Impacts of the 2024 change in US government on ME/CFS and Long Covid

Thanks for the detailed reply.

You know a lot more than me here, but since congress doesn’t have a strong republican majority, they’ll probably need to convince more moderate GOP senators too.

I could see a major NIH shakeup, and I could see RFK getting nominated, but in my intuition, it’ll be an either one of the other deal. I’m not convinced moderate republicans are willing to give RFK the power to completely restructure the largest health funder on earth.

 

Yeah several friends and family have asked me today about RFK’s likelihood on Senate approval and I just don’t even know anymore with where the moderates sit on this. This climate is just unpredictable right now.

5 days ago my answer would have been a strong no. With several (understatement) other risky Cabinet nominees, I think it may depend on where the moderates decide to fight their battle. That part I can’t really discern yet.

 

Thanks for the explanation, Yann04.

 

My instinct is that rather little change will actually occur with this new administration. Most of what is being said is not because of 'beliefs'. It is just being said for the sake of sounding 'anti-elite', whatever that is supposed to mean if you are from a presidential family. And if there is change I think it may be difficult to predict what policy shifts actually occur. I don't think the politicians have got as far as thinking that through in any way that might be writable down.

What might well happen is that a cultural group that has had a stranglehold on medical science gets pushed out - maybe typified by Fauci. These are people who assume they know best but are actually quite second rate minds who just follow each other's fashions, intoning incantations like gene expression and big data and multi-omics. We have the same people in the UK. They have become much more like shamans high priests than scientific investigators. The hit rocks with sacred sticks and water comes out - or at least they claim that.

Creative science will re-establish itself at some point but it may not be in the USA for a decade or more for reasons that have little to do with party politics.

 

The good news keeps on coming!

Jay Bhattacharya, an NIH critic, emerges as a top candidate to lead the agency

https://wapo.st/3Z79RZM

 

Can’t access WAPO. But this dude would be a disaster for Long COVID.

Looks like he’s a “herd immunity” anti-masking advocate who was anti lockdown and downplayed the deadliness of COVID.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jay_Bhattacharya

 

I found a quote from an article he wrote last year that touches on Long COVID. He minimises it’s impact and says it’s mainly “post ICU syndrome”

https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/the-covid-wars

 

I don't think senate approval matters. They already signaled they'll push through anyone, and where recess appointments fail, 'acting' positions is how the last year unfolded last time. No one pushed back. Hell the AG and SecDef were replaced with 'actings' for the final months and no one batted an eye. It's safe to assume that anyone nominated will hold that position, unless something happens internally, between the nominee and T, and another toady gets nominated and pushed through.

It's not as if there's anything anyone can actually do about this. Governments operate on norms as much as they operate on written rules. And neither matter here. Unless there is an ego clash between them, RFK will head HHS, and whoever runs the NIH and the CDC will be just as awful. Which is little difference from a current state of awful, most likely some Koch-backed toadies who pushed for herd immunity. It will be bad, but the differences in outcomes will be much smaller than people expect. The current way of doing things is so extremely inefficient that it barely moves the needle and in the end everyone adopted the eugenics approach. Every country. Every single one of them, whoever is in charge.

It is true that the current system has failed us miserably, and whatever gets rebuilt out of throwing it all to the ground has a slim chance of working out, which can still be an improvement on the current intransigent gridlock. Worst case is just as bad as it ever was. Not much change, really. Basically the main change would be more people being subject to the same incompetence we have suffered. If only it could be expected that people would learn something out of this...

 

Definitely agree, @rvallee. The bar is so low that it seems there will be little difference regardless.

Sharing without much context on Bhattacharya (I'm sure this guy is a nightmare but will have to read more, I just learned his name 5 minutes ago), when just looking at his account and LC mentions

https://twitter.com/user/status/1839590571788083465


https://twitter.com/user/status/1811165826646692007

 

If he really becomes in charge of the NIH I will be devastated.

 

Not to be a debbie downer but I'd be prepared, if already speculated, that it's a likelihood it will happen (I could be proven wrong, so I'm not placing any bets).

I honestly don't really foresee that much change with how ME/LC are approached at NIH, but that's just how I feel how low the bar is. I don't really think it's that different than what's been there for leadership ever since the mid 80's. Kinda all feels the same from here. Leaders come in and out and the results all stay the same.

(ie, how did Collins / Tabak / Bertagnolli allow for $820 million to be spent on symptom observation in RECOVER? Mainly Collins / Tabak but still..)

Totally understand how it still feels disheartening though and can't blame anyone for that

 

Nature: 'Major biomedical funder NIH poised for massive reform under Trump 2.0'

'Sweeping changes and more research scrutiny could be on the way for the US National Institutes of Health'

'The NIH has been a frequent target of Trump...'

'NIH director Monica Bertagnolli, who will probably resign before Trump takes office, noted her disapproval with the proposals to collapse the number of institutes.'

 

Feels like an apt time to re-share today

https://twitter.com/user/status/1857844947069608445

 

https://twitter.com/user/status/1857661111878701104


Lunatic anti-vaxxer RFK, Jr. says hes going to immediately STOP the DEVELOPMENT of NEW DRUGS for cancer, Alzheimers and other illnesses,... for eight years.

 

Just gets better and better.

 

RKJ making 'America healthy again' campaign.

 

One of the most important parts:

Although calling it widely rebuked or discredited is simply wrong, in the end every single country adopted those policies. Well, without the fake concern with 'focused protection', which was always complete BS. For sure it's wrong, but the current government embraced it just as every other government. So that's not much change here, it simply rewards the people who failed the worst. As is tradition. I have no doubt that people like Walitt will do very well in this new jungle. Bhattacharya's attitudes towards LC are very mainstream, in fact pretty much are the standard. In fact many MDs would rejoice if RECOVER is all cancelled out and ME/CFS funding is shut down, calling it a waste anyway.

Basically, now most medical research from the NIH will be terrible, and more of it will be neglected entirely. Instead of only some research. But for diseases affecting most people, progress has already been significant and will continue, so they won't notice much. It will simply slow progress to a crawl, but that won't be noticeable for at least a decade. By then AI will probably overtake much of the work anyway.