“Absurd”: Experts Scoff at Trump’s Sham Testing Plan
Say It Does Not Do Enough to Increase Testing, Halt Spread of the Coronavirus
Late Sunday night, on the deadline lawmakers had set for federal health officials to submit a national testing strategy, the Trump administration submitted its supposed plan for testing. But the plan the administration ended up submitting is completely insufficient. The supposed plan leaves states on their own to fend for supplies, supplies states with a fraction of the resources they need, and has drawn sharp criticism from leading experts.
Here’s a look at what Trump’s supposed plan gets wrong:
The Trump Administration’s Supposed Testing Plan Leaves States on Their Own to Fend for Supplies and Does Not Lay Out a National Testing Strategy
- The Trump Administration’s So-Called Testing Plan Does Not Lay Out Goals The Federal Government Is Calling On States To Meet. “The administration’s testing plan says every state should aim to test at least 2 percent of its population in May and June. The document, however, lists the testing targets each state reported to federal officials for May, totaling 12.9 million tests nationwide, rather than laying out goals the federal government is calling on each state to meet.” [Washington Post, 5/24/20]
- Johns Hopkins University Epidemiologist Jennifer Nuzzo Said Of The Trump Administration’s Supposed Testing Plan: “States Should Not Have To Negotiate With Foreign Countries For Testing Supplies.” “States are making progress in expanding testing & decreasing their positivity. But they need help. We will not control the virus and restore the US economy until all states have the tools they need. States should not have to negotiate with foreign countries for testing supplies.” [Twitter, Dr. Jennifer Nuzzo, 5/26/20]
- Associated Press: “The Trump Administration’s New Strategy For Coronavirus Testing Puts Much Of The Burden On States While Promising To Provide Supplies Such As Swabs And Material To Transport Specimens.” “The Trump administration’s new strategy for coronavirus testing puts much of the burden on states while promising to provide supplies such as swabs and material to transport specimens. The plan, which was delivered Sunday to members of Congress, drew harsh criticism Monday from Democrats.’” [Associated Press, 5/25/20]
The Trump Administration’s Supposed Testing Plan Would Only Supply States With Enough Swabs to Conduct 20 Days Worth of Tests at Levels Championed by Trump Himself
- On April 28, Trump Said The United States Would Surpass 5 Million Tests A Day “Very Soon.” “Five hours later, when a reporter asked Trump at the White House if the country would reach five million daily tests, as the Harvard study recommended, Trump responded: ‘We’ll increase it, and it’ll increase it by much more than that in the very near future.’ Asked to clarify if he meant the U.S. would ‘surpass 5 million tests per day,’ Trump said, ‘We’re going to be there very soon.’” [Time, 4/28/20]
- HHS’ Plan Outlined That The Federal Government Would Acquire 100 Million Swabs And 100 Million Tubes Of Viral Transport Media — Enough For Only 20 Days Of Testing At The Levels Trump Promised. “To ensure that States have the collection supplies that they need through December 2020, the Federal government plans to acquire 100 million swabs and 100 million tubes of viral transport media, and distribute these supplies to States as requested to meet their individual State plans. This large-scale acquisition reflects a significant expansion of current capacity and is a result of the broadening of available swab and media types authorized by the FDA and use of Title III of the Defense Production Act (DPA) to increase production of swabs.” [HHS, COVID-19 Strategic Testing Plan, 5/24/20]
Leading Testing Experts Say the Trump Administration’s Testing Plan Is Insufficient — The U.S. Cannot Manage the Spread of the Coronavirus Without Dramatically Increasing Testing
- Harvard Global Health Institute Director Dr. Ashish Jha Said Of The Trump Administration’s Testing Plan: “The Idea That 300,000 Tests A Day Is Enough For America Is Absurd.” “‘On the face of it, the idea that 300,000 tests a day is enough for America is absurd,’ said Dr. Ashish Jha, director of the Harvard Global Health Institute.” [New York Times, 5/25/20]
-
- Just Testing Everyone Admitted To A Hospital And Testing High-Risk Places, Including Nursing Home Workers And Residents, Every Two Weeks Could Quickly Exhaust A National Testing Supply If The Supply Were Capped At 300,000 Tests Daily. “He offered a quick rundown of the numbers to illustrate the estimate’s inadequacy. Most hospitals nationwide now test everyone who is admitted for any reason, roughly 100,000 tests each day, fearing that they may be asymptomatic and yet still spreading the virus. Testing the 1.6 million residents of nursing homes — known to be at high risk of coronavirus infection — and workers every two weeks would require 150,000 more tests each day. Add high-risk places like meatpacking plants that need regular testing, and the numbers rapidly build. ‘Without having tested a single person for symptoms of Covid, we would quickly exhaust our entire national supply of testing if all we have is 300,000 tests per day,’ he said.” [New York Times, 5/25/20]
- Harvard Global Health Institute Director Dr. Ashish Jha Estimates That The United States Needs To Conduct “At Least 900,000 Tests Per Day.” “And 300,000 daily tests would be insufficient even for mitigation, Dr. Jha said, estimating that would require at least 900,000 tests per day.” [New York Times, 5/25/20]
- Harvard Safra Center For Ethics Director Danielle Allen Said Of HHS’ 10 Percent Positivity Rate Benchmark: “There Is Not A Single Country That I’m Aware Of That Achieved Disease Suppression With A Positivity Rate Of 10 Percent.” “Dr. Allen said millions of daily tests would be required to have 4 percent of people test positive with the coronavirus — the level they say is needed to halt the spread of the virus. The administration’s target, 10 percent, would allow only for mitigation. ‘There is not a single country that I’m aware of that achieved disease suppression with a positivity rate of 10 percent,’ she said.” [New York Times, 5/25/20]
- Johns Hopkins University Epidemiologist Jennifer Nuzzo Emphasized That HHS’ Goal Of A 10 Percent Coronavirus Testing Positivity Rate Was Too High, Noting That WHO Recommended 5 Percent Or Lower. “Tracking # of tests doesn’t tell you whether state is testing enough for its epidemic. Positivity is a better metric, but @HHSGov plan cutoff of 10% is too high. WHO recommends 5% or lower.” [Twitter, Dr. Jennifer Nuzzo, 5/26/20]
HHS’ Supposed Testing Plan Used Faulty Assumptions and Incomplete Data to Support a Dangerously Low Testing Rate
- Harvard Safra Center For Ethics Director Danielle Allen Emphasized That HHS Had “Cherry-Picked” One Sample Example From Safra Analysis That Would Allow Them To Claim Only 300,000 Daily Tests Were Needed When Multiple Models Pointed To Needing Around 3 Million Tests A Day. “The H.H.S. report noted that an analysis by the Safra Center at Harvard estimated the need at more than three million tests per day. But the federal report said that estimate was based on faulty assumptions. The Safra authors who crafted the estimate said that the federal report had cherry-picked one simple example from their analysis without considering other evidence. ‘We ran multiple models, all of which pointed to the same order of magnitude,’ said Danielle Allen, director of the Safra Center. ‘They’ve selected one non-primary model in an appendix and selectively adjusted assumptions to generate a different number.’” [New York Times, 5/25/20]