#centers_for_disease_control_and_prevention

  • Federal health workers terrified after ’#DEI' website publishes list of ’targets’

    The site calls out workers who have been involved with DEI initiatives. A majority are Black.

    Federal health workers are expressing fear and alarm after a website called “#DEI_Watch_List” published the photos, names and public information of a number of workers across health agencies, describing them at one point as “targets.”

    It’s unclear when the website, which lists mostly Black employees who work in agencies primarily within the Department of Health and Human Services, first appeared.

    “Offenses” for the workers listed on the website include working on diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives, donating to Democrats and using pronouns in their bios.

    The website, a government worker said, is being circulated among multiple private group chats of federal health workers across agencies, as well as through social media links.

    The site also reached Dr. Georges Benjamin, the executive director of the American Public Health Association, who learned about it Tuesday evening when a federal health worker sent it to him.

    “This is a scare tactic to try to intimidate people who are trying to do their work and do it admirably,” Benjamin said. “It’s clear racism.”

    A government worker said they found out theirs was among the names on the website Tuesday afternoon after a former co-worker sent them the link on social media.

    “It’s unnerving,” said the person, who requested anonymity because of safety concerns. “My name and my picture is there, and in 2025, it’s very simple to Google and look up someone’s home address and all kinds of things that potentially put me at risk.”

    “I don’t know what the intention of the list is for,” the person said. “It’s just kind of a scary place to be.”

    On Tuesday evening, the site listed photos of employees and linked to further information about them under the headline “Targets.” Later Tuesday night, the headline on each page had been changed to “Dossiers.”

    The site lists workers’ salaries along with what it describes as “DEI offenses,” including political donations, screenshots of social media posts, snippets from websites describing their work, or being a part of a DEI initiative that has been scrubbed from a federal website.

    Benjamin suggested the acts of online harassment are criminal. “Law enforcement should look into them.”

    A person who isn’t on the list but works at a federal health agency called the website “psychological warfare.” The link, this person said, is being circulated in their private group chat of federal health workers, causing some to “freak out.”

    It’s hard to gauge, the worker said, whether it’s a legitimate threat. “I don’t know anything about the organization doing this or their parent association. People are just paranoid right now.”

    A note at the bottom of the website says, “A project of the American Accountability Foundation.” That group is a conservative watchdog group.

    It’s not the first time the group has created such a list. In December, it sent Pete Hegseth, then the nominee for defense secretary, a list of names of people in the military whom it deemed too focused on diversity, equity and inclusion, the New York Post reported at the time.

    Neither the American Accountability Foundation nor HHS immediately responded to requests for comment.

    The website comes after a bruising two weeks for public health workers. Employees at the #Centers_for_Disease_Control_and_Prevention say they have received “threatening” memos from the #Department_of_Health_and_Human Services directing them to terminate any activities, jobs and research with any connection to diversity, equity and inclusion — and turn in co-workers who don’t adhere to the orders. HHS oversees federal health agencies, including the CDC and the #National_Institutes_of_Health.

    “The tone is aggressive. It’s threatening consequences if we are not obedient. It’s asking us to report co-workers who aren’t complying,” said a CDC physician who wasn’t authorized to speak to reporters. “There’s a lot of fear and panic.”

    NBC News reviewed one of the memos, which directed employees to “review all agency position descriptions and send a notification to all employees whose position description involves inculcating or promoting gender ideology that they are being placed on paid administrative leave effective immediately.”

    The result, staffers said, is paranoia.

    “I know of people who have been put on administrative leave for perceived infractions related to these ambiguous memos. People are thinking if I put one foot wrong, I’m just going to be fired,” another CDC physician said.

    In one case, a potluck luncheon among co-workers was hastily canceled for fear it would be seen as a way to promote cultural diversity.

    Despite the harassment, public health employees said they remain committed to their work.

    “If I leave, who’s going to replace me?” a CDC physician said. “If nobody replaces me and enough of us leave, then who’s going to be doing the public health work?”

    https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/federal-health-workers-terrified-dei-website-publishes-list-targets-rcna190
    #liste #cibles #USA #Etats-Unis #it_has_begun #fonctionnaires #intimidation #inclusion #diversité #équité #santé #menaces #santé_publique #délation

  • CDC (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centers_for_Disease_Control_and_Prevention) orders mass retraction and revision of submitted research across all science and medicine journals. Banned terms must be scrubbed.

    The CDC has instructed its scientists to retract or pause the publication of any research manuscript being considered by any medical or scientific journal, not merely its own internal periodicals, Inside Medicine has learned. The move aims to ensure that no “forbidden terms” appear in the work. The policy includes manuscripts that are in the revision stages at journal (but not officially accepted) and those already accepted for publication but not yet live.

    In the order, CDC researchers were instructed to remove references to or mentions of a list of forbidden terms: “Gender, transgender, pregnant person, pregnant people, LGBT, transsexual, non-binary, nonbinary, assigned male at birth, assigned female at birth, biologically male, biologically female,” according to an email sent to CDC employees (see below).”

    An expansion of an emerging censorship regime at the CDC.

    The policy goes beyond the previously reported pause of the CDC’s own publications, including Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR), which has seen two issues go unreleased since January 16, marking the first publication gap of any kind in approximately 60 years. Emerging infectious Diseases and Preventing Chronic Disease, the CDC’s other major publications, also remain under lock and key, but have not yet been affected because they are monthly releases and both were released as scheduled in January, prior to President Trump’s inauguration. The policy also goes beyond the general communications gag order that already prevents any CDC scientist from submitting any new scientific findings to the public.

    The edict applies to both any previously submitted manuscript under consideration and those accepted but not yet published. For example, if CDC scientists previously submitted a manuscript to The New England Journal of Medicine, The Journal of the American Medical Association, or any other publication, the article must be stopped and reviewed. (These are hypothetical, but are examples of major journals where CDC officials often publish.)
    Scale of policy unclear. Chaos, uncertainly, and fear prevail.

    How many manuscripts are affected is unclear, but it could be many. Most manuscripts include simple demographic information about the populations or patients studied, which typically includes gender (and which is frequently used interchangeably with sex). That means just about any major study would fall under the censorship regime of the new policy, including studies on Covid-19, cancer, heart disease, or anything else, let alone anything that the administration considers to be “woke ideology.”

    Meanwhile, chaos and fear are already guiding decisions. While the policy is only meant to apply to work that might be seen as conflicting with President Trump’s executive orders, CDC experts don’t know how to interpret that. Do papers that describe disparities in health outcomes fall into “woke ideology” or not? Nobody knows, and everyone is scared that they’ll be fired. This is leading to what Germans call “vorauseilender Gehorsam,” or “preemptive obedience,” as one non-CDC scientist commented.

    “I’ve got colleagues pulling papers over Table 1 concerns,” an official told me. (Table 1 refers to basic demographic information about the study populations included in research papers, rather than actual results.) Indeed, many studies include demographic information about sexual orientation. For example, a study describing mpox outcomes would likely include basic statistics in tables summarizing the percentage of patients who were vaccinated and were lesbian, gay, transgender, or otherwise. This information can be highly impactful during an outbreak, as it helps clinicians develop policies on who to vaccinate (given limited doses, as is the case with mpox), and even to whom scarce and limited supplies of tests and treatments should be offered to maximize benefits.

    It is not necessarily the case that researchers who have submitted articles but who have not yet received an official decision from a journal need to actively recall them, however. But if a journal sends an article back for revisions, the authors would at that point have to cleanse the document of any “problematic language.” Of course, at that point, the gag order already in place would halt any resubmission.

    Efficiency is impossible.

    What can and cannot go forward appears to require approval by a Trump political appointee, an explicit requirement for any public health communications under the Trump Administration’s gag order. That’s slowing many things down. At present, there is only one political appointee in the entire CDC, acting Director Susan Monarez (plus her personal assistant, who is not a scientist). It’s unclear if some decisions may be devolved to lower officials. For example, if a paper is pulled because it simply mentions gender, it is unknown if anyone other than Monarez possesses the authority to approve its resubmission.

    “How can one person vet all of this?” another official asked, “especially one who, [like Monarez], came from an agency of, what, 130 people?”

    And yet, that seems to be the theme of the new administration: a few privileged individuals have been handed enormous authority, creating a backlog of decisions that may end up being fairly arbitrarily determined.

    https://insidemedicine.substack.com/p/breaking-news-cdc-orders-mass-retraction

    #transphobie #USA #Etats-Unis #recherche #censure #revues_scientifiques #médecine #genre #publications #édition_scientifique #archive #archive_publique
    #Centers_for_Disease_Control_and_Prevention (#CDC) #médecine #santé

    –-

    signalé aussi par @monolecte ici:
    https://seenthis.net/messages/1096228