CDC’s practices under criticisms by biosafety experts

Atlanta –The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has come under heavy condemnations after a report compiled by the biosafety experts indicated that the health institute lacks credible standards of care, leadership, and accountability.

Other observations of concern included uneducated staff of specific protocols plus inconsistent and insufficient Leadership commitment toward safety at multiple levels.

The report from the advisory group stated that, “CDC is known as a capable organization whose values and efforts are all geared towards promotion of health in the larger society hence we are concerned of its credibility loss”.

The advisory group had been put on board to look into the agency’s practices which in the latest past had resulted into multiple high-profile and dangerous blunders.Agency chief Tom Frieden while addressing the safety concerns told Congress that in 2014 alone three errors had been reported which triggered the need for review of CDC.

However, “I have taken significant handling the safety concerns and I can assure that there is progress towards implementing them”. Tom said while concurring with the recommendations made.

One of the cases involved the deadly anthrax virus where dozens of employees in a bio-terrorism lab were exposed to a risk of failure to appropriately monitor sterilization techniques. This led to the resignation of the lab head.

The other incidence was about the Ebola virus whereby wrong specimens were mistakenly transported by a technician from a high-level lab to a lower-level lab which led to a potential exposure of employees to the risk associated.

After the investigations of the two incidences, various recommendations were made including addition of cameras to some labs, obtaining certificates when transferring samples from some labs among others.

An external review of the CDC labs through an accreditation process was also highly recommended. However Chief Operating Officer was quick to state that they are committed in soliciting for feedback which would help them improve on their functions and especially those critical ones involving the lab.