Joint Info Center answers too often beg more questions

During the COVID-19 pandemic residents of the state of New Hampshire deserve heightened transparency from state officials.

However, the Joint Information Center seems to be on more of an obfuscation campaign rather than one of openness.

Consider some of the missives they have sent The Rochester Voice when responding to legitimate queries.

The Joint Information Center was activated by Gov. Sununu back on March 9 to support the coordination of timely, accurate and accessible public information in the state's response to the ongoing COVID-19 outbreak.

On April 2 The Rochester Voice contacted the JIC by email to ask them:

"I thought the state was going to release ages or age range of positive tests for COVID like Maine and Mass. Can you tell me where to find these?"

The answer came back less than an hour later: "DHHS releases an update each day at https://www.nh.gov/covid19/news/updates.htm. The updates contain the information you are asking about with regard to COVID-19 related deaths, including gender, general location of residence, and age range."

Of course they don't, at least not yet. We pored over the page they'd sent a link to only to find there were no such age metrics.

We then called the JIC and made them aware of the erroneous information they had sent out.

It should be noted that Maine and Massachusetts both release age metrics including whether confirmed cases are in their 20s, 30s, 40s, 50s, 60s, or over 70.

On April 5 we noted that the deaths from the prior two days for the first time listed the victims as adults over 60, without noting they had underlying health conditions. That was a big change because prior to that they all had been listed as having underlying medical conditions.

We wanted to know if the change was because they had no underlying medical conditions or whether they had adopted a new policy of nondisclosure to such, so we sent another email to the JIC on April 5 as follows:

"Up until 2 days ago, State of NH DHHS has reported COVID-19 related deaths, stating if the patient was over/under 60 years of age, and the statements have said "with underlying health issues". As of 2 days ago, DHHS has reported 2 more deaths and neither one has the statement "with underlying health issues".
Was the lack of stating "underlying health issue" an error of omission, or can it be rightfully inferred that these 2 deaths from COVID-19 were not exasperated by underlying health issues?"

The answer was a terse, enigmatic five words: "The omission was not in error."

Wow! Almost cryptic!

Since that exchange no COVID-19 death has been represented by DHHS as specifically having an underlying health condition. Hmmmm

So why did they change their verbiage to not include if the victim had an "underlying medical condition."

Last week we pressed the Joint Information Center to release the age grouping of confirmed cases.

An unsigned reply noted: "The current practice is to provide information in the DHHS Update based upon whether the provision of such information further ensures the health and safety of the public. The provision of more specific age data does not further ensure the health and safety of the public."

To which we say, with all due respect: Nuts!

If the Joint Information Center would release the age spectrum by decade as they do in Maine and Massachusetts it would further impress upon young people they are just as susceptible to the disease as older folk. It might not be as deadly for young people, but if they think they are less at risk, maybe that explains some of the more reckless behavior they are sometimes seen as doing.

So if you - the Joint Information Center - is charged with ensuring the health and safety of the public, remember young people are part of that fabric. How about trying to protect them by letting them know they could very easily become infected and even end up in a hospital ICU.

In Maine almost 21 percent are in their 50s compared to 19 percent in their 60s. And almost 10 percent are in their 20s

It seems to me by tiptoeing around the facts with nebulous emails that raise more questions than they answer, you may have put more folks at risk instead of less.

To their credit, the state of New Hampshire last week said they would be providing more age metrics this week.

Let's get it done ... now!

And for the JIC, just answer the questions in plain English, please.