Brazilian Health authorities adopted the World Health
Organization’s (WHO) definition of microcephaly, with head measurements of 31.9 cm for newborn boys and 31.5 cm for girls.
Wait. What’s that you ask – we’re defining this devastating
neurological deficient SOLELY on the measurement of a baby’s head
circumference? No other physical characteristics? The muscle constrictions?
Brain calcification? Eye disorders? An MRI or CT scan? No. It appears that, especially in the beginning, microcephaly cases in Brazil were being counted by
head circumference alone. Here, National Geographic tries to
make sense of the numbers in March - they are reporting 641 cases of “confirmed”
microcephaly in Brazil. According to the article another 4,222 are being
“investigated” and 1,046 cases have been “rejected” for not meeting the “criteria”
although what that criteria consists of is not shared with us. I could not find
a description of that criteria anywhere. Hmmm…..
All the news stories aimed at scaring the dollars – oops, I
mean crap – out of us acknowledge that this Zika outbreak has been working its
way around various parts of the world starting sometime in 2014, hitting the
Pacific Islands near Guam and the Marshall Islands, Haiti and most of the
Caribbean and pretty much all of the countries in Central and South America. If,
indeed, Zika causes microcephaly, and various other disastrous outcomes, the
virus should have left a trail of miscarriages, paralysis, death and profound
disability across all these countries, right? Well, in a nutshell, not so much.
Try as they might, the CDC, the Washington Post and the NY Times
have not been able to produce any real evidence of increased cases of any of
these ills in any other country besides Brazil (begging the question, once
again, what the heck has happened to investigative journalism???).
Missing the
numbers to convince you to be terrified, they’ve done their best to explain
away the lack of data with a variety of excuses – most of them ridiculous and
highly offensive to the population of the countries involved. Haiti? TheWashington Post says the residents there don’t go see doctors often enough for
either fevers or childbirth and therefore Haitian mothers missed the fact that
their babies were born horribly malformed and disabled. To the extent that they
did notice? The physicians in Haiti and the wise reporters of the Washington
Post speculate that their superstitious mothers interpreted their births as the
work of “evil spirits” and left them somewhere to die. The doctors of French
Polynesia and Yap? They just forgot to document women were giving birth to
babies with tiny, unnatural looking heads – if you go back looking for them you
can find a few – maybe an increase from 2 cases a year to 8 – and again, no other
cause for such an increase has been explored (some of the sentences written in
these articles have actually caused ME harm – smacking my forehead with my keyboard
– how did someone write these things and how in the world did they think we
would believe it????). And as Columbia announces Zika is on the way out, and we’ve hardly heard a peep about microcephaly cases there, the NY Times assures us that
there are still six reasons we should still believe that Zika causes microcephaly.
So hey, better go ahead and slather that baby – and any
pregnant woman you see – with both sunscreen and DEET, just in case (I can
pretty much guarantee you that that safety study has not been done). But while driving and listening to the radio that day, My Inner Angry Wonk was at least relieved to hear Diane Rehm’s response to the DEET
recommendation – she was horrified – she refuses to use DEET on herself she
said – why in the world would she use it on a baby?? Both Dr. Fauci and Dr.
Burd chastised her and insisted that it was safe to use, citing EPA “pesticide registration”
as proof of safety. Hey, I worked for EPA, and I believe
that a lot of good things get done there. But I would NEVER and I mean NEVER
tell someone to forgo their own research, their own instincts, their own skepticism
simply because the EPA said so. Decisions in big bureaucracies get made for many
reasons, under various circumstances and you better believe that I’ve seen bad
decisions made under both "big P" and "little p" political pressures and for other
dubious reasons. Yay Diane!
But this disease is worth a lot of money for a lot of
people. Maintaining the public's level of fear is important to the CDC. Imagine my disappointment,
but not my surprise, when 2 days later, on her Friday News Round-up show, Diane
Rehm revisited the issue (at 34:32). After talking with a caller from Miami about a different
topic, Rehm used the caller’s location as a reason to launch another discussion
of the Zika virus. She reminded people that she is going to Florida later this
month. That two days before she had declared her worries about the safety of
using DEET-containing insecticides and her life-long refusal to use it. Well, never
mind, she said, Dr. Fauci had had another conversation with her and changed her
mind. Zika is just too dangerous and the CDC just too important to ignore. She would,
in fact be using DEET insecticides on her very person on her trip to Florida
she declared. One of her panelist, Ruth Marcus, a columnist at the Washington
Post, doubled down on this message. “This is very scary. Listening to Tony
Fauci is one of my rules in life. Everyone should listen. Everyone should
listen to the CDC.” Rehm chimed in – “Absolutely!”
That noise – that noise you hear along with the screaming – I
need to go ice my forehead……
Next time…. But of course that test they are using is really accurate – right? (Until then, enjoy this video - Zika 101)