The administration has implemented a suspension of numerous communications from federal health agencies to the public, which will remain in effect until at least the end of this month.
In a memo that has come to light, acting Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Dorothy Fink, notified agency heads that there would be an “immediate pause” on various forms of communication including regulations, guidelines, announcements, press releases, social media interactions, and any website updates, requiring prior approval from a political appointee before release.
This communication freeze also pertains to content that is intended for publication in the Federal Register, where governmental entities outline their rules and regulations, as well as the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, which is a publication issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
The suspension is slated to last until February 1, according to the memo. This directive impacts key health agencies like the CDC, the National Institutes of Health, and the Food and Drug Administration, which play critical roles in managing epidemics, safeguarding the food supply, and researching disease cures.
Requests for further information from HHS officials regarding this communication standstill have gone unanswered, although four federal health officials, who chose to remain anonymous due to restrictions on discussing the situation, verified the communication pause.
A former official from HHS noted that it is not uncommon for new administrations to temporarily halt agency communications to facilitate a review process. However, typically, transition teams manage to streamline the documentation issuance process before inauguration day.
Steven Grossman, who now consults for food and drug corporations, implied in an email, “The structure of the executive branch is hierarchical. Implicitly, every incoming administration seeks to ensure that significant commitments and positions wait for new teams to be established, thus restoring a certain level of organizational order.”
Dr. Ali Khan, a former CDC outbreak investigator and current dean at the University of Nebraska’s public health college, asserted that a pause is a logical step while the executive branch undergoes realignment.
However, he expressed concerns that this might hint at a potential return to a previous approach of suppressing agency communications in favor of a specific political narrative.
During his first term, President Trump’s appointees attempted to exert control over the CDC’s MMWR journal due to its publication of COVID-19-related information that contradicted the messaging coming from the White House.
In her memo, Fink indicated that exceptions would be in place for communications deemed critical to health, safety, environmental issues, financial operations, or national security, although these would also necessitate review.
On Tuesday and Wednesday, the FDA managed to issue notifications regarding warning letters sent to companies and a notice related to drug safety. However, a consumer advocacy organization has expressed concerns that this communication shutdown could endanger public health.
According to Dr. Peter Lurie, president of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, timely information from the CDC, FDA, and other agencies is essential for preventing foodborne illnesses and staying informed about health matters.
“Every moment is crucial when it comes to controlling outbreaks,” Lurie commented. “The ambiguity surrounding this poorly articulated communication freeze could introduce unnecessary delays in issuing critical public alerts during active outbreaks.”
Dr. Jeffrey Klausner, a public health expert from the University of Southern California, expressed similar sentiments in an email, emphasizing the importance of communication in public health.
“Local health authorities and physicians rely on the CDC for up-to-date information on diseases, effective prevention measures, testing, treatment protocols, and information concerning outbreaks,” Klausner remarked. “Halting public health communication undermines a fundamental function of public health. It would be comparable to the government silencing fire alarms or other alert systems.”
