Biden's pick to head CDC = infectious diseases chief at Mass.General

[lizkat]

Dr. Rochelle Walensky, Biden’s choice for CDC chief, brings stellar reputation as scientist and communicator - The Boston Globe

“She has a history of standing up for what’s right,” said Dr. Megan Ranney, an associate professor of emergency medicine at Brown University’s Alpert Medical School. “She has an impeccable reputation as a scientist, and a communicator, and a leader.”

www.bostonglobe.com

When Massachusetts General Hospital unexpectedly received 1,000 doses of a scarce new drug to treat COVID-19 last May, the hospital’s infectious diseases chief, Dr. Rochelle Walensky, didn’t feel lucky — she knew it was unfair. Some other hospitals hadn’t gotten any doses at all.

Instead of hoarding the cache for her patients, Walensky helped organize a cooperative effort among the state’s hospitals to ensure the drug, remdesivir, was equitably distributed.

Her penchant for that kind of leadership — empathic, collaborative, and deeply ethical — was one of the reasons medical and public health professionals nationwide rejoiced at President-elect Joseph R. Biden’s decision to name Walensky the next director of the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

 

[Chew Toy McCoy]

I really have to question some of the decisions made by this incoming administration. I was really hoping Hunter Biden's laptop would get this position. It's more than qualified given its long history of being a laptop. Sure, that would upset the right and further their belief that the left is a bunch of elitists by breaking a recent tradition by putting a laptop in this post instead of Biden's barber, but I think at this point in history we need somebody or something more qualified than the previous administration's picks.

 

[lizkat]

I really have to question some of the decisions made by this incoming administration. I was really hoping Hunter Biden's laptop would get this position. It's more than qualified given its long history of being a laptop. Sure, that would upset the right and further their belief that the left is a bunch of elitists by breaking a recent tradition by putting a laptop in this post instead of Biden's barber, but I think at this point in history we need somebody or something more qualified than the previous administration's picks.

Well I'm not exactly thrilled that Biden has tagged Vilsack for heading up Agriculture.

That's a carefully triangulated old school political pick by a former Senator and former VP if I ever saw one. Vilsack in 2009 was Obama's unanimously confirmed Secretary of Agriculture and stayed for both terms, so the message to fricken McConnell for 2021 is you did it once you can do it again boy.​

Anyway I'm like oh OK, agribusiness wins again. Gee.

Well unlike Sonny Perdue, Vilsack likely arrives (again) without a cousin in tow as a US Senator.

Baby steps... I guess.

 

[User.45]

Dr. Rochelle Walensky, Biden’s choice for CDC chief, brings stellar reputation as scientist and communicator - The Boston Globe

“She has a history of standing up for what’s right,” said Dr. Megan Ranney, an associate professor of emergency medicine at Brown University’s Alpert Medical School. “She has an impeccable reputation as a scientist, and a communicator, and a leader.”

www.bostonglobe.com

She's in the same league of scientific productivity as Redfield, just younger.

 

[lizkat]

She's in the same league of scientific productivity as Redfield, just younger.

That job is public-facing: communications skills and trustworthiness are key, and the CDC needs a makeover on that score. Dr. Walensky would have to stoop pretty low from how she is now to reach where Redfield has gone to with the CDC's reputation. It was Redfield's option, not a job requirement, to become a political hack and lackey of Donald Trump.

The CDC chief lost his way during COVID-19. Now his agency is in the balance.

Director Dr. Robert Redfield compromised the CDC’s scientific credibility during COVID pandemic. A new administration inherits a loss of public trust.

www.usatoday.com

 

[thekev]

She's in the same league of scientific productivity as Redfield, just younger.

She has quite a few papers with strong citation counts. None of them are real outliers in terms of count, but they appear to be consistently cited by other people.

Rochelle Walensky

Massachusetts General Hospital - Cited by 23,052 - Infectious Diseases

scholar.google.com

 

[User.45]

She has quite a few papers with strong citation counts. None of them are real outliers in terms of count, but they appear to be consistently cited by other people.

Rochelle Walensky

Massachusetts General Hospital - Cited by 23,052 - Infectious Diseases

scholar.google.com

Yup, I looked. I consider anyone ≥10K citations very very successful...typical Harvard/Hopkins kinda record. She's also 18 years the junior of Redfield.

That job is public-facing: communications skills and trustworthiness are key, and the CDC needs a makeover on that score. Dr. Walensky would have to stoop pretty low from how she is now to reach where Redfield has gone to with the CDC's reputation. It was Redfield's option, not a job requirement, to become a political hack and lackey of Donald Trump.

The CDC chief lost his way during COVID-19. Now his agency is in the balance.

Director Dr. Robert Redfield compromised the CDC’s scientific credibility during COVID pandemic. A new administration inherits a loss of public trust.

www.usatoday.com

What can I say. I wouldn't want to consider Redfield a bad guy but he is also not without controversies and some raised by people I find credible.

 

[lizkat]

What can I say. I wouldn't want to consider Redfield a bad guy but he is also not without controversies and some raised by people I find credible.

The thing about the poor advice leading to the meat packing industry deaths was more than pretty bad.

 

[thekev]

Yup, I looked. I consider anyone ≥10K citations very very successful...typical Harvard/Hopkins kinda record. She's also 18 years the junior of Redfield.


What can I say. I wouldn't want to consider Redfield a bad guy but he is also not without controversies and some raised by people I find credible.

I would agree. It's the consistency that's really excellent though. She has a large number of papers with > 100 citations, most of which don't appear to be self-citations or citations by direct colleagues. I may read through some of her work later.