We're going to see just how many people are willing to actually stand up and fight this. I am terrified to find out. Hitler was swept into power by only about 30% of the population. It was the 60-70% of the populace that did nothing to stop it that allowed him to go unchecked. What are we going to do to stop what is happening now?
I think shine a light on everything and see what finally pisses people off. The lawyers will save us, but we have to make sure nobody is blind to what is happening.
Please do! And thank you for adding them, Nurse Jenny! Signed, just one of many trans nurses these trump voters don’t know are helping them on a bush med surg floor cuz I look like everyone else, like a human in scrubs, August, RN, they/them
Welcome to our brave new world of government censorship, overseen by Trump's political appointees, and heralding America's rapid descent into the Dark Ages of science and medicine.
I asked a lawyer about that. It might be in many cases but the line is unclear. The government can tell its officials/own agencies what it can and can't say, on a lot of things.
As I wrote earlier in Inside Medicine, it's tougher for government employees. I don't know what I would do in their shoes...but only what I HOPE I would do. But it's not easy. Rent has to be paid.
Yes, no doubt. There are going to be many hard crossings to make over the coming weeks and months. But the only way we can hope to be able to hold our own and make it through is to come together — to be with and for one another. Find pathways, invent solutions, come together in departments, divisions, institutes, professional societies — everywhere. Refuse and resist in myriad ways large and small. It all adds up.
Here's an idea. Since it seems that no one in Congress is willing to stand up to this why don't all the healthcare professionals go on strike for a day and see how the American people like it? Doctors cannot do their work without the information they are being denied and their patients will suffer. No one will believe this until it actually happens to them so the way to make this happen is call out sick. Seriously. Fight fire with fire.
Freaky when we see it evolve. But. I wish it made a difference, 'we' knew this would happen and more of the same. Do you suppose NOW the Trump supporters are becoming aware of who/what they voted for? Or, are 'they' not interested in what is really going on to BE aware of this crap. I hope some or more in congress are seeing the light from their dark, cubbyhole of fear they might lose their job id they speak against what I've heard are unconstitutional moves. Thank God for Substack. (Hmm. You may have to go 'underground' whatever that might mean. Enter the era of Anne Frank. I was asked why I rven bother with watching the news (MSNBC). I dread it usually butvtge shows bring on invaluable speakers with factual moral supporting thoughts, suggestions for speaking out and even so far the results of speaking out. Trump and team, mostly team I'm sure, have LOADED the daily changes with so many we need a scorecard to keep track. Journalists on MSNBC have really helped me - know I'm not alone, feel comfortable speaking up and helping understand the necessity of at least trying to keep up with the enormity of changes made but accepting the emotional insense, fears, anger resulting from the 'current' administration's chess moves. I am so very grateful for Substack & co. 'We' aren't alone and with Substack and their experts who are our news media, I know an educated revolt of some kind will not just sit by and watch the parade calmly waltz down Main Street USA spreading its diseased cultures. We don't need vaccines for that disease. Informative Substack, our comments, subscriptions, referrals to our friends to Substack is a highway (not just a road, mind you, to realizing our contempt for Trumpism, now more distasteful than ever) and getying us 🇺🇸 outta this and actually going forward. Dear Kamala: We are NOT going back. P.S. Again, Jeremy - thank you.
What I do not understand is why they are complying with this on old data. The President simply doesn't have the power to tell agencies to unpublish old data: it is illegal to change it. Congress approved that spending and funding for it. Taking out variables is data manipulation and this mass compliance without even saying, I think this is illegal, without the media even noticing that it's illegal is ridiculous...
It's not to unpublish things that are already online. It's to halt the dozens or hundreds or papers that are in revision or in press but have not yet come out.
example: a CDC researcher submits to JAMA in October. It gets reviewed and sent back for revisions in November. The authors revise. JAMA accepts in December and it gets in the queue for January or February but is not out yet. It would have to be retracted and 'cleansed'
There is another angle to the lengths this Administration will go to gag scientists of all kinds. By creating these rules and loyalty tests, they are daring the health and science staffers to quit and save the Federal government money and the headache of easily litigated mass firings. Of course, it will feel like a deal with the Devil no matter what a science staffer decides to do.
So, in 1994 I graduated from Georgetown University after attending for 5 years in DC. I feel like all the professors lead on and the wider DC community in general was ETHICAL DECISION MAKING and how to THINK BROADLY and within an ETHICAL SPHERE. DC in 1990s ~ we had healthcare for everyone marches, human rights discussions, open-ended public health communication ~Hillary was on The Hill talking about healthcare reform and ideas in Congress. It Takes A Village was published etc … Why are we going backwards? it’s 2025 ! Our children deserve better. Our future is thinking broadly within the realm of ETHICAL FRAMEWORKS and FREEDOM TO EXPRESS IDEAS and TO EXIST philosophically with scientific inquiry and research freedoms ~ just sayin it’s 2025 … progress… future 💡 💭 ethical processes still exist etc and the freedom to think individually and to share thoughts 💭
Has there been any prior history of left leaning censorship at the CDC prior to now? That is, were there requirements to use terms like "pregnant person" or restrictions on writing "their gender at birth" or pronoun usage?
The answer, I would think, is probably yes, but I am not sure because any influence from prior directors was likely mild stuff/suggestions, rather than strict requirements. I would invite you to consider the difference between a slap on the wrist/arm twist and a fucking decapitation. The scale of the censorship and unapologetic political bent here is without any kind of precedent.
Did you ever hear of a federal agency mandating anything like "pregnant people"? I didn't, and I'm sure we would have if it happened. When the Bush and Clinton administrations refused to fund research that mentioned "harm reduction," it wasn't after it was published— you just knew to avoid the term if you wanted the grant.
I can't tell from your responses whether you are a professional who has studied the issue or you are just really confident. I do know that the CDC did get into the weeds on language during the past few years. Like "refer to someone as a person with diabetes rather than a diabetic". "Formerly incarcerated individual" rather than "ex-felon". And no violent words like "to combat the problem" or "attack the problem". I just don't know how much it was policed because I am an outsider.
We're going to see just how many people are willing to actually stand up and fight this. I am terrified to find out. Hitler was swept into power by only about 30% of the population. It was the 60-70% of the populace that did nothing to stop it that allowed him to go unchecked. What are we going to do to stop what is happening now?
I think shine a light on everything and see what finally pisses people off. The lawyers will save us, but we have to make sure nobody is blind to what is happening.
I’ve never used pronouns in my signature for my email at work. But I decided to just add it. I included “nurse” first. 😁🤷🏻♀️
Now my signature shows like this:
Best Health,
Jeanette Tupper-Shearer, MSN-Ed, PHN, RN, RCSN
Credentialed School Nurse / Public
Health Nurse / Nurse Educator
(NURSE/She/Her/Hers)
I swear I am about to also lol
I had to add and put nurse first! Ha Ha!
Please do! And thank you for adding them, Nurse Jenny! Signed, just one of many trans nurses these trump voters don’t know are helping them on a bush med surg floor cuz I look like everyone else, like a human in scrubs, August, RN, they/them
I hope I did it right. I had to look at another nurses signature, she had (She/Her/Hers)
Hmmm, another nurse put, (She,Her,Herself). 🤷🏻♀️ I will just leave mine how I just added it.
Welcome to our brave new world of government censorship, overseen by Trump's political appointees, and heralding America's rapid descent into the Dark Ages of science and medicine.
We have to stand up to censorship
Yes, indeed. Thank you so much for standing up and spreading the truth!
Isn't this a 1st amendment issue?
I asked a lawyer about that. It might be in many cases but the line is unclear. The government can tell its officials/own agencies what it can and can't say, on a lot of things.
Regardless, it's scary.
This is fascist, plain and simple. Do not obey! Resistance is Fertile!
As I wrote earlier in Inside Medicine, it's tougher for government employees. I don't know what I would do in their shoes...but only what I HOPE I would do. But it's not easy. Rent has to be paid.
Yes, no doubt. There are going to be many hard crossings to make over the coming weeks and months. But the only way we can hope to be able to hold our own and make it through is to come together — to be with and for one another. Find pathways, invent solutions, come together in departments, divisions, institutes, professional societies — everywhere. Refuse and resist in myriad ways large and small. It all adds up.
Thank you so much for your important work, Doc.
thanks for helping disseminate
Here's an idea. Since it seems that no one in Congress is willing to stand up to this why don't all the healthcare professionals go on strike for a day and see how the American people like it? Doctors cannot do their work without the information they are being denied and their patients will suffer. No one will believe this until it actually happens to them so the way to make this happen is call out sick. Seriously. Fight fire with fire.
Freaky when we see it evolve. But. I wish it made a difference, 'we' knew this would happen and more of the same. Do you suppose NOW the Trump supporters are becoming aware of who/what they voted for? Or, are 'they' not interested in what is really going on to BE aware of this crap. I hope some or more in congress are seeing the light from their dark, cubbyhole of fear they might lose their job id they speak against what I've heard are unconstitutional moves. Thank God for Substack. (Hmm. You may have to go 'underground' whatever that might mean. Enter the era of Anne Frank. I was asked why I rven bother with watching the news (MSNBC). I dread it usually butvtge shows bring on invaluable speakers with factual moral supporting thoughts, suggestions for speaking out and even so far the results of speaking out. Trump and team, mostly team I'm sure, have LOADED the daily changes with so many we need a scorecard to keep track. Journalists on MSNBC have really helped me - know I'm not alone, feel comfortable speaking up and helping understand the necessity of at least trying to keep up with the enormity of changes made but accepting the emotional insense, fears, anger resulting from the 'current' administration's chess moves. I am so very grateful for Substack & co. 'We' aren't alone and with Substack and their experts who are our news media, I know an educated revolt of some kind will not just sit by and watch the parade calmly waltz down Main Street USA spreading its diseased cultures. We don't need vaccines for that disease. Informative Substack, our comments, subscriptions, referrals to our friends to Substack is a highway (not just a road, mind you, to realizing our contempt for Trumpism, now more distasteful than ever) and getying us 🇺🇸 outta this and actually going forward. Dear Kamala: We are NOT going back. P.S. Again, Jeremy - thank you.
We'll see how bad it gets. Good thing I don't work for the US Government.
What I do not understand is why they are complying with this on old data. The President simply doesn't have the power to tell agencies to unpublish old data: it is illegal to change it. Congress approved that spending and funding for it. Taking out variables is data manipulation and this mass compliance without even saying, I think this is illegal, without the media even noticing that it's illegal is ridiculous...
It's not to unpublish things that are already online. It's to halt the dozens or hundreds or papers that are in revision or in press but have not yet come out.
example: a CDC researcher submits to JAMA in October. It gets reviewed and sent back for revisions in November. The authors revise. JAMA accepts in December and it gets in the queue for January or February but is not out yet. It would have to be retracted and 'cleansed'
If I were a NEJM or JAMA or any editorial board member, I'd take these and not send back for minor revisions ...just publish them.
but they are *also* deleting and altering databases that were already "published" online, which is definitely illegal.
There is another angle to the lengths this Administration will go to gag scientists of all kinds. By creating these rules and loyalty tests, they are daring the health and science staffers to quit and save the Federal government money and the headache of easily litigated mass firings. Of course, it will feel like a deal with the Devil no matter what a science staffer decides to do.
Resistance is essential. Thank you for the info here. Scientists will have to set up a private way of getting data gathered and disseminated.
share and remind people that it's not about edge case issues but bread and butter science.
SPEAK UP AND CALL 📞 CONGRESS
So, in 1994 I graduated from Georgetown University after attending for 5 years in DC. I feel like all the professors lead on and the wider DC community in general was ETHICAL DECISION MAKING and how to THINK BROADLY and within an ETHICAL SPHERE. DC in 1990s ~ we had healthcare for everyone marches, human rights discussions, open-ended public health communication ~Hillary was on The Hill talking about healthcare reform and ideas in Congress. It Takes A Village was published etc … Why are we going backwards? it’s 2025 ! Our children deserve better. Our future is thinking broadly within the realm of ETHICAL FRAMEWORKS and FREEDOM TO EXPRESS IDEAS and TO EXIST philosophically with scientific inquiry and research freedoms ~ just sayin it’s 2025 … progress… future 💡 💭 ethical processes still exist etc and the freedom to think individually and to share thoughts 💭
I have to comment just from reading the headline alone! OMG! WTFFFF!?! Ummmm, NO. If I had anything published mentioning those words, so be IT. Yep…!
yeah
Has there been any prior history of left leaning censorship at the CDC prior to now? That is, were there requirements to use terms like "pregnant person" or restrictions on writing "their gender at birth" or pronoun usage?
The answer, I would think, is probably yes, but I am not sure because any influence from prior directors was likely mild stuff/suggestions, rather than strict requirements. I would invite you to consider the difference between a slap on the wrist/arm twist and a fucking decapitation. The scale of the censorship and unapologetic political bent here is without any kind of precedent.
I think I agree but I also know all of us are prone to excuse bad behavior from those on our side while calling it out on the other side.
It is not censorship to suggest use of specific words. It is censorship or worse to change already published research. This is not comparable.
So you are confirming that until now there had only been suggestions of word choice? That was my original question.
Did you ever hear of a federal agency mandating anything like "pregnant people"? I didn't, and I'm sure we would have if it happened. When the Bush and Clinton administrations refused to fund research that mentioned "harm reduction," it wasn't after it was published— you just knew to avoid the term if you wanted the grant.
I can't tell from your responses whether you are a professional who has studied the issue or you are just really confident. I do know that the CDC did get into the weeds on language during the past few years. Like "refer to someone as a person with diabetes rather than a diabetic". "Formerly incarcerated individual" rather than "ex-felon". And no violent words like "to combat the problem" or "attack the problem". I just don't know how much it was policed because I am an outsider.
I am trying to even process this. It is surreal that it is happening. Thank you for sharing and shining a light on it all.
please share!