From "Behind the Mask," Infection Control Today's Podcast: Why Cutting Off Health Communications Puts Us All at Risk

Tori Whitacre Martonicz, MA

Lead Editor of Infection Control Today

She can be reached at tmartonicz@mjhlifesciences.com.

(Image credit to author)

This article was first published in Infection Control Today’s LinkedIn newsletter. Please subscribe!

The opinions given are not necessarily those of Infection Control Today^® or its parent company, MJH Life Sciences.

I was eating a late-night snack when my phone started pinging. Texts, emails, and, later, my social media were filled with despair, anger, and disbelief.

Everyone reaching out wanted me to know that another order had come down from the Trump Administration: It had halted external communications from the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) until at least February 1, 2025.

I read these communications daily as lead editor of Infection Control Today^® (ICT^®).

As I could see from my friends’ and colleagues’ reactions, this decision has raised significant concerns among public health officials, infection preventionists, and health care professionals. With agencies like the CDC, the National Institutes of Health, and the Food and Drug Administration affected, the abrupt suspension of scientific reports and health advisories has sparked widespread debate—and strong emotions.

This move came on the heels of the US withdrawal from the World Health Organization (WHO), further complicating global and national health responses. In an era where timely information is crucial for mitigating infectious disease threats, the implications of this policy shift cannot be ignored.

As I quickly learned, the blowback from both the halted communications and the withdrawal was swift and decisive. ICT's and my personal social media feeds were filled with people’s points of view—both positive and negative.

“Our respective organizations should continue to provide the much-needed support at our level, wrote Carole W. Kamangu, MPH, RN, CIC, founder and CEO of Dumontel Healthcare Consulting, LLC. “We can’t make global changes on a large scale, but we can make an impact one step at a time. Let’s not get distracted.”

Tom Frieden, MD, MPH, the president and CEO of Resolve to Save Lives, who is also a former CDC director and New York City Health Commissioner, wrote, “CDC's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) has provided real-time data and analysis about disease outbreaks and emerging health threats without a break every week since 1960. Until today. Every day this vital publication is delayed, doctors, nurses, hospitals, local health departments, and first responders are behind the information curve and less prepared to protect the health of all Americans. With predecessor publications, a 138-year streak of information to guide health protection. Hope to see it resumed soon.”

These comments were just the beginning. As much as I had seen online, when I asked for quotes on the halting of communications, most people refused because of their employer’s directive or fear that their positions would be jeopardized. These are key researchers, health care workers, and advisors upon whom we rely to give you, ICT’s readers, the information you need to protect both yourselves and your patients.

Those I know who work for the CDC or the World Health Organization couldn't and wouldn't talk to me on the record. I didn’t take it personally. I did not doubt they were not allowed to speak about the communication halt. I did learn, off the record, that CDC employees’ travel to key conferences has been suspended, perhaps permanently.

Other funding for salaries, studies, or patient care, such as for the Veteran’s Administration, is also on hold. Guidelines and directives cannot be given to those health care workers who need them. At least for another week. Will it be longer?

However, my friends who aren’t in health care are also concerned.

“[Trump is] is taking us backwards on science, health, research, and green energy. Ceding all progress on these subjects to the rest of world. They will leave us behind,” a friend of mine, Matt Giordano, wrote.

Another friend, a social worker, Nicole Taggart, told me, “Just [5] years after the start of the last pandemic and with bird flu looming, it’s hard to believe anyone would want to cease communication. How many more family members do we have to lose? How many more years of education do our youth have to lose? At the very core, this order is violence.”

ICT’s Editorial Advisory Board (EAB) member, Isis Lamphier, MPH, MHA, CIC, contacted me early in the morning. “It is devastating to witness the silencing of public health agencies, whose communications are vital daily and in times of crisis,” she told me. “Public health experts craft these messages to promote public health and save lives. Their work should never be delayed or filtered by political appointees, as every moment lost can mean a difference between safety [or harm]. The CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report has been a reputable publication since 1952.”

My friend and former colleague, Carla Lewandowski, LPN, wrote, “Remember, I live in the "Poultry Capital" of [West Virginia], the industry is predominantly Pilgrims Pride who processes and manufactures the chicken. If this "flu" goes unchecked, it will decimate the employment in this small little community. We have 2 plants, the live kill and the cook plant, so that would be 2 huge factories not in operation.”

Another friend, speaking in terms of anonymity, said, “The foundation of good public health practices for surveillance involves open data sharing and transparency to both inform the public of possible infectious disease threats but to also enable state and local health departments to react. By restricting communication, our surveillance systems are hindered such that any new threats may go unidentified. It’s imperative that we can reinstate these communication channels as soon as possible.”

One colleague tries to see it from the administration’s side. “The closure of communications has impacted all committees, grant review boards, and publications,” AnotherICTEAB member, Kevin Kavanagh, MD, wrote. “The purpose appears to be for a reset, hopefully for the assurance of accuracy and to make sure that the government functions are aligned with the current administration's priorities. As you well know, I have been critical of the CDC and many of its biases in decision-making. In my opinion, some of the appointments were political rather than based on scientific capabilities. For example, the [Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee] not recommending respirators for all respiratory pathogens and not allowing the voluntary use of N95 masks by health care workers makes little sense to me. In the world of value-based purchasing, eliminating risk adjustment for minorities may help uncover poor performance of facilities and better allow remediation to take place.

Kavanagh continued, “Many will disagree with the administration's priorities, but elections have consequences, and the last one has our country headed in a different direction. However, these changes must be done strategically, ensuring no unintended consequences. For example, some communications relating to bacterial threats and the impending H5N1 pandemic need to be unimpeded for the sake of public safety. Many higher educational institutions are highly dependent on the grant money approved by study sections. We must be careful that the new course which will be taken is best for our nation.”

One of my nurse friends, Audrey Friedman, RN, CIC, wrote, “Ignoring science and its relation to health care will end in more contagious epidemics and health care disasters. It’s not a matter of “if” but “when.” Science and health care is not the place for retribution and revenge.”

The 2024 Infection Control Today Educator of the YearTM, Shahbaz Salehi, MD, MPH, MSHIA, said, "Halting the CDC Communication undermines the fundamental work of infection preventionists, public health professionals, and the principles of transparency. In an era of rapid data exchange and evolving events, accurate and timely communication is crucial to saving lives. This decision sets a dangerous precedent, leaving the public vulnerable, infection preventionist and public health workers dangerously uninformed."

Overall, the uncertainty surrounding this communication freeze is unsettling, to say the least. Infection preventionists, health care workers, and public health officials rely on these updates to stay ahead of emerging threats. Without clear and consistent information, we’re left guessing at a time when we need facts the most. With avian flu making a comeback and other respiratory illnesses on the rise, keeping those lines of communication open isn’t just important—it’s essential. Let’s hope this pause is short-lived because when it comes to protecting public health, silence isn’t an option.