2024 Billion Dollar Weather and Climate Disasters

Defending Scientific Integrity Against Executive Orders

4 Comments

On February 13, 2025, my colleagues and I received a call from the Executive Director of the Commissioned Officers Association of the USPHS that confirmed our worst fears about the impact of political interference in science, academic freedom, and integrity. After submitting our presentation for peer review, it was accepted: “Addressing Environmental Health Threats in Academia: Leadership in Research, Professional Collaboration and Community Engagement” to the 58th Annual USPHS Scientific & Training Symposium; a week later, we were informed that we must censor our work or withdraw it. The directive was clear: words such as “health equity,” “climate change,” and “environmental hazards” were now forbidden due to recently issued Executive Orders from the Trump administration.

We refused to comply. Our presentation was accepted as is. We made clear we would not voluntarily withdraw the presentation or self-censor. If they wanted to withdraw the acceptance, they needed to say why and do so in writing. Asking us to self-censor by removing discussion of climate change, environmental hazards, and impacts on equity in health care was not acceptable. We stood by our research, our integrity, and the principle that science should not be dictated by political whims.

Shortly thereafter, we received official confirmation that our work had been deemed “not permissible” under Executive Order 14148, which revokes climate-related initiatives, and Executive Order 14151, which terminates all diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs, including those related to environmental justice.

  • EO 14148 states that its Purpose and Policy includes “Climate extremism has exploded inflation and overburdened businesses with regulation” and revokes numerous EOs dealing with climate crises, change, and risk. 
  • EO 14151’s Purpose and Policy deals with all “diversity, equity, and inclusion [DEI]” programs and directs agencies and departments to terminate all “equity” actions, initiatives, or programs including those that deal with “environmental justice” activities and Federal grantees receiving Federal funding on DEI, DEIA, or “environmental justice” programs.

The message was blunt: these topics, essential to public health and scientific progress, were now unmentionable at a federally co-sponsored symposium.

We Are Not Climate Extremists

We are not climate extremists, nor is our topic about diversity, equity, and inclusion. Our proposal focuses on the well-documented and measurable impacts of environmental health threats on communities, research challenges, and leadership in public health. The core of our presentation is leadership development, research collaboration, and professional engagement—issues directly relevant to public health professionals. The proposal does not advocate for any political ideology. Instead, it seeks to equip attendees with evidence-based strategies to address environmental health threats, a topic firmly rooted in science and public health practice. Any rational person reviewing this proposal would find no legitimate reason for objection. The subject matter—natural disasters, environmental hazards, and community engagement—aligns with public health priorities and emergency preparedness, making its exclusion a stark example of unwarranted censorship rather than a genuine policy concern.

I had to wonder if the leadership of Commission Officers Association (COA), Office of the Assistant Secretary of Health (OASH), and Office of the Surgeon Genderal (OSG) not undersood that health equity simply means everyone has a fair and just opportunity to attain their highest level of health. Health equity is not, and has never been about taking from one to give to another. It is about improving health care for all.

Why would any rational human with an intact moral compass oppose health equity? Are you honoring the uniform you wear or wore if you will not stand up for health equity for those in rural areas, the poor, people with disabilities, the elderly, or any number of other people that have difficulty with access?

A Dangerous Precedent

Executive orders can be instruments of good governance and expedient policy implementation when used responsibly. However, when wielded to suppress knowledge and dictate what science can and cannot address, they become tools of censorship. The repercussions of these directives will extend far beyond a single conference; they set a dangerous precedent for academic inquiry, public discourse, and the dissemination of knowledge. They will promote ignorance.

This is not just about our presentation. It is about a growing trend of silencing scientific inquiry that does not align with political ideology and it did not begin with this administration, but it has been weaponized by this administration to incite fear. It is about the erosion of intellectual independence in federally affiliated institutions. It is about the chilling effect this creates on researchers, educators, and practitioners who now must choose between compromising their integrity or being excluded from critical platforms.

A Failure of Leadership

I am deeply disappointed in the COA, OASH, and to OSG and the individual in leadership positions in those organizations. These organizations should be on the front lines defending scientific integrity and evidence-based policy, not surrendering to political pressure as should the people in them that wanted to lead. The COA is supposed to be dedicated to advocating for the interests of the U.S. Public Health Service (USPHS) Commissioned Corps officers. Its mission is supposed to be to protect and enhance the public health and safety of the United States by supporting and advancing the interests of the Commissioned Corps and its officers. If they do not have the courage to stand up for science now, how can we trust any future Surgeon General’s reports or guidance from OASH? How can the public have confidence in the integrity of any health-related recommendations coming from these institutions? How will officers have confidence in the COA?

Science is not partisan, and public health is not a political tool. If these institutions abandon their duty to defend objective, evidence-based research, they will fail not only the scientific community and the USPHS officers but also the public they are supposed to serve.

Science Cannot Be Gagged

Refusing to acknowledge environmental hazards, climate change, or health equity does not make these issues disappear. Instead, it endangers communities, undermines scientific progress, and weakens the foundation of evidence-based policy. Ignoring over 200 closed uranium mines in New Mexico does not make them disappear. Suppressing research will not prevent their consequences—it will only ensure that we are less prepared to address climate-associated disasters and their health impacts.

Scientific integrity must not be contingent upon political convenience, academic freedom must not be subject to the shifting tides of executive power, and the pursuit of truth must not be constrained by any ideology.

I will not self-censor. I will not erase reality to appease policies that deny it. Science serves the public good, not political agendas, and I will continue to uphold my responsibility to research, educate, and advocate for evidence-based solutions.

If we remain silent in the face of such restrictions, we become complicit in the erosion of the very freedoms that sustain scientific discovery and democratic discourse.

I refuse to be silent.

Don’t Turn on others over COVID vaccines

Leave a comment

In the last few days I’ve seen a growing number of people turning on others they perceive cutting the vaccine line. Most of the people complaining of line cutting are not healthcare workers but community members. I’m sure many mean well are are trying to be supportive of physicians, nurses, and other frontline workers while some come across as angry.

I understand that many people are justifiably frustrated with those politicians that either directly said or through their behavior made clear they thought COVID-19 was a hoax, but were first in line for the vaccine. Then there were those people who are not healthcare workers at all, but hold positions of privilege like religious leaders. Finally, there were healthcare administrators who do not have direct patient contact but managed to be in the first group. Of course, there are also people like me that volunteered to give vaccines and as a result of being present at the end of the day when they needed to use up the vaccines that would expire was lucky enough to be given one.

I don’t think we should be frustrated or angry with any of these people. Let me begin with the politicians that promoted COVID-19 as a hoax and or acted in ways that were irresponsible by not wearing masks, social distancing, and encouraged others to do the same. By taking the vaccine and rushing the line they are clearly admitting they were wrong. Their vaccine selfies are their public confession of misleading the public, errors, and/or dishonesty. We should accept it as the statement it is and recognize that the. people that voted for them would never listen to someone like me. However, they may follow the example of that person they trust. If that gets people in communities to line up for the vaccine that is good.

One person who was the brunt of public outrage was a 70 year old Bishop. I agree by any current criteria he was not on the list of first in line, but the reality is there are a lot of people that will see him getting vaccinated and follow his example. We need people in positions of leadership (political, medical, religious) to be examples and show their belief in the vaccines. I think it is especially important for the Bishop since there have been a couple of Bishops that were very negative with weak arguments about abortion that were refuted by moral theologians. Thus seeing a Bishop getting vaccinated sends a strong message that the claim that getting vaccinated is complicity with abortion is inconsistent with Catholic teaching.

As for the hospital administrators that never touch patients getting vaccinated ahead of front line providers it is important to remember they are part of the structure that keeps hospitals going. The average clinician has no idea how the supply chain works or how to keep the facilities going. Administrators are as critical to the a well functioning hospital as the facilities staff and custodians. A hospital is a team activity. It will not function well or long with only physicians and nurses.

As a country we are tired, frustrated, and honestly a little scared. We have made it this far together and will make it to herd immunity by working as a country. We need to pull together and support vaccinations because vaccinations are the solution to COVID-19. If anything we need to focus our efforts toward better vaccination plans, getting the vaccines out into the communities, and arranging mass vaccination clinics. This may mean we need to make people more responsible for their record keeping and get shots in arms rather than time consuming computer data entry tasks. My experience was the paperwork was taking much longer than the vaccinations and thus slowing the process.

I don’t care how much you denied that COVID-19 was real or dangerous. If you are willing to get a vaccine I’m willing to volunteer my time to give it and thank you for showing up. Please don’t let this divide us. Remember, some of those people being criticized have been asked to get vaccinated as a show of public support, others because of the federal continuity of operations plans, and others maybe out of fear. Let’s support everyone with a compassionate heart.

Wear A Mask

5 Comments

Over the last few weeks, I have been angered by the large number of hospitals threatening nurses and physicians for wearing masks and telling the truth. Nurses have primarily been told to remove their mask or be fired. While physicians seem to be told to remain silent about shortages and conditions or be fired and while at the same time to remove their masks. I’ve collected a large number of such stories from people I know and trust. They have come from nurses and physicians. One physician, a friend of a friend, was working in an ER and the administration told him to take off his mask or be fired. He quit on the spot rather than take off the mask. The husband of another friend is also an ER physician and he actually had to go to his car and get a mask when a symptomatic patient came in because they had absolutely no N95 masks in the rural hospital.

This was sent to me by a friend who has spent her entire career at the beside.

I can’t speak out publicly and be identified because I cannot afford to lose my job. I can tell you that nurses are being bullied not to use their own PPE especially if they are working in areas that it was previously not routinely necessary. Even nurses and therapists with asthma, COPD, immunosuppression and/or recommendations from their personal physicians are being bullied about not wearing an N95/PPE that they provided themselves. My area was recently told we “can” but are not required to wear a surgical mask after repeated complaints from the Radiation Therapists we work with that their professional body (ASTRO) is recommending they wear a mask during all patient care. However, the administration here has been “working around” the nurses in administration to roll back that protection in the name of not “wasting masks”. None of them wear masks when they come through the clinic. Combined they’ve spent almost no time in the clinic before or after this began. They act as if we are overreacting when we wear masks to work with our patients, but in the same breath tell us to stay out of the clinic if at all possible and “protect ourselves” as if our front line staff is disposable. With the transition to no visitors we have folks that counted on caregivers coming in with them that are now upset and unable to do their own intake paperwork and needing more hands on care. But the culture coming down from the top is that the front end staff are overreacting if they want to protect themselves and patients by wearing masks. I feel like we are a pressure cooker ready to go off. We have young folks that are going home to families and roommates (that are working in Walmart’s and driving busses) and they are the ones helping immunosuppressed patients with their paperwork (so much more because now they can’t have a family member to help them) and when they use a physical barrier mask they get side eye from our nurse manager (whose boss is non clinical and was on the Hoax train up until last week and still makes flippant “just wash your hands, you’ll be fine, comments”) and others. They along with the rest of the management team are hoping/thinking they will “roll back” the decision to allow our folks wear masks this week… all of this from the big executive suite where a few folks, all sitting in private offices are dictating what the hands on people can do to protect themselves. It’s just wrong. They are intentionally talking amongst themselves to reach a consensus against protecting our folks before including equally/higher ranking nurses on any conversations. At a time when nurses should be at the forefront of decision making we are being railroaded and overridden. I am the only one that seems to understand the magnitude of what we are facing. Since our doctors are a separate group they can do what they want for themselves and although they can ask that we protect the patients and employees, they have no sway.
I have been working to make sure we have local seamstresses lined up and donations of fabric surgical masks so that we have some protection. However our hospital system will not allow employees to wear them, even/especially when we are in areas that they don’t deem masks “necessary” which is almost all our front line folks in non COVID19 treatment areas. It’s incredibly short sighted. One of our employees was sent to employee health after they developed a nasty cough this week. They were told no test needed, no quarantine needed, no mask needed, they could go back to work, the cough alone was not concerning.
Thank you.

CDC Failure

The guidance on the use of masks needs to be clear for both clinicians and the public. While CDC says it has been updated that does not appear to be the case and remains so vague that there is great flexibility for facilities to do what they want. Fortunately, the Joint Commission has now been clear in their recommendation that not only should staff be allowed to wear their own PPE if they have it and the hospital is not providing it, but they refute the CDC guidance and cite evidence while admitting it is incomplete. The Joint Commission confirmed that they are receiving reports from across the country of hospitals refusing to let staff bring their own N95, surgical, and homemade masks.

Use of Mask for the Public

As bad as the CDC guidance has been for healthcare personnel it has been equally bad for the general public. Statements have ranged from it isn’t need and handwashing is adequate to masks can increase a person’s risk of contracting the disease. Both are clearly misleading. The rational was first:

  • We need to conserve the PPE for healthcare personnel and the general public is at low risk. Because the virus is spread through droplets from coughing or sneezing you would need to be within 6 feet of the person that is sick.

When it became clear that many cases were actually being spread by asymptomatic people and that the virus may linger in the air longer than they first thought they still did not change their recommendation. They did change their approach.

  • People do not need to wear a mask when outside because they will wear them improperly and may increase their risk because they will be more likely to touch their faces and it will give them false confidence.

Obviously, we all know that we need to conserve N95 and surgical masks for healthcare personnel. They are our front line and deserve all we can do to protect them. However, the government is now telling us that a minimum of 100,000 to 240,000 Americans will die and 50% to 70% of the country may contract COVID-19. Spare us the rhetoric that the risk is low. Also, don’t insult people. No one thinks a mask is a protective forcefield. What the average person feels is that even a homemade mask is better than no mask. When a homemade mask or other non N95 mask is worn and combined with social distancing, handwashing, and not touching one’s face it decreases an individual’s risk when a person must venture outside.

As the nation’s leading public health organization, the CDC should remember that education is critical. If they believe that putting on a mask makes the average citizen suddenly forgets that they should social distance, wash their hands, and not touch their face then the answer is a public service campaign to remind people. If they believe that people will wear masks improperly again education is critical and they should immediately make an infographic or short video demonstrating how to properly put on a mask, take it off, and clean it or dispose of it. The real risk would be people reusing disposable masks and/or not cleaning masks. Of course, this ignores the fact we are asking healthcare personnel to do just that. This is public health 101. Treating the public as if they lack any reasonable amount of intelligence is insulting and not helpful.

What Does the Research Show

In a Lancet article  that reviewed different countries’ use of masks and the available evidence they pointed out that “there is an essential distinction between absence of evidence and evidence of absence.” They concluded, “community transmission might be reduced if everyone, including people who have been infected but are asymptomatic and contagious, wears face masks.” A cluster randomised trial of cloth masks compared with medical masks in healthcare workers found that medical mask are significantly better and should be preferred during a pandemic for healthcare providers. However, they also pointed out that medical masks are not always an option. It was suggested that cloth mask with multiple layers and tighter weaves would be more effective than the current cloth masks that they tested.  Testing the Efficacy of Homemade Masks: Would
They Protect in an Influenza Pandemic provides some insight into what materials may be best for a homemade mask. Smart AIR took the information and put it into a useful graphic that compares homemade masks to surgical masks.

While the graphic below also isn’t evidence it makes clear that places that routinely do wear masks have fewer cases of COVID-19. Of course, there are other confounding variables and this is just one piece of data.

Information on Making Your Own Mask

I think everyone should take the time to make their own mask. It will serve as a reminder that we are in a battle to save lives. It will remind us that in many poor countries this is all they have when they care for patients. It will give children a craft project while they are out of school that can be used to teach science, health, public safety, social responsibility, and even math. And most importantly, it may give you just a little extra protection when you absolutely must go out.

Making your own mask is not that difficult for anyone with basic sewing skills.  I’ve provided a couple of links that have instructions.

I wish you all good sewing.

Book Review: Voices of the Dead

Leave a comment

I received a free copy of Voices of the Dead by John Babb, a retired U.S. Public Health Service, Rear Admiral. I read his first book Orphan Hero which I enjoyed, but this one is different. It is a historical novel set in 1878 and tells of Yellow Fever in Memphis and New Orlean. I could feel the humidity as I read of the nurses and physicians responding to the deadly virus and risking their lives to serve others.

There are plenty of nurse heroes in this book, but also everyone from physicians to Sisters, from Priests to Madames stepped up to help their neighbors and some lost their lives in the effort. Whether you are a lover of historical novels, or epidemiological investigations, or an infectious disease nerd this is a great book.

Of course, it could be that I liked it because it had all the things that fascinate me, steamy southern cities, infectious diseases, legislation like the Quarantine Act, selfless physicians and nurses, and the Marine Hospital Service which lead to the Commissioned Corps of the U.S. Public Health Service. It dealt effectively with the fears of quarantine and what citizens do when quarantine is ordered. In many ways, it is a case study of epidemics prior to modern healthcare.

I don’t want to spoil the book, but if you are a public health worker I think you will love it.