Roberta J. WittyThere is a very old saying that the first victim of war is the truth. Well, we can easily see how that cliché can apply to the circumstances surrounding the very early days of the unfolding swine flu story.
In just trying to get a sense of the pace at which swine flu is spreading, consider the following tallies from the Center for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta as of 10:00 AM this morning:
Cases as of 4/27/09: 40
Cases as of 4/27/09: 64
Yes, both tallies had the same date. Just wrong information.
OK, this may be minor, but it gets worse the deeper one goes.
Yesterday we spent hours in search of a public official who would declare whether or not non-health related response plans compiled for the “bird flu” pandemic were entirely adequate for responding to “swine flu.” However, what we did not say in that post was that a New York State official (where most swine flu cases have been identified) recommended that we ask officials at the Center for Disease Control (CDC) in Atlanta to ascertain whether any non-health related response plans to “swine flu” had to be altered in any way from their “bird flu” based plans prepared just a few years ago.
I will say that again.
A New York State official on the state’s “Swine Flu Hotline” recommended that we ask officials at the CDC to ascertain whether any (non-health related) response plans that were originally created for “bird flu” had to be altered in any way to adequate respond to “swine flu.”
We highlight these two little vignettes for one simple reason. If policy is going to be predicated upon the advice and counsel you provide your executives then verify all “facts” from at least three independent sources before offering your advice and counsel. This will help prevent visiting the realities behind yet another cliché: “The path to hell is paved with good intentions.”
Category: Uncategorized Tags:
2 responses so far ↓
1 joan fischer April 30, 2009 at 12:42 pm
why would “non health related” response plans be created, much less altered, for a health related problem?
2 Ken McGee May 4, 2009 at 1:22 pm
Your question stresses our point.
First, a medical related response plan would describe the manner in which anti-viral medicines would be distributed to areas harshly afflicted by a virus outbreak. Whereas a non-health related response plan would include preparations for multi-week staffing of datacenters during a no-travel mandate.
Despite the specific nature of the virus e,g, H1N1, H5N1, etc. it seemed to us there would be little reason to alter a response plan based upon a specific type of vrus.
While suspecting no alterations were required, we researched this increasingly common question from clients by calling response experts to verify our beliefs. Along the way we found someone at a “Hot Line” with an incomplete understanding of certain matters.