Comments on: Redacted Testimony of CDC Director Julie L. Gerberding http://www.scienceprogress.org/2007/10/redacted-testimony-of-cdc-director-julie-l-gerberding/ Progressive approaches to science policy Sat, 13 Mar 2010 13:54:22 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: Tom O. http://www.scienceprogress.org/2007/10/redacted-testimony-of-cdc-director-julie-l-gerberding/comment-page-1/#comment-2368 Tom O. Tue, 15 Jul 2008 06:34:17 +0000 http://www.scienceprogress.org/2007/10/redacted-testimony-of-cdc-director-julie-l-gerberding/#comment-2368 If this is global warming, then why are they now saying that we will be in a 10 year cycle of cooling? Some places are warmer, others are cooler. California has a drought and the midwest has more water than they can handle. Many people make it sound like these are first-time occurances. If you go back a hundred years we have records that have yet to be brokes, such as the "Dust Bowl". It seems that most people think that history started the year they were born. If it was not for the so called "environmentalist" the Forest Service could do thinning in the forest and possibly "prescribed burns" under carefully monitered weather conditions to clear the ground and keep future fires from being so devistating, such as the Yellowstone and Yosemite fires 10 and 20 years ago. I've seen both and it isn't pretty. I suppose now that it cant happen again for many years in those particular area, but the unburned areas are still vulnerable. The private property owners in a remote Sequoia National Forest area I visited last week have been clearing the low branches and ground cover to prevent serious fires in their area. Thinning the forests would be benefitial to the forest, business(wood and pulp) and to people who like that kind of work(employment). If carbon is so bad why are the plants not growing so much faster? http://www.forestry.org/wa/position/mgmt.php If this is global warming, then why are they now saying that we will be in a 10 year cycle of cooling? Some places are warmer, others are cooler. California has a drought and the midwest has more water than they can handle. Many people make it sound like these are first-time occurances. If you go back a hundred years we have records that have yet to be brokes, such as the “Dust Bowl”. It seems that most people think that history started the year they were born. If it was not for the so called “environmentalist” the Forest Service could do thinning in the forest and possibly “prescribed burns” under carefully monitered weather conditions to clear the ground and keep future fires from being so devistating, such as the Yellowstone and Yosemite fires 10 and 20 years ago. I’ve seen both and it isn’t pretty. I suppose now that it cant happen again for many years in those particular area, but the unburned areas are still vulnerable. The private property owners in a remote Sequoia National Forest area I visited last week have been clearing the low branches and ground cover to prevent serious fires in their area. Thinning the forests would be benefitial to the forest, business(wood and pulp) and to people who like that kind of work(employment). If carbon is so bad why are the plants not growing so much faster? http://www.forestry.org/wa/position/mgmt.php

]]> By: Elaine H. http://www.scienceprogress.org/2007/10/redacted-testimony-of-cdc-director-julie-l-gerberding/comment-page-1/#comment-2353 Elaine H. Wed, 09 Jul 2008 23:53:57 +0000 http://www.scienceprogress.org/2007/10/redacted-testimony-of-cdc-director-julie-l-gerberding/#comment-2353 I cannot help but disagree with Dave Segerson concerning the appropriateness of CDC dealing with climate change. if the nation's health is at risk, the duty to the people, not the administration's acceptance of scientific fact, should be the deciding factor. I cannot help but disagree with Dave Segerson concerning the appropriateness of CDC dealing with climate change. if the nation’s health is at risk, the duty to the people, not the administration’s acceptance of scientific fact, should be the deciding factor.

]]> By: Jimbo http://www.scienceprogress.org/2007/10/redacted-testimony-of-cdc-director-julie-l-gerberding/comment-page-1/#comment-2351 Jimbo Wed, 09 Jul 2008 15:19:30 +0000 http://www.scienceprogress.org/2007/10/redacted-testimony-of-cdc-director-julie-l-gerberding/#comment-2351 The only thing that would change this administrations view on global warming would be if they found a way for Halliburton to make a profit off it. The only thing that would change this administrations view on global warming would be if they found a way for Halliburton to make a profit off it.

]]> By: Blaze McMahon http://www.scienceprogress.org/2007/10/redacted-testimony-of-cdc-director-julie-l-gerberding/comment-page-1/#comment-2348 Blaze McMahon Tue, 08 Jul 2008 23:44:21 +0000 http://www.scienceprogress.org/2007/10/redacted-testimony-of-cdc-director-julie-l-gerberding/#comment-2348 It really is amazing that the Bush administration is still trying to conceal and deflect the issue of climate change, simply because it is bad for business. Bad for business? So hurricanes, floods, and fires are good for business? Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma (former Chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee)has for years minimized and ridiculed the real science of climate change, and here in Oklahoma the oil industry is so entrenched that there are many petroleum organizations devoted to maintaining the status quo of an oil dominated nation, no matter the cost. Maybe they are just waiting for the Northwest Passage to melt so that they can plunder the Arctic oil. So much for democracy. It really is amazing that the Bush administration is still trying to conceal and deflect the issue of climate change, simply because it is bad for business. Bad for business? So hurricanes, floods, and fires are good for business? Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma (former Chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee)has for years minimized and ridiculed the real science of climate change, and here in Oklahoma the oil industry is so entrenched that there are many petroleum organizations devoted to maintaining the status quo of an oil dominated nation, no matter the cost. Maybe they are just waiting for the Northwest Passage to melt so that they can plunder the Arctic oil. So much for democracy.

]]> By: WFT? http://www.scienceprogress.org/2007/10/redacted-testimony-of-cdc-director-julie-l-gerberding/comment-page-1/#comment-2347 WFT? Tue, 08 Jul 2008 19:59:29 +0000 http://www.scienceprogress.org/2007/10/redacted-testimony-of-cdc-director-julie-l-gerberding/#comment-2347 Why do people still say "if" when talking about climate change? California's on fire, the mid-west is under water, the north pole is nearly ice-free, but people still act like this is just a vague possibility that might affect some people in a few hundred years. Well, enjoy your natural disasters, folks! Our planet is treating us like an infectious disease, or a pesky virus, that must be disposed of before we do anymore senseless damage. Where do we think we'll go after we dig up, burn, and destroy what's left of out planet? Why do we just assume we'll even survive to see the end? Why do people still say “if” when talking about climate change? California’s on fire, the mid-west is under water, the north pole is nearly ice-free, but people still act like this is just a vague possibility that might affect some people in a few hundred years. Well, enjoy your natural disasters, folks! Our planet is treating us like an infectious disease, or a pesky virus, that must be disposed of before we do anymore senseless damage. Where do we think we’ll go after we dig up, burn, and destroy what’s left of out planet? Why do we just assume we’ll even survive to see the end?

]]> By: Dave Segerson http://www.scienceprogress.org/2007/10/redacted-testimony-of-cdc-director-julie-l-gerberding/comment-page-1/#comment-2062 Dave Segerson Wed, 21 May 2008 02:47:49 +0000 http://www.scienceprogress.org/2007/10/redacted-testimony-of-cdc-director-julie-l-gerberding/#comment-2062 In my career, I've been both an opinionated, frustrated employee and a cautious manager. One thing I've learned is that an employee or a subordinate organization cannot speak on behalf of the greater organization without gaining concurrence with the message. That message must be consistent with organizational positions. For some reason, it appears that the Bush administration has not publicly concluded that global warming is taking place. Therefore, it is entirely inappropriate for the CDC, which represents the Executive Branch of the government, to express such conclusions publicly. Furthermore, if and when the administration decides to acknowledge global warming, I wouldn't think it would be through CDC, it would be through more appropriate agencies, such as NOAA or EPA. CDC is a health agency; it is not CDC's place to draw conclusions about the existence of climate change. The CDC article may not have been redacted so severely if all of the health consequences had been couched in terms of "IF there were a climate change, then..." In my career, I’ve been both an opinionated, frustrated employee and a cautious manager. One thing I’ve learned is that an employee or a subordinate organization cannot speak on behalf of the greater organization without gaining concurrence with the message. That message must be consistent with organizational positions. For some reason, it appears that the Bush administration has not publicly concluded that global warming is taking place. Therefore, it is entirely inappropriate for the CDC, which represents the Executive Branch of the government, to express such conclusions publicly. Furthermore, if and when the administration decides to acknowledge global warming, I wouldn’t think it would be through CDC, it would be through more appropriate agencies, such as NOAA or EPA. CDC is a health agency; it is not CDC’s place to draw conclusions about the existence of climate change. The CDC article may not have been redacted so severely if all of the health consequences had been couched in terms of “IF there were a climate change, then…”

]]> By: John M. Nardo M.D. http://www.scienceprogress.org/2007/10/redacted-testimony-of-cdc-director-julie-l-gerberding/comment-page-1/#comment-337 John M. Nardo M.D. Thu, 08 Nov 2007 12:41:24 +0000 http://www.scienceprogress.org/2007/10/redacted-testimony-of-cdc-director-julie-l-gerberding/#comment-337 http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/printedition/2007/11/01/cdcchange1101.html The "very valued" COO of the CDC is leaving. He and Dr. Gerbeding have essentially politicized the CDC in the last four years beyond recognition. The White House may have redacted her opening statement, but it came out of her mouth - the same mouth that swore to "do no harm" when she graduated from Medical School. She's no innocent in this story... http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/printedition/2007/11/01/cdcchange1101.html

The “very valued” COO of the CDC is leaving. He and Dr. Gerbeding have essentially politicized the CDC in the last four years beyond recognition. The White House may have redacted her opening statement, but it came out of her mouth – the same mouth that swore to “do no harm” when she graduated from Medical School. She’s no innocent in this story…

]]> By: Smgumby http://www.scienceprogress.org/2007/10/redacted-testimony-of-cdc-director-julie-l-gerberding/comment-page-1/#comment-336 Smgumby Thu, 08 Nov 2007 10:07:29 +0000 http://www.scienceprogress.org/2007/10/redacted-testimony-of-cdc-director-julie-l-gerberding/#comment-336 White House spokeswoman Dana Perino maintains Gerberding’s testimony “was not watered down.” Why would anyone think removing all those portions of the report would be "watering it down". Nonsense, just because they hide the portions they don't want to deal with doesn't mean anything at all. Watered down. Indeed. White House spokeswoman Dana Perino maintains Gerberding’s testimony “was not watered down.”

Why would anyone think removing all those portions of the report would be “watering it down”. Nonsense, just because they hide the portions they don’t want to deal with doesn’t mean anything at all.

Watered down.

Indeed.

]]>