Last Updated on January 12, 2022 by Shaun Snapp
- Dr. Fauci has repeatedly lied during the coronavirus pandemic and has a history of lying going back decades.
Fauci has been exposed during the coronavirus for repeatedly lying. However, Fauci has a history of lying that goes back decades. Fauci works in science, but his behavior and thought pattern are not scientific.
Our References for This Article
If you want to see our references for this article and related Brightwork articles, visit this link.
Dr Fauci’s Background
Dr. Anthony Fauci has served in many US Administrations. He is highly respected in the field and is head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases which is within the National Institutes of Health. The NIH is the central medical grant endowing body of the US government.
Dr. Fauci’s background is immunology and specifically infectious diseases. This makes it impossible for Fauci to deny knowledge around the gain of function research that will be the article’s topic.
Dr. Fauci and the Truth
The media and the public often refer to Dr. Fauci as a scientist. That is true, but one does not survive through the number of administrations that Dr. Fauci has and led the NIH without being a politician. And being political and politically motivated contradicts following a scientific approach. Being political means achieving an objective, and those objectives usually contradict scientific truth.
Repeated interviews and testimony from Dr. Fauci have revealed a willingness to bend the truth to meet political objectives. One of the first political analysts to pick up on this was Jimmy Dore. Dore critiqued Dr. Fauchi back in 2020 for providing contradictory information about wearing masks. It is important to note that back in mid-2020, no one in mainstream media was questioning Dr. Fauchi.
However, within the establishment media in the US, Dr. Fauci has been untouchable. Depending upon the group one is speaking with, it can get you branded as “anti-science.”
The Rand Paul, Dr. Fauchi Interaction
If you have read the article How the US, China, and the NIH and Dr. Fauci Promulgated the Coronavirus., these same videos are embedded in that article to skip them.
Observe the analysis of Dr. Fauchi’s interaction with Rand Paul.
Note that YouTube is at a degree of censorship that Jimmy Dore stated he could not cover the story unless it had first been covered elsewhere. YouTube has been suppressing Jimmy Dore’s channel because YouTube is financially and politically connected to the Democratic Party in the US, and Jimmy Dore critiques the Democratic Party.
Therefore, they retaliate by restricting the growth of subscribers to his channel. This is not hypothetical or an evidence-free claim. I have noticed that Jimmy Dore’s subscriber numbers never increase, but his views are still high.
This issue was also covered by the following video produced by The Hill.
It is of note that neither of these is establishment media outlets. The establishment media, except for the few that are captured by Republicans like Fox News and Breitbart, are captured by the Democratic party. Fauci’s lies cannot be found on these outlets.
This illustrates a highly doctrinal media system, with journalists presenting themselves as the standard-bearers of what is true when they repeat biased claims by powerful entities. This shows the media as the victim of a massive Dunning Kreuger Effect. As soon as the establishment hypothesis is created, media entities do the work of discrediting any competing hypothesis. A competing hypothesis is then called a “conspiracy theory.” Taibbi explains that in his experience, anyone who would naturally question the establishment’s explanations is run out of establishment media. This leaves a mass of conformist journalists who the establishment easily manipulates.
An area where Fauci has been caught repeatedly lying and flip-flopping has been on the topic of the effectiveness of masks, which I cover in the following article.
This video shows that Fauci knew that it was most likely that the virus was made in a lab, and hid this information from the public and continues to lie about the topic.
Fauci Providing False Information on AIDS in the 1980s
This video does a great job explaining how Fauci mismanaged the AIDS response from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases in the 1980s.
Fauci is speaking unscientifically right in this interview!
Both communication of what is a hypothesis and then concentrating on just AZT to the exclusion of everything else.
Secondly, if the incidence is very low (such as in the case of babies — where Fauci developed his hypothesis), this means it has to be taken into account. Furthermore, if a baby is born to a mother with AIDS, they have the same blood supply, so how hard is it to figure out it came from the mother? One article that did an excellent job showing the pattern of Fauci’s lies is AIER’s Fauci Was Duplicitous During the AIDS Crisis. The following quotes are from this article.
The article took an increasingly speculative turn in promoting this new theory. “If indeed the latter is true, then AIDS takes on an entirely new dimension,” it continued. “If we add to this possibility that nonsexual, non-blood-borne transmission is possible, the scope of the syndrome may be enormous.” The damage was already done though, as the media went to work stoking alarm about AIDS transmission through simple routine contacts. Hundreds of newspapers disseminated the distressing theory from Fauci’s article. Journalist Randy Shilts documented the incident in his classic early history of the AIDS crisis, And the Band Played On. Immunologist Arye Rubinstein had already offered a more plausible explanation for the infant case, which even cursory examination would verify: the disease transmitted from the mother to the baby during pregnancy. As Shilts explains, “Upon investigation, Rubinstein learned that Anthony Fauci had not bothered to read his paper.” The NIH scientist instead relied on second-hand information from another researcher to indulge in open-ended speculation (for a longer excerpt of Shilts, see David Henderson’s post on Fauci’s early career). On June 26, less than two months after his JAMA article appeared, Fauci publicly contradicted its most irresponsible claim – albeit without ever acknowledging his own central role in promoting that claim to begin with. As he told the Baltimore Sun, “It is absolutely preposterous to suggest that AIDS can be contracted through normal social contact like being in the same room with someone or sitting on a bus with them. The poor gays have received a very raw deal on this.” In short, Fauci flip-flopped with the political winds and the press barely even noticed. It’s a familiar pattern to anyone who has closely followed the infectious disease bureaucrat’s public commentary since Covid-19 burst into the national news cycle last January. – AEIR
How did Fauci not get called out for this? How did Fauci not get exposed earlier? Why was there no investigation of Fauci’s history before him being accepted as an expert?
In this video, Dr. Robert Malone explains the high cost and inefficient US response to corona, and the problematic centralized role of Dr Fauci and the pharmaceutical industry in setting public health policy.
Most of the Evidence is Against Lockdowns
One of the health authorities and by establishment Democrats has been that lockdowns are effective against viruses. This has been beaten into people through the media and has been the policy of most countries. Countries like Sweden that have gone against lockdowns have been routinely critiqued as irresponsible. I was unaware of the previous literature on the effectiveness of lockdowns myself when I wrote the article What is The Most Important Variable in a Country’s Success Versus Coronavirus. However, analysis of who died from corona made it obvious that the best strategy was to isolate the most at risk in the population, including the obese, the aged, and others with low immune systems. The broader lockdown that so many companies implemented was costly — and therefore, each government had a large hypothetical budget by which to make the lives of the quarantined or isolated to be made easier.
What I did not know at this time was what I found in the AEIR article, that the medical literature on shutdowns is ineffective against viruses. What is amazing is that if one made this statement today, one would be categorized as a conspiracy theorist.
The quote AEIR explains.
He (Fauci) continued: “[h]istorically when you shut things down it doesn’t have a major effect.” Indeed, this was Fauci’s own position during the 2014 Ebola outbreak. A recently resurfaced interview on NBC shows Fauci warning against “draconian” quarantine measures for Ebola, and chastising several state governors for enacting hasty emergency restrictions to contain an outbreak in the United States without considering the unintended consequences.
So Fauci was initially communicating accurate information about shutdowns. But then observe what happens next.
By mid-March 2020, less than two months after he disavowed the use of lockdowns in major US cities such as New York and Los Angeles, Fauci executed a flip-flop and repositioned himself as the U.S. government’s primary architect of our historically unprecedented lockdown response. “If you look at the curves of outbreaks, they go big peaks, and then come down. What we need to do is flatten that down,” he told the press on March 11. On March 16, Fauci, along with the rest of the Trump administration’s coronavirus task force, threw their weight behind the now-discredited Imperial College Model of Neil Ferguson, igniting a wave of draconian shelter-in-place ordinances in not only New York and Los Angeles but ultimately 43 of 50 states.
It is almost as if Fauci vacillates with public opinion and has no concern for the established medical literature. Fauci has been protected from responsibility by a constant claim that science is continually evolving. Again, this makes it sounds like there is no previous research into viruses. This is explained in the following quotation.
“But the evidence on lockdowns changed!” comes the predictable cry of those who instinctively defend Fauci through every twist and turn in his messaging. Except it didn’t. Prior to March 2020, a substantial body of epidemiological literature strongly condemned lockdowns – both for their ineffectiveness and their extremely high social and economic costs. The only change that happened between January and March was political; namely that technocratic modelers such as Ferguson realized that fear and alarm over the coronavirus could be used to brush aside civil liberties and democratic norms in favor of a society-wide quarantine modeled on the Chinese response in Wuhan. Among those who embraced this rapid political shift toward lockdowns was none other than Fauci. Indeed on February 17, 2020 the infectious disease administrator told USA Today that the risk from the coronavirus in the United States was “just minuscule.” Barely three weeks later Fauci would call for a nationwide lockdown, albeit for only two weeks. For Fauci, that quickly became a month. Then two months. Then denunciations of states that reopened “too early.” Then testimony praising New York for remaining closed and providing a “model” Covid response despite boasting one of the highest per-capita death rates in the entire world.
This brings up a critical question about the majority of the government’s response to the coronavirus.
The explanation of lockdowns has been that they are temporary and that anyone who disagrees with the lockdowns is unreasonable and “anti-science” as they are only temporary. However, the lockdowns have now been made somewhat permanent because there is always some new development that requires the extension of the lockdown.
However, the lockdowns were only agreed to by most of the population because they believed they would be temporary. This is called “moving the goalposts.” Once governments obtain buy-in on the lockdown, they simply extend lockdowns until the original agreement on the lockdowns is forgotten. This is expressed in the following quotation.
“It is not inconceivable that restrictions could remain in place until ……..” no end date. The lockdown was always going to be permanent.
This quote illustrates the constantly moving the goalposts.
It’s only for a few weeks to stop the NHS being overwhelmed, masks are only a small inconvenience, it’s only on public transport, it’s only only for a little while longer until we get a vaccines, it’s only until the most vulnerable are vaccinated, it’s only one Christmas, it’s only until the over 50s are vaccinated, it’s only until we are past the peak, it’s only until the majority have been vaccinated, it’s only until we get the data on the new variant, it’s only until June 21, it’s only a four week delay, it will only be until those aged 12 to 15 are jabbed, it’s only another Christmas.
I recently took a flight out of the country. I encountered a TSA controlled security process where I was fully body scanned as were my bags, in what was supposed to be a response to 9/11, which it is now apparent was performed not by the CIA constructed Bin Laden and the faux “Al Qaeda” but by the Bush Administration. And in the line were people all with masks, who were conditioned to wear these masks to keep “safe” against a virus created in the Wuhan Institute Lab with the help of a grant from Fauci’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.
Security is always the excuse to take away people’s freedoms.
More Fauci Flip Flops
The contradictory statements from Fauci continue.
Per his latest prognostication, offered almost exactly 1 year to the day after he dismissed Covid-19 as a “minuscule” threat to the United States, we may return to normal by early 2022. And just like that, “two weeks to flatten the curve” became two years.
It seems like Fauci should stop making predictions, and this brings up the question of why Fauci’s forecast error, which appears to be close to 100%, is never analyzed in the mainstream media. Do they not possess the ability to perform comparisons between Fauci’s transcripted responses over time?
Fauci’s flip flop on double masks continues.
Long after masking supplanted his initial advice against masking, Fauci shifted yet again to double-masking, then backtracked on this advice a few days later, then re-embraced the practice a few days after that in conjunction with a new CDC recommendation.
The medical literature states that single masks are not effective. What led Fauci to state that double masks were effective? Does Fauci not know how small viruses are?
The long-term pattern of how Fauci communicates and how he influences policy is explained as follows.
Whether it’s the coronavirus of 2020-21 or the AIDS crisis of 1983, he routinely stakes out public positions that rely upon unwarranted speculation about scientific matters in the absence of evidence.
Allow me to be more direct. Fauci is a politically motivated bullshit artist who has no concern for scientifically true or false but changes his views based upon what he thinks will be good for him.
The Scientific Literature on Major Coronavirus Policy Issues
It was amazing to read some of the scientific literature on viruses that I found from links in articles I read for writing the article you are reading now. What struck me is how the scientific literature directly contradicted what Fauci and CNN/NBC/etc. have advised, which is now accepted as gospel.
The following quotes are examples of this.
Journal Quotes on Topic #1: On the Topic of Lockdowns to Mitigate Against the Spread of Viruses
A historical review of communities in the U.S. during the 1918 influenza pandemic identified only two that escaped serious mortality and morbidity. Both communities had completely cut themselves off for months from the outside world. One was a remote town in the Colorado mountains, and the other was a naval training station on an island in San Francisco Bay. Obviously, this is not a strategy of general utility. Other studies have suggested that, except in the most extreme applications, disease mitigation measures have not had a significant impact on altering the course of an influenza pandemic.
In previous influenza epidemics, the impact of school closings on illness rates has been mixed. A study from Israel reported a decrease in respiratory infections after a 2-week teacher strike, but the decrease was only evident for a single day.
Experience has shown that communities faced with epidemics or other adverse events respond best and with the least anxiety when the normal social functioning of the community is least disrupted. – Disease Mitigation Measures in the Control of Pandemic Influenza
And this one.
For example, even in retrospect, it is not clear whether isolation or quarantine had the greater impact in stopping the spread of SARS, or whether both control measures were essential. Second, if the duration of the asymptomatic period is too long, then it will be extremely difficult to identify those individuals that are likely to have been infected by a given infected person (by virtue of their having had many contacts during the asymptomatic phase). Furthermore, if the asymptomatic period is very long, then the quarantine period must also be correspondingly long (21). Such lengthy quarantine periods would be very difficult to implement, again making it unlikely that q can be made very large. – American Journal of Epidemiology
This quote is amazing as it proposes that lockdowns are primarily performed for political reasons.
During an emergency, it should be expected that implementation of some NPIs, such as travel restrictions and quarantine, might be pursued for social or political purposes by political leaders, rather than pursued because of public health evidence.
Access to education has been rapidly decreasing due to the pandemic. The swift change to online learning in order to reduce COVID-19 transmission has paralysed Indonesia’s education system. Online learning poses an immense challenge to children from poor families who have limited access to technology or the internet.
The pandemic has also triggered mass unemployment and a reduction in job opportunities. As Indonesia plunges into recession, those hovering above the poverty line are at risk of exploitation as many are willing to do anything for money.
Under the most recent projection, COVID-19 could push between 1.3 million to 8.5 million Indonesian people into poverty, significantly affecting females.
The pandemic has limited the capacity of governments and NGOs to provide support to victims and police the activity of traffickers. – Center for Health and Security
Since the lockdowns began there has been a strident debate between pro-lockdown proponents and anti-lockdown proponents, which has broken down along political lines. The argument used by pro-lockdown proponents has been that the lockdowns are worth it for public safety. And the argument from anti-lockdown proponents has been that while the lockdowns will increase safety, they are not worth the loss of freedom and state encroachment onto public. What neither side knew is that there is no evidence in the scientific literature that lockdowns work, and the consensus is that societies should be kept as near as normal as possible so that there are minimal disruptions. The debate then up to this point about lockdowns has been about as constructive as debating whether shutting down amusement parks should be supported — as with lockdowns increasing the admission prices to access amusement parks also has nothing to do with public safety during pandemics. This also means that the entirety of the lockdowns and debates about lockdown has been counterproductive to dealing with the coronavirus.
When lockdown proponents make their arguments, they do so not only being aware of the scientific literature on the topic but also leaving out the negative consequences of lockdowns. The following quote is just one example of these negative follow-on effects.
The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in a rapid and significant increase in the prevalence and severity of modern slavery in Indonesia. Thousands of additional Indonesian woman and girls have been plunged into modern slavery, while current victims’ experiences have become more severe.
The pandemic has triggered a socio-economic crisis , as rising unemployment, limited government social security, and external support have forced many Indonesians to partake in exploitative employment to survive. – Australian Institute of International Affairs
Journal Quotes on Topic #2: On the Topic of Maintaining 6 Feet of Distance
It has been recommended that individuals maintain a distance of 3 feet or more during a pandemic so as to diminish the number of contacts with people who may be infected. The efficacy of this measure is unknown. It is typically assumed that transmission of droplet-spread diseases, such as influenza, is limited to “close contacts”—that is, being within 3–6 feet of an infected person. – Disease Mitigation Measures in the Control of Pandemic Influenza
Journal Quotes on Topic #3: On the Topic of Masking
In Asia during the SARS period, many people in the affected communities wore surgical masks when in public. But studies have shown that the ordinary surgical mask does little to prevent inhalation of small droplets bearing influenza virus. The pores in the mask become blocked by moisture from breathing, and the air stream simply diverts around the mask. – Disease Mitigation Measures in the Control of Pandemic Influenza
It is almost as if Fauci and other health care leaders are illiterate or can’t be bothered to read the scientific literature. You don’t need a medical degree or a board-certified medical doctor to understand the scientific literature. I found most of these papers quite straightforward to read and clearly explained in their conclusions. Reading the papers indeed took a lot of time. One of the papers was 84 pages long, and the part related to what I was interested in was only a paragraph.
Perhaps these health leaders are so busy they don’t have time to read the scientific literature. However, they also have many assistants who should be able to provide a synopsis of the scientific literature findings. The problem I have run into when writing research papers for companies is that the executives are so busy and in so many meetings that they don’t have time to read the papers they hire me to write.
This video shows how Fauci has been exposed and been asked to resign. The Democrats, who have adopted Fauci, have their personal guru refuse to hold him accountable. This is the same category of people who say “science is real,” who don’t know what science is or how it functions and don’t have any other faculties for determining what is true other than supporting whatever expert is presented to them as part of their in-group.
This is Fauci lying again for by recategorizing GOF into a different area.
Fauci is not only unscientific, he is a thug. He targets any academic or MD that contradicts whatever Fauci wants.
This video covers how Fauci and NIH Head Dr. Fancis Collins suppress speech and different views.
Fauci is a repeated liar and has been lying for decades and does not communicate the consensus of the scientific literature. Instead, Fauci makes up things as he goes and this is what requires him to contradict himself. What is absolutely damning is that Fauci was able to escape scrutiny for so long that he is fully exposed; Democrats have adopted Fauci and sanctified him and are unwilling to question anything Fauci says. Fauci is profoundly unscientific and is inappropriate to be head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, which he has been head of since 1984. This means that enormous sums of government money have been horribly misallocated becuase an unscientific serial liar has been at the top of this organization. Fauci also cannot be critiqued by scientists because they fear their funding not be approved or re-approved.
Yet, with all of this evidence, most of the population can’t figure this out. There is nothing very complicated here; Fauci’s honesty, consistency with established scientific literature, and dishonesty are obvious from just observing his interviews.