Dr. Fauci Doubles Down

On Christmas Eve, Dr. Anthony Fauci celebrated his birthday, but the 84-year-old, a government bureaucrat since 1968 and head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) from 1984 to 2023, shows no sign of slowing down. In his recent paper, “HIV and COVID-19: Shared Lessons From Two Pandemics,” Dr. Fauci raises a question right in the title.

AIDS (acquired immunodeficiency syndrome) or HIV/AIDS fails to qualify as a pandemic. Dr. Fauci once contended that AIDS could be spread by simple family contact and would ravage the general population. As it turned out, the syndrome never moved beyond male homosexuals, hemophiliacs, and intravenous drug users in any significant measure. As with COVID, the origin of AIDS was a matter of dispute.

The human immunodeficiency virus, better known as HIV, was discovered in 1983 by Luc Montagnier of the Pasteur Institute. Dr. Fauci pegged HIV as the sole cause of AIDS, which was disputed by Nobel laureate Kary Mullis, inventor of the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) technique, widely used in medical science and criminal justice.

Joining Mullis in dissent was UC Berke ley molecular biologist Peter Duesberg, a highly regarded cancer researcher with an outstanding investigator grant from the National Institutes of Health (NIH). In his HIV and COVID article, Dr. Fauci mentions both men but leaves out crucial information.

Anthony Fauci earned a medical degree in 1966, but in 1968 he took a job with the NIH. His bio showed no advanced degrees in biochemistry or molecular biology, but in 1984 the NIH made Dr. Fauci director of NIAID. Kary Mullis contended that Fauci “doesn’t understand electronic microscopy and he doesn’t understand medicine. He should not be in a position like he’s in.” But he was, with predictable consequences.

The NIAID boss, who never invented anything, did not attempt to debate Mullis, Duesberg, and other prominent scientists. Dr. Fauci chose to brand them “AIDS denialists,” and proceeded to cancel Duesberg’s media appearances and target the NIH grants for the cancer research that brought Duesberg to UC Berkeley in the first place. The same dynamics were evident during the COVID pandemic.

Dr. Fauci maintained that the COVID-19 virus was “zoonotic” and emerged naturally in the wild. Other medical scientists detected a laboratory origin, but instead of engaging in debate, Dr. Fauci smeared them as “conspiracy theorists.” Consider also his treatment of the medical scientists of the Gre at Barrington Declaration, who took issue with Dr. Fauci’s draconian lockdown policies on schools.

Instead of debating the Great Barrington Declaration scientists, most if not all of whom were more qualified than himself, Dr. Fauci chose to attack them as “fringe epidemiologists.” NIH Director Francis Collins tasked Fauci for a “quick and devastating takedown” of the Great Barrington Declaration scientists, including Stanford professor Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, Martin Kulldorff of Harvard, and Sunetra Gupta of Oxford.

Dr. Fauci now claims that “misinformation and disinformation have been rampant during the COVID-19 pandemic.” This claim proceeds from a non-practicing MD who in 2021 proclaimed, “Attacks on me, quite frankly, are attacks on science.”

This same government bureaucrat now claims “the origin of HIV is zoonotic.” That was not the view of Luc Montangier, and no successful animal model was developed for AIDS. Dr. Fauci also writes of how “the social determinants of health lead to disparities in incidents and severities of disease.” So “policies are needed to ensure universal, equitable and affordable health coverage.” That recalls a statement Fauci made in 2021, the same year he claimed to represent science:

I think what people have to appreciate is that indeed, you do have personal liberties for yourself and you should be in control of that. But you are a member of society, and as a member of society—reaping all the benefits of being a member of society—you have a responsibility to society. And I think each of us, particularly in the context of a pandemic that’s killing millions of people, you have got to look at it and say there comes a time when you do have to give up what you consider your individual right of making your own decision, for the greater good of society.

If taxpayers thought that smacked of the totalitarian ethos, it would be hard to blame them. As they might also note, after announcing his retirement in 2023, Dr. Fauci continued to receive a private chauffeur and U.S. Marshals security detail, all funded by taxpayers.

Dr. Fauci’s claims will be of great interest to Dr. Bhattacharya, President-elect Trump’s pick to head the NIH. While confirmation awaits, another “devastating takedown” of Dr. Battacharya appears from Dr. Steven Albert, professor of “community health and social justice” at the University of Pittsburgh.

In a recent Scientific American article headlined “Trump’s Pick for NIH Director Could Harm Science and People’s Health,” Dr. Albert claims “science supported school closures, work-from-home policies, large gathering restrictions in public spaces, and face mask requirements as effective ways to lower hospi tal surges and buy time for vaccine development.” And there’s more to it.

Albert said, “Pitting personal autonomy against the application of science to policy is fine for vanity webcasts and think tanks, but inappropriate for NIH leadership,” and so he concluded, “Bhattacharya is not what the NIH needs.” The Senate will make the call.

If confirmed, Dr. Bhattacharya, who also earned a PhD in economics, could launch long- overdue reforms. Limit the NIAID director to a single four-year term. Do not allow the same people to control public health policy and medical research funding. Post all grants online in real-time and downloadable form, and so on.

Meanwhile, Dr. Albert, like Fauci a Cornell grad, has yet to respond to an email asking if he ever received a grant from NIAID. That agency, a division of the NIH, is currently headed by Dr. Jeanne Marrazzo, a strong supporter of Dr. Fauci’s policies.