CDC is documenting their lack of a suitable response to "bird flu"

https://www.cdc.gov/bird-flu/spotlights/h5n1-response-01172025.html
They are documenting that they never started contact testing and contact tracing, and they make no claims about the dairy workers that they were supposed to have started testing back in Nov.  Instead they make a big deal about "monitoring" cases of human influenza that is just pathetic when you think that they are claiming testing only 73,000 infected people (not associated with dairies) when the number of human influenza cases have likely been in the millions by now.  The CDC estimates that 28,000 people died of influenza in the US in 2023, so 10s of millions of infected individuals are needed to account for that mortality.  That means that their monitoring is stupidly ineffective and the 4 individuals identified as being infected are likely only a fraction of people that were infected with the "bird flu".
As indicated testing of dairy workers has been pathetically nearly nonexistant even though they were supposed to have started increased testing a couple months ago, nothing is being reported, and that effort isn't even mentioned in this report, so it likely never got started.
They continue to not differentiate the B3.13 dairy genotype from the D1.1 wild bird genotype (that killed one person).  As stupid as it may be they are only treating the D1.1 infections like the dairy infections, and make no new recommendations as to how to deal with the D1.1 infections.  D1.1 needs to be dealt with in a different manner than how they have not been doing the right thing for the dairy virus.  Their surveillance program is just inadequate and they will never be able to stop the next pandemic from starting since they likely are only detecting a fraction of the non dairy infection bird flu infections.
This report is just sad as it documents what has not been done, by their claims of what they have done.
As frightening as it may be they have apparently not tested the D1.1 virus against their current H5 vaccine strains.  They only cite the early work on the dairy virus before it has changed to the point where they had to make a synthetic H5 antigen with the Missouri patients viral mutations in it in order to test for antibodies in their blood.  They know that the mutations severely affect the antibody binding, but that is not in this report.  They know the sequence of the D1.1 genotype and it is that sequence that they need to worry about.  It is as if they are purposely trying not to do the right thing.  They know that they have different sequences, but they are not differentiating between the different strains.
Ron Okimoto