Trump made fun of Biden for wearing a mask 0:56
(CNN) -
In an unprecedented move, the New England Journal of Medicine published an editorial written by its editors on Wednesday condemning the Trump administration for its response to the covid-19 pandemic.
The magazine asked, by vote, to change the current leadership of the United States.
"We rarely publish editorials signed by all editors," said Dr. Eric Rubin, editor-in-chief of the medical journal and author of the new editorial.
The editorial, which Rubin said was written in August, details how the United States leads the world in COVID-19 cases and deaths.
So far, more than 7.5 million people in the United States have been diagnosed with COVID-19 and more than 200,000 have died from the disease.
“This crisis has produced a test of leadership.
Without good options to combat a new pathogen, countries were forced to make difficult decisions about how to respond.
Here in America, our leaders failed that test.
They have taken a crisis and turned it into a tragedy, "says the editorial.
US reports more than 50,000 new cases of coronavirus
5 things: vaccines in the US need Latinos and blacks 2:13
The government has had "immunity," says the scientific journal
The magazine does not endorse any candidate, but offers a scathing critique of the leadership of the Trump administration during the pandemic.
“Anyone else who recklessly wastes lives and money in this way would be suffering legal consequences.
Our leaders have largely claimed immunity for their actions.
But this election gives us the power to make judgments, ”says the editorial.
“When it comes to responding to the greatest public health crisis of our time, our current political leaders have shown themselves to be dangerously incompetent.
We must not help them and allow thousands more Americans to die by allowing them to keep their jobs.
The New England Journal of Medicine began publication in 1812. There have been only four previous editorials collectively signed by its editors in the recent past: one in 2014 on contraception;
an obituary that same year for a former editor-in-chief;
an editorial from that year on standard of care research and an editorial in 2019 on abortion.
“The reason we have never published an editorial on elections is that we are not a political magazine and I don't think we want to be a political magazine, but the problem here is about facts, not opinions.
There have been many mistakes made there that were not only foolish but reckless, and I think we want people to realize that there are truths here, not just opinions, ”said Rubin.
Covid-19 arrives at the White House 1 month after the 1:53 election
«For example, the masks work.
Social distancing works.
Quarantine and isolation work.
They are not opinions.
Deciding not to use them is perhaps a political decision, but trying to suggest that they are not real is imaginary and dangerous, ”he said.
“We don't have the right leaders for this epidemic.
I think we need better leadership.
The New England Journal of Medicine is not the only medical or scientific journal to take a political stance amid the pandemic and ahead of the November presidential election.
In September, Scientific American magazine announced that it was backing former Vice President and Democratic candidate Joe Biden over President Trump, whom it criticized for rejecting science.
That announcement marked the publication's first endorsement of a presidential candidate in its 175-year history.
covid-19