Dr. Anthony Fauci - 54 years of service

Citysnaps

Elite Member
Staff Member
Site Donor
Posts
3,601
Reaction score
8,819
Main Camera
iPhone
I came across this really excellent Dr. Fauci interview on Amanpour and Co this afternoon, hosted by Walter Isaacson. Thought I'd pass it on.

It's a little long at 18 minutes, but it covers a wide range of information about infectious diseases in general, and where we are today regarding covid.

 

rdrr

Elite Member
Posts
1,181
Reaction score
1,961
Congrats to his long career, and I am hoping he can find time to enjoy his retirement and family. Whatever you feel about him or what your views are about how he handled the Covid Pandemic, he did have a passion for his job and stuck with it for 54 years. I am not sure too many people can claim that.
 

AG_PhamD

Elite Member
Posts
1,028
Reaction score
969
I commend Fauci for a long, productive career and looking amazing for his age.

I honestly have mixed feeling about Fauci. He’s done a lot of good, he’s very intelligent, and mostly made good decisions with COVID given the information at the time.

But I would be remiss to say how disappointed I am that he hurt his own credibility. For example, his initial statement about masks he knew was false and the manipulation around discrediting the credible inquiries into COVID’s origins as a possible lab leak and making people sound conspiracy theorists. I have no idea where the virus originated, but I think it’s important to explore all avenues to help prevent future pandemics.

There was always going to be a faction of people, the anti-mask, anti-vax crowd who don’t trust the government. And they were always going to latch onto whatever they can to justify their beliefs. But how that group was able to influence 50% of the population is pretty alarming.

It is essential the public health authorities research how their own COVID communications with the public could have been handled better. I think the obvious problem is that there was no one in charge who was widely trusted- obviously Trump wasn’t, Fauci hurt his credibility multiple times over, Cuomo was filling the roll to some extent even though he’s the last person who should have been doing so. For some reason, political figures and the media became more influential than actual experts. I think a lot more planning and strategy needs to go into communication during a crisis, including emphasizing that decisions are being made based on the best available info, which is subject to change.

I don’t know, it’s just a very strange situation we found ourselves in. I never imagined that things would get so political. Thank god we didn’t have a worse virus. COVID was pretty devastating with a 1% fatality rate. Imagine if it was 5% or 10% or 50%.
 

Citysnaps

Elite Member
Staff Member
Site Donor
Posts
3,601
Reaction score
8,819
Main Camera
iPhone
Thank god we didn’t have a worse virus. COVID was pretty devastating with a 1% fatality rate. Imagine if it was 5% or 10% or 50%.

Indeed. And during the very early stages of the pandemic, with hospital ICUs maxed out with people on ventilators, and some hospitals needing to have refrigeration trailers brought in to their parking lots to deal with overflow deaths at city morgues, there were a lot of unknowns and uncertainty about the virus' potential outcome.

And with that, there was a massive shortage of adequate PPE/masks, for not just the population, but for hospital care givers. I even remember Apple jumping in using its resources for having PPE manufactured for care-givers at hospitals. Fauci's motivation on masks, at least initially, was that they were at the time, with widespread hoarding, were a scarce resource, and it was critical that front-line covid care-givers be protected.

"I never imagined that things would get so political."

Yep. And that all started started with trump pointing fingers at "Chyna," believing/hinting Chinese leadership was intentionally launching a pandemic weapon on the population of the US. Fauci, being a scientist and epidemiologist with four decades of pandemic-related experience, I suspect believed any such determinations needed to be based on facts available at the time, rather than getting the US population stirred up about China simply to feed trump's ego.

"Fauci hurt his credibility multiple times over"

My view on just about anything in life, with respect to complex problems/endeavors and outcomes, especially with a number of unknown variables, is that there is rarely 100% perfection 100% of the time. And with all things considered, Fauci did an outstanding job.
 

SuperMatt

Site Master
Posts
7,862
Reaction score
15,004
I commend Fauci for a long, productive career and looking amazing for his age.

I honestly have mixed feeling about Fauci. He’s done a lot of good, he’s very intelligent, and mostly made good decisions with COVID given the information at the time.

But I would be remiss to say how disappointed I am that he hurt his own credibility. For example, his initial statement about masks he knew was false and the manipulation around discrediting the credible inquiries into COVID’s origins as a possible lab leak and making people sound conspiracy theorists. I have no idea where the virus originated, but I think it’s important to explore all avenues to help prevent future pandemics.

There was always going to be a faction of people, the anti-mask, anti-vax crowd who don’t trust the government. And they were always going to latch onto whatever they can to justify their beliefs. But how that group was able to influence 50% of the population is pretty alarming.

It is essential the public health authorities research how their own COVID communications with the public could have been handled better. I think the obvious problem is that there was no one in charge who was widely trusted- obviously Trump wasn’t, Fauci hurt his credibility multiple times over, Cuomo was filling the roll to some extent even though he’s the last person who should have been doing so. For some reason, political figures and the media became more influential than actual experts. I think a lot more planning and strategy needs to go into communication during a crisis, including emphasizing that decisions are being made based on the best available info, which is subject to change.

I don’t know, it’s just a very strange situation we found ourselves in. I never imagined that things would get so political. Thank god we didn’t have a worse virus. COVID was pretty devastating with a 1% fatality rate. Imagine if it was 5% or 10% or 50%.
There have been many terrible takes about Dr. Fauci’s work. Now there’s another.

This man dedicated basically his entire life to public service, and is a big reason that AIDS has effective treatments. If people listened to him instead of Trump, the spread of COVID would have been much lower.

But when he retires, armchair quarterbacks are critical of all the wrong things in an effort to pretend they would have done things better?

Bye, Felicia.
 
Last edited:

Eric

Mama's lil stinker
Posts
11,294
Reaction score
21,744
Location
California
Instagram
Main Camera
Sony
For example, his initial statement about masks he knew was false and the manipulation around discrediting the credible inquiries into COVID’s origins as a possible lab leak and making people sound conspiracy theorists. I have no idea where the virus originated, but I think it’s important to explore all avenues to help prevent future pandemics.
Science means learning and adapting, in the case of COVID it had to be done at a lightning pace. Fauci and the medical community all changed their course when they learned it was airborne.

Republicans on the other hand have used this same trope you are parroting, hard line ideology that does not bend whether it's false or not. This is why you guys have such a hard time with something as dynamic as a virus or climate change, instead of adapting to changes you all simply bitch about those who have.
 
Last edited:

AG_PhamD

Elite Member
Posts
1,028
Reaction score
969
Science means learning and adapting, in the case of COVID it had to be done at a lightning pace. Fauci and the medical community all changed their course when they learned it was airborne.

Republicans on the other hand have used this same trope you are parroting, hard line ideology that does not bend whether it's false or not. This is why you guys have such a hard time with something as dynamic as a virus or climate change, instead of adapting to changes you all simply bitch about those who have.

The things I am talking about are NOT things that were known at the the time but later amended. I have zero problem with that. You work with the best information you have at the time.

Fauci personally admitted he “flip flopped” on masking because he wanted to preserve the limited supplies for first responders. I totally agree with prioritizing masks to hospitals. What I think was wrong, was misleading the public that masks would not be helpful to try to achieve that goal. Ethically wrong and wrong because it breeds mistrust between factions of the public, the government, and the medical/scientific community.

And as we saw, once that trust is broken, then nothing is trusted.

Given that at the time the initial guidance was given, COVID was only just starting to affect the US, hysteria was not in full effect, had Fauci/the government been upfront and honest- we have limited supplies of masks, the supply chains are tight, we need the reserve masks for healthcare workers so they are safe and can continue working, please donate any masks to your local hospital, etc- I think most of the public would have understood that and rallied behind the effort.

Fauci coordinating with others to shut down legitimate scientific inquiry into the lab leak hypothesis or any legitimate scientists who reasonably questioned current policies or suggested differing ones is completely antithetical to the scientific method you allude to. For almost a year and half anyone, including legitimate scientists who raised the possibly of anything other than a natural origin were ostracized, particularly by the media. It wasn’t until May 2021 Biden announced that our intelligence suggested both natural and lab origin were possible that suddenly it was no longer a conspiracy theory. This should not have been a surprise.

This censorship of scientific discourse as far as I have witnessed is seen as a big mistake among scientists and doctors I know. This should not (and cannot) be defended. It is not a political issue.

What I care about and the “Republicans” you mention are two very different things. My concern in regard to this critique is primarily that Fauci was involved in shutting down legitimate scientific discourse, which is a tragedy for science. The republicans are far more concerned with seeking out Fauci’s allegedly nefarious motivations for his actions (ie protecting his research field and associated funding to completely character assassinate him and blame him for all the policies they disagree with (many of which were legitimately warranted either at the time or even with 20/20 hindsight).

I think the political sphere has this symptom of borderline personality disorder called “splitting”- where people see others as either all good or all bad. One who is good is held in the highest possible esteem, incapable of wrongdoing or critique. One who is bad is seen as the worst person on earth and everything they do is wrong. The perception of who is good/bad can change, sometimes rapidly, but there’s never really any middle ground.

Take for example James Comey, depending on what stage of the Clinton investigation he was in, he was either the hero of the left or the right. Elon Musk was a hero of the left for promoting EV’s and environmentalism, now THE a hero of the right for sharing and espousing many of their political goals.

Then you have people like Andrew Cuomo and Michael Avanatti who the left wing media effectively praised like a deities, that is until their true colors were revealed as truly despicable people. Trump is the epitome of ridiculous praise and admiration on much of the right.

People on right hate Fauci because he was antithetical to their beliefs around COVID policies. The left loves him because he was antithetical to Trump and represented their beliefs on policy, and followed him without question. The right for the most part sadly put their guidance in people like Trump, Mike Lindell, and Tucker Carlson. That’s not to compare Fauci’s credentials to these clowns, rather the relationships with their political faction.

Perhaps there’s a reality where people are human and can do both good things and bad things. No one is completely perfect. 99.999% of people are not completely evil. Everyone makes bad decisions, often quite regularly. No one should ever be regarded with the absolute, infallible esteem that is so common today.
 

AG_PhamD

Elite Member
Posts
1,028
Reaction score
969
Science means learning and adapting, in the case of COVID it had to be done at a lightning pace. Fauci and the medical community all changed their course when they learned it was airborne.

Republicans on the other hand have used this same trope you are parroting, hard line ideology that does not bend whether it's false or not. This is why you guys have such a hard time with something as dynamic as a virus or climate change, instead of adapting to changes you all simply bitch about those who have.

The things I am talking about are NOT things that were known at the the time but later amended. I have zero problem with that. You work with the best information you have at the time.

Fauci personally admitted he “flip flopped” on masking because he wanted to preserve the limited supplies for first responders. I totally agree with prioritizing masks to hospitals. What I think was wrong, was misleading the public that masks would not be helpful to try to achieve that goal. Ethically wrong and wrong because it breeds mistrust between factions of the public, the government, and the medical/scientific community.

And as we saw, once that trust is broken, then nothing is trusted.

Given that at the time the initial guidance was given, COVID was only just starting to affect the US, hysteria was not in full effect, had Fauci/the government been upfront and honest- we have limited supplies of masks, the supply chains are tight, we need the reserve masks for healthcare workers so they are safe and can continue working, please donate any masks to your local hospital, etc- I think most of the public would have understood that and rallied behind the effort.

Fauci coordinating with others to shut down legitimate scientific inquiry into the lab leak hypothesis or any legitimate scientists who reasonably questioned current policies or suggested differing ones is completely antithetical to the scientific method you allude to. For almost a year and half anyone, including legitimate scientists who raised the possibly of anything other than a natural origin were ostracized, particularly by the media. It wasn’t until May 2021 Biden announced that our intelligence suggested both natural and lab origin were possible that suddenly it was no longer a conspiracy theory. This should not have been a surprise.

This censorship of scientific discourse as far as I have witnessed is seen as a big mistake among scientists and doctors I know. This should not (and cannot) be defended. It is not a political issue.

What I care about and the “Republicans” you mention are two very different things. My concern in regard to this critique is primarily that Fauci was involved in shutting down legitimate scientific discourse, which is a tragedy for science. The republicans are far more concerned with seeking out Fauci’s allegedly nefarious motivations for his actions (ie protecting his research field and associated funding to completely character assassinate him andu blame him for all the policies they disagree with (many of which were legitimately warranted either at the time or even with 20/20 hindsight).

I think the political sphere has this symptom of borderline personality disorder called “splitting”- where people see others as either all good or all bad. One who is good is held in the highest possible esteem, incapable of wrongdoing or critique. One who is bad is seen as the worst person on earth and everything they do is wrong. The perception of who is good/bad can change, sometimes rapidly, but there’s never really any middle ground.

Take for example James Comey, depending on what stage of the Clinton investigation he was in, he was either the hero of the left or the right. Elon Musk was a hero of the left for promoting EV’s and environmentalism, now THE a hero of the right for sharing and espousing many of their political goals.

Then you have people like Andrew Cuomo and Michael Avanatti who the left wing media effectively praised like a deities, that is until their true colors were revealed as truly despicable people. Trump is the epitome of ridiculous praise and admiration on much of the right.

People on right hate Fauci because he was antithetical to their beliefs around COVID policies. The left loves him because he was antithetical to Trump and represented their beliefs on policy, and followed him without question. The right for the most part sadly put their guidance in people like Trump, Mike Lindell, and Tucker Carlson. That’s not to compare Fauci’s credentials to these clowns, rather the relationships with their political faction.

Perhaps there’s a reality where people are human and can do both good things and bad things. No one is completely perfect. 99.999% of people are not completely evil. Everyone makes bad decisions, often quite regularly. No one should ever be regarded with the absolute, infallible esteem that is so common today.

Unlike many on the right, I believe Fauci genuinely thought he was working in the best interest of the public. Obviously the facts that knowledge develops over time with a novel disease and a pandemic of this scale has never been dealt with in modern times must be recognized. I’m merely saying he made some poor decisions with regrettable, not-insignificant consequences.
 

rdrr

Elite Member
Posts
1,181
Reaction score
1,961
The things I am talking about are NOT things that were known at the the time but later amended. I have zero problem with that. You work with the best information you have at the time.

Fauci personally admitted he “flip flopped” on masking because he wanted to preserve the limited supplies for first responders. I totally agree with prioritizing masks to hospitals. What I think was wrong, was misleading the public that masks would not be helpful to try to achieve that goal. Ethically wrong and wrong because it breeds mistrust between factions of the public, the government, and the medical/scientific community.

And as we saw, once that trust is broken, then nothing is trusted.

Given that at the time the initial guidance was given, COVID was only just starting to affect the US, hysteria was not in full effect, had Fauci/the government been upfront and honest- we have limited supplies of masks, the supply chains are tight, we need the reserve masks for healthcare workers so they are safe and can continue working, please donate any masks to your local hospital, etc- I think most of the public would have understood that and rallied behind the effort.

Fauci coordinating with others to shut down legitimate scientific inquiry into the lab leak hypothesis or any legitimate scientists who reasonably questioned current policies or suggested differing ones is completely antithetical to the scientific method you allude to. For almost a year and half anyone, including legitimate scientists who raised the possibly of anything other than a natural origin were ostracized, particularly by the media. It wasn’t until May 2021 Biden announced that our intelligence suggested both natural and lab origin were possible that suddenly it was no longer a conspiracy theory. This should not have been a surprise.

This censorship of scientific discourse as far as I have witnessed is seen as a big mistake among scientists and doctors I know. This should not (and cannot) be defended. It is not a political issue.

What I care about and the “Republicans” you mention are two very different things. My concern in regard to this critique is primarily that Fauci was involved in shutting down legitimate scientific discourse, which is a tragedy for science. The republicans are far more concerned with seeking out Fauci’s allegedly nefarious motivations for his actions (ie protecting his research field and associated funding to completely character assassinate him and blame him for all the policies they disagree with (many of which were legitimately warranted either at the time or even with 20/20 hindsight).

I think the political sphere has this symptom of borderline personality disorder called “splitting”- where people see others as either all good or all bad. One who is good is held in the highest possible esteem, incapable of wrongdoing or critique. One who is bad is seen as the worst person on earth and everything they do is wrong. The perception of who is good/bad can change, sometimes rapidly, but there’s never really any middle ground.

Take for example James Comey, depending on what stage of the Clinton investigation he was in, he was either the hero of the left or the right. Elon Musk was a hero of the left for promoting EV’s and environmentalism, now THE a hero of the right for sharing and espousing many of their political goals.

Then you have people like Andrew Cuomo and Michael Avanatti who the left wing media effectively praised like a deities, that is until their true colors were revealed as truly despicable people. Trump is the epitome of ridiculous praise and admiration on much of the right.

People on right hate Fauci because he was antithetical to their beliefs around COVID policies. The left loves him because he was antithetical to Trump and represented their beliefs on policy, and followed him without question. The right for the most part sadly put their guidance in people like Trump, Mike Lindell, and Tucker Carlson. That’s not to compare Fauci’s credentials to these clowns, rather the relationships with their political faction.

Perhaps there’s a reality where people are human and can do both good things and bad things. No one is completely perfect. 99.999% of people are not completely evil. Everyone makes bad decisions, often quite regularly. No one should ever be regarded with the absolute, infallible esteem that is so common today.
Yeah I didn't like that he ultimately lied to the public for what he considered the greater good. However, I believe that is what he is trained to do as a medical professional in a mass crisis. They all have to perform triage to determine the best way to save the most amount of people. In any emergency situation First Responders, Hospitals, and Military are always priority number one, then Government, Infrastructure, and Finance number two, and so on. The general public especially sparsely populated areas are always last on the list of priorities. Fauci also seems to be the type of leader that is willing to take the heat on orders given. There is no evidence, but I can assume that when the possibility of a face mask rush came up, he was probably ordered to tell the general public that masks were not necessary.
 

dada_dave

Elite Member
Posts
2,063
Reaction score
2,043
The things I am talking about are NOT things that were known at the the time but later amended. I have zero problem with that. You work with the best information you have at the time.

Fauci personally admitted he “flip flopped” on masking because he wanted to preserve the limited supplies for first responders. I totally agree with prioritizing masks to hospitals. What I think was wrong, was misleading the public that masks would not be helpful to try to achieve that goal. Ethically wrong and wrong because it breeds mistrust between factions of the public, the government, and the medical/scientific community.

And as we saw, once that trust is broken, then nothing is trusted.

Given that at the time the initial guidance was given, COVID was only just starting to affect the US, hysteria was not in full effect, had Fauci/the government been upfront and honest- we have limited supplies of masks, the supply chains are tight, we need the reserve masks for healthcare workers so they are safe and can continue working, please donate any masks to your local hospital, etc- I think most of the public would have understood that and rallied behind the effort.

Fauci coordinating with others to shut down legitimate scientific inquiry into the lab leak hypothesis or any legitimate scientists who reasonably questioned current policies or suggested differing ones is completely antithetical to the scientific method you allude to. For almost a year and half anyone, including legitimate scientists who raised the possibly of anything other than a natural origin were ostracized, particularly by the media. It wasn’t until May 2021 Biden announced that our intelligence suggested both natural and lab origin were possible that suddenly it was no longer a conspiracy theory. This should not have been a surprise.

This censorship of scientific discourse as far as I have witnessed is seen as a big mistake among scientists and doctors I know. This should not (and cannot) be defended. It is not a political issue.

What I care about and the “Republicans” you mention are two very different things. My concern in regard to this critique is primarily that Fauci was involved in shutting down legitimate scientific discourse, which is a tragedy for science. The republicans are far more concerned with seeking out Fauci’s allegedly nefarious motivations for his actions (ie protecting his research field and associated funding to completely character assassinate him andu blame him for all the policies they disagree with (many of which were legitimately warranted either at the time or even with 20/20 hindsight).

I think the political sphere has this symptom of borderline personality disorder called “splitting”- where people see others as either all good or all bad. One who is good is held in the highest possible esteem, incapable of wrongdoing or critique. One who is bad is seen as the worst person on earth and everything they do is wrong. The perception of who is good/bad can change, sometimes rapidly, but there’s never really any middle ground.

Take for example James Comey, depending on what stage of the Clinton investigation he was in, he was either the hero of the left or the right. Elon Musk was a hero of the left for promoting EV’s and environmentalism, now THE a hero of the right for sharing and espousing many of their political goals.

Then you have people like Andrew Cuomo and Michael Avanatti who the left wing media effectively praised like a deities, that is until their true colors were revealed as truly despicable people. Trump is the epitome of ridiculous praise and admiration on much of the right.

People on right hate Fauci because he was antithetical to their beliefs around COVID policies. The left loves him because he was antithetical to Trump and represented their beliefs on policy, and followed him without question. The right for the most part sadly put their guidance in people like Trump, Mike Lindell, and Tucker Carlson. That’s not to compare Fauci’s credentials to these clowns, rather the relationships with their political faction.

Perhaps there’s a reality where people are human and can do both good things and bad things. No one is completely perfect. 99.999% of people are not completely evil. Everyone makes bad decisions, often quite regularly. No one should ever be regarded with the absolute, infallible esteem that is so common today.

Unlike many on the right, I believe Fauci genuinely thought he was working in the best interest of the public. Obviously the facts that knowledge develops over time with a novel disease and a pandemic of this scale has never been dealt with in modern times must be recognized. I’m merely saying he made some poor decisions with regrettable, not-insignificant consequences.

Yes downplaying the effectiveness and necessity of masks to ensure a supply for hospitals was a mistake and Fauci himself admitted that. However he did not lie about it as you posited and I also initially wrote.

[Edit: to say Fauci lied as I initially did, was incorrect, while he did want to ensure a supply for health care workers, he also seemed to believe that transmission in the general population could be controlled without masks. He changed his guidance when he realized he was wrong.

]

No he didn't shut down or censor legitimate scientific discourse into the lab leak theory. He combated the disinformation that was being promulgated at the time by cranks and the politically motivated and which often times bordered on the outlandish. And yes he also said even the more reasonable lab leak theories were still very unlikely and there was little evidence for them (in fact at the time there was none). That's not censorship ... that's a statement of fact. And it certainly wasn't blocking scientific inquiry into the origins of the virus. And again, there was and still is little evidence for such leak theories whereas there is now quite a lot for the natural origin of the virus. If you'd like, I can go through the details for why this is so*, but the short version is this: three separate labs have put out three separate papers (bioarXiv, so technically not peer reviewed but peers have been reading and commenting and overall the methods and conclusions are sound with a couple of exceptions) analyzing the data from multiple different angles (using methods from both genetics and epidemiology) and concluded that the most reasonable explanation was a natural origin and even which wet market the virus likely originated from (now we get into the exception the Chinese-led paper has some additional conclusions that then try to claim an ultimate origin beyond the wet market that don't appear to be well supported by ... anything even in their own paper). Now none of these studies could completely rule out a lab leak because it's possible that a single infected individual from the Virology institute went to the wet market and infected everyone else, but to take that scenario seriously we're starting to get into angels dancing on pinheads level of reductio ad absurdum if these analyses bear out. To summarize the intelligence that has been made public has so far (mostly from the Republican Senate report) we basically see the Chinese government panicking, some mistranslations of emails sent from the Wuhan Virology institute, and frankly little else of substance. It's possible the Biden administration has more of course. But what we've seen so far to support it has been extremely weak and circumstantial.

The bottom line is even prior to the publication a natural origin was always vastly more likely than a lab leak, especially given what was known at the time and with everything that's come to light since then the natural origin has if anything grown more likely, not less. At this point, a lab leak would be an extra-extraordinary claim to make and would require extra-extraordinary evidence. Is it still possible? Yes. But not not remotely plausible. And again, most (not all!) of those claiming otherwise are indeed cranks and the politically motivated.

And that last point is crucial. You say these things shouldn't be politically motivated, but unfortunately it is. For the politically motivated they adopted the lab leak theory as a way to try to eschew blame for why the pandemic went so badly and put more the blame on the Chinese than themselves. Which is nuts because the Chinese government already deserves a huge portion of the blame for trying to cover up that the virus was even spreading or dangerous in the first place. The problem for these people is that they did the same thing, which I guess why they adopted the lab leak theory. And that's what's so annoying about this whole lab leak theory in the first place, it is largely irrelevant! I'm not saying there are no important decisions to be made about about lab safety or the cost-benefit of gain-of-function experiments, but that's not what this was actually about. For the politically motivated they pushed it so hard to distract from their own failures and try to spread those failures to others. And the point bears repeating: saying that a lab leak is incredibly unlikely or even worse that the virus being deliberately engineered is stupid, does not shut down scientists actually studying the origins of the virus.

*As a background I can speak authoritatively on the evolution and genetics of viruses, less so on epidemiology/public health. I studied mathematical and computational models of population genetics and many of my former colleagues studied viruses. So while I cannot claim to be the foremost expert on the genetics of viruses, I know enough for these purposes. While I'm sure I've read papers and sat through the odd lecture which included epidemiology and some related models, I'm too far afield from epidemiology to be called any kind of expert in it.
 
Last edited:

Roller

Elite Member
Posts
1,392
Reaction score
2,697
The things I am talking about are NOT things that were known at the the time but later amended. I have zero problem with that. You work with the best information you have at the time.

Fauci personally admitted he “flip flopped” on masking because he wanted to preserve the limited supplies for first responders. I totally agree with prioritizing masks to hospitals. What I think was wrong, was misleading the public that masks would not be helpful to try to achieve that goal. Ethically wrong and wrong because it breeds mistrust between factions of the public, the government, and the medical/scientific community.

And as we saw, once that trust is broken, then nothing is trusted.

Given that at the time the initial guidance was given, COVID was only just starting to affect the US, hysteria was not in full effect, had Fauci/the government been upfront and honest- we have limited supplies of masks, the supply chains are tight, we need the reserve masks for healthcare workers so they are safe and can continue working, please donate any masks to your local hospital, etc- I think most of the public would have understood that and rallied behind the effort.

Fauci coordinating with others to shut down legitimate scientific inquiry into the lab leak hypothesis or any legitimate scientists who reasonably questioned current policies or suggested differing ones is completely antithetical to the scientific method you allude to. For almost a year and half anyone, including legitimate scientists who raised the possibly of anything other than a natural origin were ostracized, particularly by the media. It wasn’t until May 2021 Biden announced that our intelligence suggested both natural and lab origin were possible that suddenly it was no longer a conspiracy theory. This should not have been a surprise.

This censorship of scientific discourse as far as I have witnessed is seen as a big mistake among scientists and doctors I know. This should not (and cannot) be defended. It is not a political issue.

What I care about and the “Republicans” you mention are two very different things. My concern in regard to this critique is primarily that Fauci was involved in shutting down legitimate scientific discourse, which is a tragedy for science. The republicans are far more concerned with seeking out Fauci’s allegedly nefarious motivations for his actions (ie protecting his research field and associated funding to completely character assassinate him andu blame him for all the policies they disagree with (many of which were legitimately warranted either at the time or even with 20/20 hindsight).

I think the political sphere has this symptom of borderline personality disorder called “splitting”- where people see others as either all good or all bad. One who is good is held in the highest possible esteem, incapable of wrongdoing or critique. One who is bad is seen as the worst person on earth and everything they do is wrong. The perception of who is good/bad can change, sometimes rapidly, but there’s never really any middle ground.

Take for example James Comey, depending on what stage of the Clinton investigation he was in, he was either the hero of the left or the right. Elon Musk was a hero of the left for promoting EV’s and environmentalism, now THE a hero of the right for sharing and espousing many of their political goals.

Then you have people like Andrew Cuomo and Michael Avanatti who the left wing media effectively praised like a deities, that is until their true colors were revealed as truly despicable people. Trump is the epitome of ridiculous praise and admiration on much of the right.

People on right hate Fauci because he was antithetical to their beliefs around COVID policies. The left loves him because he was antithetical to Trump and represented their beliefs on policy, and followed him without question. The right for the most part sadly put their guidance in people like Trump, Mike Lindell, and Tucker Carlson. That’s not to compare Fauci’s credentials to these clowns, rather the relationships with their political faction.

Perhaps there’s a reality where people are human and can do both good things and bad things. No one is completely perfect. 99.999% of people are not completely evil. Everyone makes bad decisions, often quite regularly. No one should ever be regarded with the absolute, infallible esteem that is so common today.

Unlike many on the right, I believe Fauci genuinely thought he was working in the best interest of the public. Obviously the facts that knowledge develops over time with a novel disease and a pandemic of this scale has never been dealt with in modern times must be recognized. I’m merely saying he made some poor decisions with regrettable, not-insignificant consequences.
Dr. Fauci became a convenient scapegoat for everything some groups didn't like, whether it was mask mandates, vaccination requirements, or anything else that was being proposed to mitigate the pandemic. He's been criticized for his high net worth, a consequence of working in the Federal system for so many years, as well as awards and other source of income. But he could have done even better in industry, where he and his family wouldn't have had to face death threats, not to mention inane questioning from idiots like Rand Paul.

So say what you will about broken trust, but Fauci's record of public service will probably never be equalled.
 

Citysnaps

Elite Member
Staff Member
Site Donor
Posts
3,601
Reaction score
8,819
Main Camera
iPhone
Dr. Fauci became a convenient scapegoat for everything some groups didn't like, whether it was mask mandates, vaccination requirements, or anything else that was being proposed to mitigate the pandemic. He's been criticized for his high net worth, a consequence of working in the Federal system for so many years, as well as awards and other source of income. But he could have done even better in industry, where he and his family wouldn't have had to face death threats, not to mention inane questioning from idiots like Rand Paul.

So say what you will about broken trust, but Fauci's record of public service will probably never be equalled.

Spot on.

Sadly, that's where we are today when someone devotes their entire life to making the world a better place, needs to be dragged down off of what others believe is a pedestal. Just for good measure.
 

Hrafn

Snowflake from Hell
Posts
903
Reaction score
1,085
Spot on.

Sadly, that's where we are today when someone devotes their entire life to making the world a better place, needs to be dragged down off of what others believe is a pedestal. Just for good measure.
Almost as if the drumpsters are running wild...
 

Citysnaps

Elite Member
Staff Member
Site Donor
Posts
3,601
Reaction score
8,819
Main Camera
iPhone
The things I am talking about are NOT things that were known at the the time but later amended. I have zero problem with that. You work with the best information you have at the time.

Or course. And at that time it was not known that 40-45% of the people who had contracted covid were asymptomatic, yet could still quickly transmit the virus to many other people for an extended period of time.
 

trillux

Member
Posts
11
Reaction score
18
Dr. Fauci became a convenient scapegoat for everything some groups didn't like, whether it was mask mandates, vaccination requirements, or anything else that was being proposed to mitigate the pandemic. He's been criticized for his high net worth, a consequence of working in the Federal system for so many years, as well as awards and other source of income. But he could have done even better in industry, where he and his family wouldn't have had to face death threats, not to mention inane questioning from idiots like Rand Paul.

So say what you will about broken trust, but Fauci's record of public service will probably never be equalled.
1670635188059.png


I walked by one the research nurse's desk this week...he uses book as a monitor stand because, well, it's definitely thick enough for the task.

Fauci personally admitted he “flip flopped” on masking because he wanted to preserve the limited supplies for first responders. I totally agree with prioritizing masks to hospitals. What I think was wrong, was misleading the public that masks would not be helpful to try to achieve that goal. Ethically wrong and wrong because it breeds mistrust between factions of the public, the government, and the medical/scientific community.
Here we go again, another attempt to dress up disinformation as critical thinking. What I recall (and I followed this very closely because the whole family is in healthcare) Fauci stated that those who have symptoms should avoid contact and that's more important than masking. The limited mask supply should be preserved for those in direct contact with symptomatic patients (this is when top hospitals generously handed out a single N95 and a brown bag to be used until fallen apart). Fauci changed his stance when the data on the unprecedented rates of asymptomatic spread came out.

If you were as fair as wordy, you'd had started by analyzing whether Fauci lied/misinformed corroborating it with data, rather than stating it as a fact.

Same thing applies to the statement "shutting down" legitimate research on the lab leak theory. A summary timeline on Fauci's stance on this. https://www.forbes.com/sites/jackbr...gins-and-the-lab-leak-theory/?sh=299c9c3fa853

The issue is and you may have noticed it yourself as a critical thinker. One of the interesting biases that if someone goes against the "medical establishment" on 20 issues, and turns out to be correct on one, that's considered a visionary. If Fauci turns out to be wrong on 1 in 20 issues, he's a liar. (Those who know statistics know why I used those very specific numbers).

---
Fun anecdote is one of the more prominent lab leak proponents who also claimed to be the original inventor of the "dangerous" mRNA vaccines happened to have worked with someone I personally know... I'll just drop the article instead. The story was that I noticed that I now some of this guy's coauthors, and I was wondering what they'd say. Well...
 
Last edited:

Citysnaps

Elite Member
Staff Member
Site Donor
Posts
3,601
Reaction score
8,819
Main Camera
iPhone
Top Bottom
1 2