Previously, public data had already disappeared from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention website after the Trump administration quietly transferred control of the information to the Department of Health and Human Services.
Since the pandemic began, CDC has regularly released data on the availability of hospital beds and intensive care units across the country. But Ryan Panchadsaram, who helps manage a data-tracking site called the Covid Exit Strategy, said that when he tried to collect the CDC data on Tuesday, he had disappeared.
“We were surprised because the modules we normally go to are empty. The data was not available and was not there,” he said. “There was no warning.”
CDC Director Dr. Robert Redfield told reporters in a conference call Wednesday that states were told to stop sending information from the hospital to the site of the National Health Safety Network, the CDC to collect data, starting Wednesday. Instead, all the data will now be reported through the HHS reporting portal, officials said, adding that the decision was made to streamline the data reporting and provide HHS officials with real-time data.
Public health specialists and former health officials acknowledged that CDC’s data reporting infrastructure was limited and said it needs to be overhauled to meet the demands of the Covid-19 pandemic. However, they expressed concern in interviews with CNBC that the change could lead to less transparent data.
When CNBC contacted him on Thursday, HHS spokesman Michael Caputo said in a statement that the CDC had instructions that the data be available again. Going forward, he said HHS will provide “more powerful ideas.”
“Yes, HHS is committed to being transparent to the American public about the information it is collecting about the coronavirus,” he said. “Therefore, HHS ordered CDC to reinstate the coronavirus boards it removed from the public on Wednesday.”
CDC representatives did not immediately respond to CNBC’s request for comment.
CDC’s website for information on available beds at the hospital and ICU has been replaced with a note that says: “The data displayed on this page was sent directly to the National Health Safety Network of CDC (NHSN) and do not include data sent to other entities contracted by or within the federal government. “
“We no longer have this critical indicator,” said Panchadsaram. “The intention to simply change data streams to HHS is fine. But you should keep the data you are sharing publicly available and up to date.”
Panchadsaram said he and his team, which includes researchers from the Duke-Margolis Center for Health Policy and Resolve to Save Lives, a public health initiative led by former CDC director Dr. Tom Frieden, have been tracking data from April.
Panchadsaram thinks of the project as a kind of “czar of progress” as different states rate the overall progress they have made in the fight against Covid-19. Available hospital beds and ICU capacity is a key indicator they use to assess state performance, he added.
“It is disappointing. It happened much faster than expected,” he said. “The image we are presenting to the world is incomplete.”
Other coronavirus researchers and public health specialists expressed concern that the policy change was announced so suddenly in the midst of a public health crisis that it appears to be worsening.
Dr. Jennifer Nuzzo, an epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins University, who administers one of the most popular third-party coronavirus data panels, said the policy change will not affect the Hopkins site because they have managed to obtain their data directly from the states .
“What worries me is that it seems that we are suddenly pressing in the middle of what seems like a very urgent moment in terms of growing cases that we are seeing across the country,” he told CNBC. “The question is, what are we going to lose in this transition, and particularly at a time when we really don’t want to lose the ability to understand what is happening in hospitals.”
Nuzzo expressed concern that the administration did not appear to fully plan how the transition would work in the data reporting and did not give hospitals or researchers a warning about the change or how it might affect them.
“I think it is reasonable to worry that it may lead to the erosion of capabilities at a time when we cannot afford to lose any skills at this time,” he added. “I don’t fully understand how it’s going to work. That in itself is problematic.”
.
