Fauci to Congress: 6-Foot Social Distancing Guidance Likely Not Based on Data
Republican lawmakers criticized the former NIH official for playing "semantics" about lab leaks and gain-of-function research during closed-door congressional testimony this week.

In closed-door congressional testimony, former chief White House medical adviser Anthony Fauci said that federal social distancing guidance during the pandemic was likely not based on any data, and conceded that the lab leak hypothesis of COVID-19's origins isn't a conspiracy theory.
Fauci's comments came during the second of two seven-hour rounds of transcribed, but non-public, testimony before the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic.
The repeated federal recommendation that people keep six feet of distance between themselves and others "sort of just appeared," said Fauci—the former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and former chief medical advisor to President Joe Biden—to lawmakers yesterday, according to a statement released today from the committee's Chairman, Rep. Brad Wenstrup (R–Ohio).
The feds' oft-repeated six-foot rule informed numerous state and local pandemic restrictions, including mask mandates and capacity limitations at businesses. Washington, D.C.'s mask mandate, for instance, required people to wear masks outside when one couldn't reliably keep six feet away from other people.
Fauci also reportedly told lawmakers yesterday that the lab leak hypothesis was not a conspiracy theory.
Early in the pandemic, Fauci and other National Institute of Health (NIH) officials pushed researchers to produce a paper downplaying the possibility COVID-19 had man-made origins.
Last year, the House's Coronavirus subcommittee published emails and other communications showing Fauci's own efforts to downplay the lab leak early in the pandemic and pressure researchers to produce a paper to that effect.
The resulting "Proximal Origins" paper published in March 2020 totally dismissed the lab leak, instead saying that COVID-19 had zoonotic origins. It heavily influenced initial media coverage of the lab leak as a debunked conspiracy. Other communications uncovered by the House subcommittee show the paper's authors candidly saying they were downplaying their assessment of a possible lab leak for political reasons.
Across his two days of testimony, Fauci engaged in "semantics" about the definitions of lab leaks and gain-of-function research—which involves engineering viruses to make them more deadly—to "cover up" his suppression of the lab leak hypothesis and improperly defended his past statements that NIH didn't fund gain-of-function research in Wuhan, China, said Wenstrup.
Sen. Rand Paul (R–Ky.) has called for Fauci to be criminally prosecuted for lying to Congress about NIH's funding of gain-of-function research.
"Dr. Fauci's transcribed interview revealed systemic failures in our public health system," said Wenstrup today. "It is clear that dissenting opinions were often not considered or suppressed completely. Should a future pandemic arise, America's response must be guided by scientific facts and conclusive data."
Rent Free is a weekly newsletter from Christian Britschgi on urbanism and the fight for less regulation, more housing, more property rights, and more freedom in America's cities.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
People after Fauci fucked up the response to AIDS: kill him!
People after Fauci fucked up the response to COVID: kill him!
Do you think he deserves a third shot?
He deserves to be shot, anyway. (Following appropriate legal due process, of course)
Read the following report to learn how a single-mom with 3 kids was able to generate $89,844 of annual income working in her spare time online from her home without selling...
For More Visit Here....> http://Www.Smartcareer1.com
What a bunch of fuckwits!
Not upset with the government cover ups over the lab origin lies and mishandling.
Fuckwits want to punish the health departments that saw the millions dead piling up and had no idea what we were dealing with so were making recommendations to save lives.
Fauci lied alright and probably didn’t understand how bad it could get.
You stupid retarded Nazi, Fauci was at the epicenter for the government coverups and lies about the lab origin and gain of function research. If not for him, it's likely Covid might never have happened.
"Recommendations."
"Reluctant" "recommendations."
More bullshit. There were not "millions dead piling up" at any point during Covid and certainly not when Fauci's stupid decrees were being implemented in states and cities across this nation. Vilifying research that disagreed with his own assertions caused more people to die than would have if the government had allowed opposing views to be aired and alternative treatment to be given to willing patients. Following Fauci's "recommendations" which at the time he insisted were based on hard science also caused great economic harm to individuals and business nationwide. He should be put on trial for fraud.
More than a million in the US alone. Worldwide many millions.
You probably deny the reports of overwhelmed ICUs and retirement homes.
The many millions who lost loved ones don’t share your narcissistic disdain.
If you were capable of focussing on the cause instead of the symptoms you might be part of the solution to prevent the next man made pandemic which could be far worse than COVID.
Squirrel. Fuck you.
More than a million in the US alone. Worldwide many millions.
Can you prove they weren't hired actors?
The million total dead in the USA took multiple years, in a country where on average around one percent of the population (somewhere between 3-3.5 million) dies in any given year. There was a surge of overwhelmed ICUs and possibly unnecessary deaths early on because Doctors who hadn't figured out what treatments worked were jumping straight to putting patients onto ventilators (which it was later determined likely killed as many or more patients than they saved).
Nursing homes were hit with outbreaks, especially in places like NYC where the government forced them to take in patients who were known to be infected and prohibited testing of other patients for a virus which the data was already showing was mostly dangerous to older patients with existing medical conditions. It's hard to say how much difference a wave of deaths at a nursing home made in the long run though, since the average life expectancy for patients after being checked into such facilities on a "permanent" basis is less than 16 months; very few, if any of the people in those facilities in March/April of 2020 would have been expected to still be alive by October 2021.
In NYC and surrounding areas refrigerated trucks were used to augment storage for overflowing morgues, but that was largely due to the closure of all of the funeral homes to which the dead are normally transferred for cremation/burial after relatively short amounts of time. Without the outflow, the existing storage backed up and got overfilled, sort of like how a sink fills up when a stopper/valve is applied to close the drain regardless of how strong the inflow happens to be.
"More than a million in the US alone. Worldwide many millions."
Maybe they all just went on vacation, like the million or more jews who were taken to Auschwitz/Dachau in the early 40s but weren't there in 1945, and according to you also didn't get murdered/incinerated in between?
Odd that the one person on here who thinks there's a precedent for 12million+ people having vanished from the Earth without having died is also completely credulous over the count of "covid dead" where for the first year of the pandemic anyone to have died within 6 weeks of a positive test was counted as "killed by the virus"
Look at the CDC's own numbers, around 60% of the "million plus" in the USA who "died of Covid" were already older than they'd been told to expect to live when they were growing up. That doesn't make their deaths any kind of cause for celebration, but everyone who's on full-time palliative care in a nursing home is well aware that death is something that's going to happen to them at some point in the not-too-distant future. The fewer than 2000 people under 25 who "died of covid" in the USA over the last 3 years arguably lost more potential life than the 600k+ over 75, but none of the young deaths were otherwise in what any doctor would have called "overall good health".
“millions dead piling up”
When I tell people that the stories of refrigerator trucks parked outside hospitals across the country because the morgues were overflowing with COVID decedents were false, they angrily insist it was true and they "saw it on the news". No, they didn't, but they insist they did. A mass delusion.
The field hospital set up in Columbus (at the convention center), like many others across the country, never saw a patient. However, unlike many others across the country, it did host a basketball tournament that was televised on ESPN right in the middle of a raging pandemic!
The USN Hospital ship that was parked in Long Beach (supposedly to free up space by treating non-Covid patients from around L.A.) ended up treating something like 85 people in a 20 million metro area before a Covid outbreak among the crew of the ship forced them to close down and leave the port.
In some places they had to supplement the morgue storage, but it was because the funeral homes were shut down and there was nowhere for bodies to go to free up space in the normally temporary morgue storage. It wasn't due to any kind of overwhelming surge in the number of people dying over short periods of time.
The news outlets which did report on it were more interested in sowing panic to draw more "engagement" from their viewers/readers and didn't get into explaining the actual causes for the situations their narrative required to be "because of Covid" or "because of the unvaxed".
So, when Fauci's "well-intentioned" recommendations were being pushed by Rochelle Walensky (a Jew), what then?
Why does it matter to you that Rochelle Walensky is Jewish?
Because Rob Misek is a Nazi and I do not mean that hyperbolic.
It doesn't matter to me. But for those new to the comments, Idaho-Bob explains it above.
Misek is a no shit, no hyperbole Nazi scumbag who denies the Holocaust ever happened.
who denies the Holocaust ever happened
And yet wishes that it had.
In my experience the overlap between those two beliefs is as close to 100% as to be no difference, so I thought about adding that but felt it went without saying.
Fair.
Fuckwits can’t focus.
It’s probably why you can’t prove what you claim or refute what you deny.
Everything is about the evil naaazis and the poor persecuted jooos.
You’re unaware that Jews committing a holocaust in Gaza has changed that bogeyman story forever.
My dog has the same reaction to the word squirrel.
What health departments, precisely, “saw the millions [of] dead piling up” at the point that those counter-productive “recommendations” were being imposed?
How bad did it really get? I keep hearing about numbers being revised downward.
How dumb are you Rob? Your view is government can say whatever they want and you'll follow it right? Remember "follow the science". Remember if you don't wear a mask you are killing people.
Lying like that is fine. It would be different if they said "we recommend because we don't know". They didn't. They required it by states, businesses, everywhere. You added the word recommendation. Or did you forget they closed business down if they violated the rule.
But hey, yours is the party who still wears masks inside and outside. Sometimes 2 masks.
How dumb are you Rob?
I don't think you can quantify the stupidity of one who chooses to join the losing side of the second world war.
-jcr
He'd have to have a couple consecutive moments of lucidity for anyone to have a shot at even getting a handle on where his mind is and isn't connected to reality.
It's entirely possible that Misek has a Hawking-esque grasp on the underpinnings and societal structures of the world in which his mind appears to exist. For those of us functioning on Earth 2023, there might not be any way to meaningfully assess what, if any points of commonality that world shares with this one, especially not through only online contact.
How about we agree to disagree and a bullet "just sort of appears" in his brainpan?
Do you think he deserves a
third shotbooster ?I suppose that stringing him up by his toes in the public square violates the constitutional protections against pillory.
Is there a credible claim that treating him like Mussolini would be, in some small way, honoring his Italian heritage?
he deserves as many shots as he ordered.
6 for each citizen / resident?
A quick google search tells me the US population is 331.9 million. So let's give him one shot and 1,991,399,999 boosters.
But just the bar bottle, not a name brand - - - - - - - -
Yes, three shots from a firing squad.
No, the firing squad is the most honorable form of execution. Hanging is what's appropriate for lowlifes and scoundrels such as him.
Honestly based on is ego, I mean the man has a painting of himself over his desk, is to strip him of power, make him a noboday, and ridicule him for the rest of his days. He can't handle it (Especially after 40 years in government)
The Science, everyone.
Should a future pandemic arise, America's response must be guided by scientific facts and conclusive data."
You dumb fuck, that is why we got fucked by Fauci in the first place. You've learned nothing. Instead you should be guided by principles of Liberty. That isn't to say scientific fact isn't important, just that it provides no guide as to how to run a country. Testing hypothesis on the nation doesn't work.
^^^^
If there was a major outbreak of smallpox in the US, would you oppose quarantines because Liberty is more important than science?
Smallpox? The one that everyone is vaccinated for? That was damned near eradicated? Heck yes I would oppose quarantines.
Damn near eradicated yes. That's why they stopped requiring that everyone be vaccinated like fifty years ago.
They did find live smallpox virus in a cold room at NIH 10 years ago. This wasn’t a BSL-3 or 4 lab, so anyone who worked there could have been exposed. Government keeping us safe.
I believe that the majority of people (around 99%) would do everything in their power to protect them and their loved ones without any government force needed for a disease that deadly and actually effects children.
Also the Founders were well aware of smallpox but didn't include a carveout in the Constitution for quarrentines or forced inoculations like say they did with quartering solidiers (can do it in times of War) is telling. Seems like people who lost children to the disease, still valued Liberty.
I'll take that as yes, you would oppose quarantines because people would do it on their own without government telling them to or organizing anything. I think that's a really dumb answer that's meant to attack COVID policies more than answer the question. But ok.
Sarc if my answers aren't up to snuff for your; well that hurts. I'll have to work on them down to meet the expectations of such a world renowned rummy, like yourself.
What did you mean by "a disease that deadly and actually effects children" if not to attack COVID policy instead of answering the question?
And if you didn't already have the respect of the troll brigade, you sure won it by calling me "rummy".
I'll give you two "attaboys" and a pat on the head.
I think it's a fine answer. If something is really that dangerous, people will take precautions. If massive coercion is required to avert catastrophe, we're almost certainly fucked anyway.
There's going to be some assholes who want to ruin it for everyone, and force will be justified to stop them. The question then becomes if that force should be employed by people or government. I'm leaning towards government on this one. That or government prosecutes people who defend themselves from sick assholes who don't care if they infect others.
Nobody should be surprised that sarc takes the statist position here.
Fuck, Washington himself almost died of it as a juvenile too. Plus, he lost a lot of soldiers to it in two wars. Yes, he ordered quarantine and inoculations (note this was before the vaccine, so they actually purposely infected you with smallpox, hopefully a mild case) for his soldiers, but ordering troops, in a cramped environment, close quarters, with an active outbreak already occuring and deaths already occuring is far different than ordering every citizen into quarantine and forcing them to get inoculated. Also, I would note he didn't confine every soldier to their quarters (in fact he actually increased their time outdoors and forced them to clean their quarters and bathe as part of his preventative measures) just the ones who were symptomatic. Everyone else was expected to continue their duties, including training in close quarter combat and linear infantry tactics (e.g. extremely close quarters, about half to one upraised arm distance between you and the next guy). For anyone who wonders, our current drill and ceremony is based almost entirely on the teachings of the Prussian von Steuben's training, which were not originally only ceremonial but were how they actually moved and fought in the 18th and 19th centuries, while saluting goes back to the middle ages.
Tell that to the people who say "concentration camp" and "internment" to describe quarantines.
I don't know how else to describe a fenced in camp that you are forced into and not allowed to leave. Nothing like that happened in the US as far as I know. But it did in Australia.
There was no end date for people who were concentrated or interned. It wasn't like they could stop showing symptoms of being Jewish or Japanese. A quarantine is temporary. At least it's usually thought of that way.
Sarc doesn’t like it when people correctly use words that hurt his feelings. At least he’s consistent with this, which is rare.
With the "quarantine" camps in Australia and the talk (mostly among left-"progressive" Dems) about possibly establishing "isolation facilities" for those who didn't get the vaccine (which never at any point had any data supporting the idea or quantifying a rate at which it might have prevented the virus to take hold when a vaxxed person was exposed) coming more than a year into the "six weeks to flatten the curve", would any announced end date to such confinement have carried any kind of credibility?
Why should anyone believed any supposed "end date" coming from officials who were already extending one supposedly finite-duration infringement of basic freedoms into something which had become officially "indefinite" in several States/Counties/Cities?
Smallpox had a mortality rate of 20% for those not innoculated (although depending on the method, the innoculation process itself wasn't without fatalities in the late 1700s), and could leave survivors blinded and/or disfigured. Quarantining those infected for the duration of their symptoms is a far different thing than imprisoning anyone who simply hadn't taken whatever precautions the PTB decide should be "required". Not to mention that the underlying level of liberty allowed to soldiers in active combat units is somewhat different from the level of freedom that's now promised to civilian/citizens within the legal structure of the US, and member state, Constitutions.
Covid, by contrast, had a morbidity rate (combined death and serious after-effects) of far less than one percent for unvaccinated (not vaxxed for Covid,anyway) and generally healthy people under age 50. The risk/reward calculations change a lot when the virus in question is virtually harmless to a particular civilian population as opposed to one that could literally decimate an army engaged in active warfare. The CA Teachers' Unions continued to insist 18 months in that their fight to keep schools closed to in-person classes was about safety of students despite ample available data (including from the private schools where the children of most teachers and government officials had been attending for more than a full year since re-opening) that transmission to and among primary and high school students wasn't of particular concern during in-person instruction.
In 1793, there was a yellow fever epidemic in Philadelphia (then the capital). It was cities that arranged quarantines, inspections, roadblocks, militia mustering then - and they all did. The Federal govt just left the city for a few months. After the epidemic the Federal government did respond.
They started tracking yellow fever epidemics - 1791, 1795, 1798 in NY; 1794 in Baltimore, 1798 in Boston, 1793, 1797, 1798, and 1799 in Philly, most years in Charleston. At the request of Dr Benjamin Rush (who had signed the Declaration of Independence). One of Rush's students - who mapped the yellow fever epidemic of 1795 in NY - also introduced the smallpox vaccine to the US in 1799. And in 1802, put a NY based program in place to provide smallpox vaccines to the poor.
The feds set up marine hospitals in all ports in 1798. Originally within the precursor of the Coast Guard. It was the origin of the uniformed Public Health Service and the first implementation of medical inspections and quarantines and recordkeeping for all entrants to and departures from the US - and free hospital care for merchant seamen.
The basic fed approach then was similar to what it is now. Let local entities do the implementation of whatever health measures are needed. The feds only do implementation on oddball territory without local sovereignty. The feds provide info/data/research. Militias were mobilized to do whatever a local govt needed/wanted doing. Ancaps were as irrelevant then as now.
Ancaps were as irrelevant then as now.
I like anarchy on paper. Then again communism works great on paper too. My problem with anarchists is that men will gang up together to subjugate others. And if we're going to be subjugated, it's marginally better if we get a choice in who does it.
I like 19th century anarchist thinking. Ultimately they all turn into bomb throwers if they continue to believe that it's possible. But it's a useful exercise.
Says the guy that admits he doesn’t vote because it doesn’t matter, lol. Not. Very. Smart.
What kind of quarantines? I would never support any general lockdown type thing like they tried with Covid. And I don't think there is a lot that science has to say one way or another regarding the effectiveness of large scale quarantine on a smallpox epidemic. I'm pretty sure no well controlled studies were ever conducted.
What kind of quarantines?
I don't know. Just posing the scenario with a historically feared killer instead of what many thought was going to be one.
We didn't do much of anything in the US based on scientific facts or data. And principles of Liberty only works when applied to facts and reality. Otherwise you're just Mel Gibson in Braveheart.
6-Foot Social Distancing Guidance Likely Not Based on Data
LIKELY not based on Data? This has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt that 6' distancing was literally made up.
Republican lawmakers criticized the former NIH official for playing "semantics" about lab leaks and gain-of-function research during closed-door congressional testimony this week.
Well, yes, in that room, at that time, in that context, on that 2nd Thursday of the month, between 2:30 and 345pm, Republicans were criticizing the former NIH official. But the criticism of Fauci on this topic and dozens of others goes way beyond Ron DeSantis and Josh Hawley.
If the people who pushed it can't identify any data to support it, then it's probably safe to say it wasn't based on data.
Real... honest scientists pointed out that the 6' rule was largely based on old school, fairly widely discredited germ transmission theory. There's a scientist who's been on the circuit lately talking about this... I'll try to find an interview with her and post it.
She talks about the history of germ theory... and in particular what it gets wrong and why COVID spread the way it did-- in total defiance of the models that the CDC and WHO were using.
I suspect Reason might interview her in 2029.
The 6-foot distance was based on the probable flight distance of snot particles (via sneezing) and saliva particles (via coughing) and how far they would travel.
But the COVID-19 particles (via breathing) were much smaller (and hence not stopped by cloth masks) and more easily airborne. Scientists knew almost right away that they were carried much greater distances by air conditioning and heating air currents. It’s why infection rates spiked in winter in the North and in summer in the South and West.
Your first paragraph matches my recollection. The only think I'd add is that the saliva-particle distribution drops off to basically nothing at less than one meter (3 feet). It does so by evaporating, not by falling to the ground. The distance was arbitrarily doubled on the basis of, well, nothing.
Your second paragraph, however, was not widely understood until far, far later in the epidemic. Covid-19, like most virons, requires moisture to remain viable. The ability to remain viable absent the moisture droplets of snot and saliva was not obvious.
I reread the study last night. My summary above was incomplete. Particles from sneezes and coughs come in a range of sizes. What the researchers found was that (in the conditions of their study), large particles drop to the ground faster than small particles, small particles evaporate to nothing, and when you plot the two effects in combination, essentially all particles from a human cough or sneeze fail to exceed about 1 meter distance from the cougher/sneezer.
Before Covid I never realized we had 2 cold seasons. Sad thing is after everyone seeing the "curves" for years very few made the realization. They all seemed to think the spikes in the South were just MAGAs running around without masks
Here's the short clip (I picked one at random that discusses the issue of masks and the 6' distance).
Here is the full 1 hour interview of wide ranging topics she researched. Here she talks about the history of germ theory, how covid actually spread vs how the models said it would spread. Lots of good info here.
One of the more interesting things I've learned from the whole covid debacle is how little people actually know about how infectious diseases actually work. And what a bad job scientists and science communicators do of making clear what the gaps in our knowledge are.
And how effectively politicians exploit that lack of knowledge.
It would help if the scientists and science communicators weren’t so utterly corrupt.
It’s probably my top criticism of Trump that he didn’t see what was happening, especially since getting rid of him was one of the motivations for it.
An awful lot of the early Covid response ran directly counter to what 99% of the world's virologists would have cited as general tenets of "how viruses work" if they'd been asked in 2019.
Any competent scientist would have said pre-covid that transmission of pretty much any respiratory virus is nearly impossible outdoors (especially in sunny weather) since the UV in sunlight kills most microbes so effectively and because of the immediate dissipation of anything exhaled from a contagious person; with or without masks, and at any point where people aren't within arms-length of each other (maybe less). People should have been encouraged to get out to parks and beaches as much as possible, instead most states closed them all immediately (and in CA they remained closed for months, and were heavily restricted for a year or more).
The biggest problem with the Covid response in the USA is that like everything else in 2017-2021, the personal opinions of Donny Jingles (especially acting in opposition to whatever those who hated him believed him to think) became the primary basis of major policy decisions which should have been make looking to what data was actually available from the scientific community. Mask mandates and lockdowns got intensified and prolonged for insane durations in "blue" states often for no reason other than that trump refused to institute them at the Federal level. The most amazing shift was probably from October 2020, when trump's "excessive focus on vaccine development and failure to fund production of more ventilators" along with his refusal to lock down the whole of the country in reaction to something which affected different regions very differently was his "single greatest failure" with every prominent Dem in office lining up to be quoted that they'd never trust the "trump vaccine" to Feb 2021 when somehow the increasing number of "shots in arms" (mostly due to the coincidental timing of when "trump's greatest failure" managed to get doses into larger-scale production and distribution overlapping with the inaugural time-frame) was a policy success which made Biden suddenly one of the greatest leaders in the history of mankind, and meanwhile the main thrust of the MSM "news" focused almost exclusively on portraying trump as suddenly "anti-vax" in order to keep him positioned as the Goldstein to Biden's BB. It's hard to imagine that Orwell himself would have believed what NYT, CNN, the TV Networks, and major social media platforms did in terms of memory-holing one narrative for another, especially with only partial direction coming from government bureaucrats aligned with the party that was more or less "out of power" in the first half of the progression.
The second biggest problem was how much of the response appeared to be happening as if this was maybe the first known microorganism that mankind had ever encountered. So many policies were supported by assumptions that just because it was a novel strain, Covid was somehow likely to behave completely contrary to everything that was already known about the workings of infectious diseases, virues in general and the overall family of coronaviruses.
They didn't have any data to support all the plexiglass barriers they put up either. They also ignored actual data that showed masks were ineffective.
Coincidently they just yesterday took down the one in front of our receptionist.
Why is this in the RENT column?
Probably due to the covid rent moratorium.
It couldn’t have been! Everywhere else was doing two meters (also made up).
Actually, many countries started with (and some stayed with) one meter.
The one-meter rule of thumb is based on a study that showed that the average particles from a sneeze or a cough will evaporate away to nothing within a meter or less (on average, depending on atmospheric conditions, etc). Coupled with the observation that virons do not generally remain viable without moisture, the one-meter rule is a decent rule of thumb when someone is coughing or sneezing near you. Just don't shake their hand or use their phone.
NO amnesty for this national socialists.
If only someone had pointed this out sooner!
I get all my news from Reason. It takes at least 2 years for them to notice things like the most aggregious assault on civil liberties in a couple of hundred years. I expect an article on the civil rights abuses of people who paraded outside the capitol on J6 in late 2026.
I don’t think they’ll ever address that. All those people are just too icky.
Get your news from the comments instead. You're right that Reason is generally about three years behind the commentariat.
The repeated federal recommendation that people keep six feet of distance between themselves and others "sort of just appeared," said Fauci
Someone must have been eating some bad recommendation soup in a wet market near Washington DC. It couldn't be the result of any malfeasance by the clergy of SCIENCE.
>>Should a future pandemic arise, America's response must be guided by scientific facts and conclusive data.
Wenstrup = Bailey?
Warmest year ever! We're all gonna die! AAAAHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
A lying liar lies about lying, again.
And yet, somehow, he walks out alive, again.
This man is a mass murderer, by his own admission.
Once he is in jail for life, the entire federal "health" apparatus must be permanently dismantled.
(and democrats should embrace individual freedom; equally likely)
Fauci is boring. He is what you Peanuts get for taking what the government says seriously.
But there has been a HUNTER BIDEN PENIS SIGHTING BY COMER AND THE BOYS!
Hunter Biden leaves wild House committee meeting after surprise appearance
CBS News
5.55M subscribers
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWZJQhoWN3o
GOP Swooning!
"Oh my god why are we still talking about this?"
The refrain of people who were spectacularly wrong, and will be spectacularly wrong (with deadly consequences again) if you don't stop constantly reminding them of it.
To be fair, even if you do constantly remind them...
Democrats want us to all forget what their stupid mandates imposed upon our nation. They want "Covid' amnesty. No! They need to be reminded daily of their evil stupidity.
They want us to forget their failures so they can implement the same plan beginning around March of this year. They will insist on drop box voting and relaxed voting procedures again due to whatever new current and more deadly strain of Covid on which they can create a narrative.
Well, thank you all very much. This is a very important day. I’ll sign the single-biggest economic relief package in American history and, I must say, or any other package, by the way. It’s twice as large as any relief ever signed. It’s $2.2 billion, but it actually goes up to 6.2 — potentially — billion dollars — trillion dollars. So you’re talking about 6.2 trillion-dollar bill. Nothing like that. And this will deliver urgently needed relief to our nation’s families, workers, and businesses. And that’s what this is all about.
- Donald Trump , Cares Act Signing Statement
So do Republicans, if they nominate Trump. Only 4 Republicans didn't vote for this in the Senate; Romney, Paul, Lee and Thune Massie didn't get the recorded vote in the House, again thanks Trump - he called him a loser, backbencher who should be primaried for thinking that his chamber should record their vote.
Fuck Republicans and Democrats, they share equal blame for the COVID response.
I was told in these comments that he signed it against his will only after heroic Republicans carved a bunch of big pieces off of it.
Fuck Republicans and Democrats, they share equal blame for the COVID response.
Wait, you're comparing a spending package to relieve people from lockdowns that Fauci demanded, to trapping people in nursing homes so they could die?
I thought Trump was the head of the executive who could have replaced Fauci with a wave of his hand. Didn't know he was Fauci's hostage.
I thought so too and I've considered that a big black eye for Trump. But apparently it's not that easy. Or so I've been told by seemingly well informed sources.
A spending package? Relieve lockdowns? It's not just a spending package, its the one that enabled all of the lockdowns and helped created the inflation we see to day (Joe helped push that to new heights). It's at the root of all the evil that came about. We didn't have lockdowns in MD till this bill was passed by Congress.
And yes, Cuomo and NY gov. are the only ones responsible for the NY nursing home deaths. So I probably should have qualified that as nearly equal. But to act as if Republicans don't own a large share of this is just horse manure.
Good point. Without the federal bailout, the lockdowns couldn't have been sustained. People would have revolted by April 2020.
I have said many times that covid policy was one of Trump's biggest failures. At the state level, though, I think it's fair to say that overall Republicans did a lot less damage than Democrats.
“Equal blame”?
No. Fuck you, notion. Only one side wanted to ban tens of millions of people from working for refusing to comply with a series of injections.
Fuck them twice as hard, and again, fuck you too. Asshole.
"Democrats want us to all forget what their stupid mandates imposed upon our nation..."
So do turd and JFucked.
Hunter flashed his penis at Congress?
He is what you Peanuts get for taking what the government says seriously.
What does being forced to do things by people claiming to be acting in the name of Science have to do with whether or not you take those people seriously? And who here takes those people seriously?
I don't know about you but I ignored Fauci.
Obviously. He wasn't quite your "type".
I don’t know about you but I ignored Fauci.
You must not be a landlord.
To be fair, according to Reason, Fauci was just (the highest paid) drunk college friend in the back seat, telling us to turn left when we should have turned right while trying to get to the Hardees. So the fact that we turned left is on us... or something.
Sure, but in the context of SPB's "argument," he's implying that the government deciding what was and what wasn't "scientific" policy is a red herring, since you don't need to listen to the government when it tells you to do things.
So okay, fine, perhaps Fauci himself didn't literally have any direct control over my life - my state and local govs, OTOH, made me do all kinds of things, and they were all pointing to Fauci as the reason why they had to do those things, because Science.
In short, my problem was not that I was taking Fauci too seriously.
Yeah, but that was Reason's thesis: They literally compared Fauci to a drunk college friend in the back seat, telling you to go left when you should have turned right. So any policy decisions are on your feckless government leaders. The problem that Reason completely glossed over, is that Fauci WASN'T a drunk college guy in the back seat, he was a HIGHLY paid navigator, whose one and only job was to guide us through disease outbreaks and pandemics. So when you're a rally driver heading down the straightaway at 90kph and your navigator says "right five minus one hundred" and it turns out to be "left seven minus one hundred" and you end up in the ditch... or dead... that's on the navigator.
Fauci WASN’T a drunk college guy in the back seat, he was a HIGHLY paid navigator, whose one and only job was to guide us through disease outbreaks and pandemics
Well put.
Do you mean the eviction moratoriums? That only applied to federally subsidized housing and federally backed mortgages. The federal government's favorite way of avoiding the Constitution is putting strings on returning your money back to you.
Um, you must be talking about the federal eviction moratoriums, not the state and local ones.
Yeah, I don't keep track of all 18,000 localities.
You don't have to. All you need to know is blue states enacted their own eviction moratoriums because the CDCs didn't go marxist enough.
I live in a blue state that didn't enact its own moratoriums.
Seattle is on its own level along with Portland. Maybe it's that magic mushrooms appear whenever it rains, and it rains a lot.
Do you mean the eviction moratoriums?
Yes - the ones that were declared facially unconstitutional by the Supreme Court and that the Biden Administration continued with anyway. I don't recall them ever being specific about whom it applied to, but in CA the affirmative language of the law is that it applies to everybody.
So, again, sure - maybe not Fauci himself personally directly (although I'm skeptical regarding these enumerated limitations, since we're talking about a vague executive decree rather than a law), but Fauci was the Authority to whom everyone was appealing as our rights were being stripped away.
That landlords were simply "taking the government too seriously" is an absurd position to take.
I didn't take all the localities into account, and mine didn't ban evictions.
The federal eviction moratorium only affected people getting federal money in the form of subsidized housing or loans.
The federal eviction moratorium only affected people getting federal money in the form of subsidized housing or loans.
Since I’m skeptical of this, I did the research, and it turns out this is not true – what you’re talking about is the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, which the CDC’s Temporary Halt in Residential Evictions to Prevent the Further Spread of COVID-19 specifically says didn’t go far enough:
The Federal moratorium, however, did not reach all renters. Many renters who fell outside the scope of the Federal moratorium were protected under State and local moratoria. In the absence of State and local protections, as many as 30–40 million people in America could be at risk of eviction. A wave of evictions on that scale would be unprecedented in modern times. A large portion of those who are evicted may move into close quarters in shared housing or, as discussed below, become homeless, thus contributing to the spread of COVID-19. (pages 19-20)
Under “Applicability” on Page 5:
Under this Order, a landlord, owner of a residential property, or other person with a legal right to pursue eviction or possessory action, shall not evict any covered person from any residential property in any jurisdiction to which this Order applies during the effective period of the Order.
This explicitly applied to all renters, nationwide, and in all territories except, for some reason, Samoa.
From a different source.
Hm. Guess I was wrong.
turd, the ass-clown of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
He was here pitching masks and 'social distancing at the time; turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit.
turd lies. turd lies when he knows he’s lying. turd lies when we know he’s lying. turd lies when he knows that we know he’s lying.
turd lies. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit and a pederast besides.
I bet pluggo still wears two masks in public.
The Party of Science strikes again.
To be so dammed self-assured during Covid when doing daily appearances with his fawning media, Fauci (Mr. Science himself) sure has a faulty memory of his assertions at that time. His current "I can't recall" and "I don't remember" responses is worthy of the Clinton award for obfuscation.
But at least Fauci now admits the stupid "Six foot apart" declarations were nothing but bull-droppings. It was all political. Small businesses were closed because their building space could not allow even the employees to remain six foot apart, much less customers to enter with those restrictions. Remember dementia Joe's "rallies" with attendees (press) sitting inside hoola-hoops six foot apart?
The amount of money my former employer put into signs reminding people to "Stay Six Foot Apart" and "We Are All in This Together" would have funded a family of four for a year. The "Masking Required" signs, plexi-glass barriers, and sanitizer stations costs would have funded a small town's yearly budget.
Ignorance and stupidity ruled the day for over two years. People previously thought intelligent were wearing two or three cloth masks for "protection", while yelling that those unmasked could make them sick. And now Covid idiots want to bring back mask mandates.
Many governors and mayors found they enjoyed their new powers so much they are still holding on to them and trying to make them permanent. And most in the legal profession, both practicing and in academia, nod their heads and say "This is good", "Restricting freedom is democracy in action" and give us other such pearls of wisdom.
A pox on them all!
My company had a foot sprayer with a camera pointed at it, and anyone who failed to go through it would get an official reprimand. You literally can't make this up. The idea that people were catching COVID because they were tracking it in on their shoes is hilarious. Hilarious in that way that we laugh at how silly the German people were in 1939.
My company turned off every other sink in the restrooms to ensure people weren't too close when the mandated handwashing was imposed. Shop personnel has to wear masks in 100°F conditions and the company turned off the fans. The company tried to tell us we couldn't socialize. There was a "Do Not Leave the State of Washington" mandate. I live in Idaho. The list is endless.
Well said. Never forget.
+1
Why no contempt charge?
It's February 2020. There's a new virus that has just emerged that has a lot of people scared, and it has just made its way to America. People are scared and panicking about how to deal with this new threat. There's a lot of people who don't know what to do but are very scared and they are looking for some guidance. The people want to be told what to do by a respected authority figure about how to keep themselves safe.
YOU are that authority figure. You have more information than the general public about this virus, but there's still a lot of things that you don't know either. But the people are looking to you to provide reassuring guidance.
What do you say and do?
And if your honest and serious answer is, "I don't do or say anything, I tell people they are on their own and to deal with it as best as they can", then you are the one who is going to be fired for your dereliction of duty (as others view it).
So, what you do is you offer the best guidance that you can, with the information that you have available, and when people ask for more guidance for which there is no clear answer, you make an educated guess. That is what reasonable people do anyway. So you tell people to "wear a mask and stay six feet apart". Is there clear, unambiguous scientific evidence that wearing masks will help in all cases? No. Is there clear unambiguous scientific evidence that staying six feet apart (as opposed to five or seven) will help in all cases? No. However, is it good general advice to try to keep safe from respiratory viruses in general? Yes.
Unless you're willing to put yourself in Fauci's shoes and say what you would have done when a scared public is looking to you for advice and, most importantly, reassurance about what to do in the face of a novel and unique virus, then it's all just Monday morning quarterbacking.
So I don't fault Facui or the experts generally for giving initial advice in the face of an unknown threat that may not have been based on solid science, but was nonetheless good faith educated guesses on what to do.
The problem arose when the "educated guess" advice continued and persisted as more knowledge became available about what to do. Once we all had a better understanding about how the virus was transmitted and how to keep safe from it, then the advice should have been revised accordingly. That they DIDN'T do that is the real scandal here. Not that they initially told people to stay six feet apart, but that they continued to insist upon it even if it became clear that staying six feet apart wasn't the best idea.
Telling people that covering their face with an old t-shirt is not an "educated guess".
It’s not an educated guess. It’s an educated lie because Fauci knew that cloth masks were useless unless he actually never heard about the 1918 Flu pandemic.
Is it better than doing nothing?
No, as it is the same as doing nothing. If air escapes your facial covering, then it is doing nothing.
But that's not true, the total amount of viral particles escaping an infected person is, generally, less wearing a mask than when not wearing a mask.
Again, that transmission is possible wearing a mask does not mean that "masks don't work", it only means that "masks don't work 100%". Don't confuse the two.
Would you wear a bullet 'proof' vest that doesn't stop 100% of the bullets? Especially when you are being hit with thousands at a time.
Would you wear a bullet ‘proof’ vest that doesn’t stop 100% of the bullets?
What are the alternatives?
If you are going to be exposed to thousands of 'bullets' ANYWAY, would YOU wear the vest, or not?
Not wearing the vest = 100% certainty of death
Wearing the vest = <100% certainty of death
Both are bad, but which is less bad?
Your bulletproof vest is a bad analogy, and good luck with that headshot.
Take it up with Spiritus Mundi then.
Bullshit, Jeffy. Believe your lying eyes.
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/this-video-shows-just-how-ineffective-masks-are/
A TikTok video is not the same as a scientific study. And who is Chip Roy again? Oh yeah, a member of Congress. Not exactly an unbiased source.
The people who say that masks stop ALL viral particles are wrong. But the people who say that masks don't stop ANY viral particles are also wrong.
But the people who say that masks don’t stop ANY viral particles are also wrong.
They don't stop enough to be statistically significant. The CDC knew that before the pandemic and they still know it now.
They don’t stop enough to be statistically significant.
But statistical results are not guaranteed to be true for individual scenarios. Statistically, if you roll a pair of two unloaded six-sided dice, you will get the number 7 as the most probable result. That does not mean that EVERY roll of the dice will yield 7, or even that a fixed finite set of rolls will ALWAYS yield 7 as the most probable result. That is a proper understanding of statistics.
So statistically, "masks don't work" only means that if you look at the average of everyone using masks in real world situations (including the times when they aren't wearing masks but are supposed to be), using variable quality materials for their masks, using highly variable air quality situations, that ON AVERAGE the result is negligible. It does NOT mean that every INDIVIDUAL case of mask usage will not yield any benefit.
You see that escaping from the edges of his masks, Jeffy, that’s what we call water vapor. And on water vapor, we can find these little things called viruses, Jeffy. Guess how they escape and enter the mask? That’s right, Jeffy, around the edges. I’ll say it again, so you can hear me:
CLOTH, SURGICAL, AND N95/KN95 MASKS DO NOT HAVE TIGHT-FITTING SEALS TO ONE’S FACE, HENCE AIR IS MERELY REDIRECTED TO THE EDGES AND ESCAPES/ENTERS ANYWAY.
If you want to follow what real medical professionals who do virus testing do, to protect yourself, you use a half-face respirator with P100 filters. Not a cloth mask, but one made of air-tight rubber.
Once again - everyone here including me agrees with you that masks do not work 100%. Not even N95 masks. But that is not the relevant standard nor should it be when considering nonprofessionals using masks under real-world conditions.
Not ALL of the air escapes through the edges. SOME of the air is filtered through the mask. The proportion of the air that is filtered through the mask vs. escapes around the edges depends a great deal on specific conditions.
A proper study would try to analyze the amount of air that escapes through the edges vs. the amount of air that is filtered by the mask material. But this video is not a proper study, it is a partisan TikTok video designed to push a narrative rather than contribute meaningfully to the body of human knowledge.
No
Oh, you think they didn’t know what they were dealing with? Lol.
Fuck you too, Chemjeff selectively nuanced collectivist.
Telling people that it's ok to congregate in some instances (protesting racism) but not others (protesting forced unemployment) is not an "educated guess".
Telling people that it’s ok to congregate in some instances (protesting racism) but not others (protesting forced unemployment) is not an “educated guess”.
No medical professional, not even Fauci, EVER said that. If I'm wrong, provide a quote from a medical professional who actually said that. Partisans might have, but not the professionals. Instead, the message was "you should balance the risks between getting COVID and protesting an injustice". Which is sensible - but it is sensible for all sorts of activities, not just protesting injustices.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/05/health/health-care-open-letter-protests-coronavirus-trnd/index.html
April 23, before George Floyd:
From Arizona to Virginia, health care workers tell protesters to "stay at home."
https://abcnews.go.com/US/disagree-medical-professionals-counter-coronavirus-lockdown-protesters/story?id=70293830
"Dr. Mark Shrime, a surgeon and professor at Harvard Medical School who founded the Center for Global Surgery Evaluations, told The Denver Post that racism is a pandemic in its own right.
“The role of professionals in medicine and public health is to focus on health and equity, in all its forms,” he said. “The world currently grapples with two pandemics: that of COVID-19 and that of structural racism. Both pandemics are lethal, and both disproportionately affect black Americans.
A group of nearly 1,300 health professionals from across the country — including a handful from Colorado — recently signed an open letter that praised the protesters of the last couple of weeks for calling attention “to the pervasive lethal force of white supremacy.” The protests began as a response to the death of Floyd, a black man, after a white police officer pressed his knee on his neck for nearly nine minutes, and have grown to include the deaths of other black people at police hands around the country.
“… We do not condemn these gatherings as risky for COVID-19 transmission,” the letter states. “We support them as vital to the national public health and to the threatened health specifically of Black people in the United States.”
The letter said the same considerations should not be given to “protests against stay-home orders,” which it claimed “not only oppose public health interventions, but are also rooted in white nationalism and run contrary to respect for Black lives.”"
https://www.denverpost.com/2020/06/15/coronavirus-protests-health-racism/
It keeps saying "Health Professionals" instead of "Medical Professionals" so I'm not sure this works for what you want.
Yeah a lot of those are probably psychologists or the like.
But it is still the case that they are not saying that if you go protest that it magically keeps you safe from the virus or that there are no risks. Only that you have to balance the risks.
The mistake was not saying "protesting can be okay depending on the risk", the mistake was not applying that same standard evenly.
No medical professional, not even Fauci, EVER said that.
And here’s what the open letter says:
“However, as public health advocates, we do not condemn these gatherings as risky for COVID-19 transmission. We support them as vital to the national public health and to the threatened health specifically of Black people in the United States. We can show that support by facilitating safest protesting practices without detracting from demonstrators’ ability to gather and demand change. This should not be confused with a permissive stance on all gatherings, particularly protests against stay-home orders.”
The letter literally said “Some protests are okay, and others are not.” And signed by medical professionals.
Still think you were right?
The original claim was:
Telling people that it’s ok to congregate in some instances (protesting racism) but not others (protesting forced unemployment) is not an “educated guess”.
I dispute the notion that even this letter says it is "ok". To me they are saying that the risk of getting COVID is worth it in order to protest racism. Their issue again is that they didn't apply this same risk-balancing test to other types of protests.
Telling people that a mask will provide more protection than a vaccine (the pre-covid understanding of a vaccine), is not an "educated guess".
Who said "a mask will provide more protection than a vaccine"? That is a new one to me.
Dr. Redfield
https://news.yahoo.com/cdc-chief-says-masks-better-at-stopping-coronavirus-than-a-vaccine-173526486.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall
Thank you for the citation. And in the specific scenario that he mentioned, he said that for people who don't get an immune response from the vaccine, that the masks will work better than the vaccine. That is almost a tautology.
How so, it assume masks work. Which they don't. It is a circular argument. Do you ever tire of being wrong?
Again, for an individual person depending on the situation, masks CAN work. And for those individuals, assuming that the individual is using a mask properly and under optimal or at least good-enough situations, if that individual can't get an immune response from the vaccine, then wearing a mask is better than the vaccine because the vaccine does nothing.
There is zero evidence to support this. Asshats like you need to be strung up next to people like Fauci for aiding and abetting his crimes.
No that's not true. Laboratory tests with high quality masks under controlled conditions do show that masks work to stop transmission. It is only when the issue of widespread public masking using variable quality masks under real-world conditions do you arrive at the *statistical* result that "masks don't work". And it isn't about the mask per se, but how they are used and applied by non-professionals under actual situations.
And IF you are a person who does not generate an immune response from the vaccine, what else are you going to do? What would your advice be to that person? Do nothing?
1. These lab tests do not reflect real world use in the least.
2. They do no have people actually wearing the masks during the trial.
3. As this is the case, the masks cannot be used for real world conditions.
4. How fucking retarded are you, Mr. Badyear Blimp?
When are you guys going to stop arguing over whether masks work or not, and agree that mask policies don't do shit because few people will wear masks properly, making it moot?
few people will wear masks properly, making it moot?
But that is essentially the REASON for the statistical conclusion that "masks don't work". Either people in general, being nonprofessionals, don't wear the masks correctly, or they don't wear them at all, or the mask material is crap, or the air quality conditions of the local environment would defeat the beneficial effect of any mask.
1. These lab tests do not reflect real world use in the least.
Mostly, I agree.
2. They do no have people actually wearing the masks during the trial.
For many of these studies, that is correct.
3. As this is the case, the masks cannot be used for real world conditions.
No - we can still draw conclusions from laboratory tests when applying the results to real-world conditions. We just have to be cautious in doing so.
But that is essentially the REASON for the statistical conclusion that “masks don’t work”.
Mask policy doesn't work. And it doesn't matter if masks themselves work or not if fat women sitting behind cash registers use them to cover their mouths while they huff and puff through visible nose hairs.
Only if you're using a half-face respirator with HEPA (P100) filter cartridges, minimum. Anything less, and you're fooling yourself, Jeffy.
Masks don't do shit against airborne viruses.
A Hazmat suit might, depending on the configuration.
No. This is what he said:
“This face mask is more guaranteed to protect me against COVID than when I take a COVID vaccine."
Yes, and he used that specific example to bolster his claim, of a person who doesn't generate an immune response from the vaccine. IN THAT SPECIFIC CASE, he's right.
And he's wrong, just as you are wrong. See my other comments here for more.
I the case of these vaccines, maybe this was accidentally true 🙂
If you can compare doesn't work at all to doesn't work at all.
So I don’t fault Facui or the experts generally for giving initial advice in the face of an unknown threat that may not have been based on solid science, but was nonetheless good faith educated guesses on what to do.
Fauci got ONE thing right about Covid at the early outbreak: Masks don't work. But then he later lied and claimed he lied to protect the supply. But the lie was a lie. He didn't lie to protect the supply, he lied because of a series of meetings that essentially determined that the government had to do SOMETHING to give people confidence that they could operate somewhat normally- and have a feeling that there were in fact measures you could reasonably take to avoid getting covid. Out of that came: Masks and 6' distancing.
And remember, that lie to give people 'confidence' is 100% consistent with the initial view of COVID the left had: Hey man, it's not that big a deal, have your party San Francisco, don't be a racist! The idea was that people were afraid, but there was an initial reluctance to shut the country down.
No one remembers that, but I do. Then everything turned on its head and just when people were beginning to discover that the initial wave of the virus, while much more deadly to old and inform people, wasn't particularly dangerous to the young and/or healthy. But by that time, the fear had set in, and by that time Fauci had initiated his pandemic playbook, and because he wrote the playbook, no data, no countervailing evidence, no contrarian opinions were going to derail that.
So from then on it was Masks, 6' distancing, everyone gets vaccinated (with a vaccine they mysteriously had in the pipeline for JUST this virus), everything is locked down in perpetuity, vaccine passports, the whole works.
Masks don’t work.
If you are going to keep repeating this, can you at least repeat it accurately?
Masks "don't work" when considered on a broad statistical, population level measure, in real world situations. Masks DO work in particular situations, depending on a great number of factors such as type of mask, quality of air ventilation, density of the crowd, etc.
So telling people to "wear a mask" means that it will work for some people but not for others. Some individuals will be protected, other individuals will not be protected as much.
Mask policies didn't do any good because masks are guaranteed to not be effective if only a few people wear them correctly.
You're literally repeating the trope that Fauci tried to pull off: That yeah, masks didn't work for the population, but they worked for that guy over there?
I'll just let Vinay Prasad speak simple facts to this bullshit.
And also:
So telling people to “wear a mask” means that it will work for some people but not for others. Some individuals will be protected, other individuals will not be protected as much.
Telling people "wear a mask if you want" would have been a reasonable policy. But that wasn't the policy. You know it wasn't the policy, I know it wasn't the policy, and Fauci didn't make that the policy.
Telling people “wear a mask if you want” would have been a reasonable policy.
But given the statistical nature of the evidence, the "if you want" would have guaranteed that widespread masking wouldn't have worked, because those who chose not to wear the masks would have defeated the masking of those who chose to wear it, because masks weren't THAT effective. They only help somewhat and then only under the right conditions.
I agree that Fauci et al., once more information was known, should have been more candid about the extent to which masks actually work. But I don't blame them for initially recommending it in a good faith effort to try to keep people safe.
he lied because of a series of meetings that essentially determined that the government had to do SOMETHING to give people confidence that they could operate somewhat normally- and have a feeling that there were in fact measures you could reasonably take to avoid getting covid. Out of that came: Masks and 6′ distancing.
A good faith educated guess is not the same as a lie. A lie includes an intent to deceive. I really don't think there was some plan in place by Fauci, NIH, CDC, etc., to intentionally deceive people into wearing a mask for some purpose OTHER than trying to keep people safe from COVID. I am sure they knew it didn't work all that well, but again as I pointed out and you essentially admit, the people broadly were demanding SOMETHING to help keep them safe. I don't begrudge their initial decisions to offer reasonable advice to keep people safe.
There is no reasonable situation in which Fauci or anyone in his position is going to give advice like "oh don't worry, don't do anything" from a scared population while watching the daily news of the death count continuing to rise. If you had been in his situation, you would have done the same thing or something very similar. I guarantee it.
A good faith educated guess is not the same as a lie. A lie includes an intent to deceive.
I think there was a good mix of both as power seekers did their best to not waste opportunities.
A good faith educated guess is not the same as a lie. A lie includes an intent to deceive.
It was a lie and HE PUBLICLY ADMITTED it was a lie. He said, in congressional testimony that he lied to "protect the supply" and everyone in the media nodded. Whether you think it was NOBLE lie is irrelevant. If he believed masks worked, then he literally modulated scientific evidence to produce a socio-political outcome. That's a lie.
If he said to wear masks, and his justification was that he had to protect the supply of scarce masks, but that justification was wrong and he knew it was wrong, then I suppose that would be a lie.
But I am saying that if he or others said to wear a mask, because it can help to stop the transmission of COVID, but they knew the scientific evidence for this claim wasn't rock solid in favor of this claim but said it anyway, then I would not call that a lie.
as I pointed out and you essentially admit, the people broadly were demanding SOMETHING
Don't want to put words in Diane's mouth, but she never said the people were demanding something. The original post indicated that a committee of fancy assholes determined THEY had to do something.
a committee of fancy assholes determined THEY had to do something
What if they don’t “do something”? I think they’d be replaced by people who promised to “do something”. Can’t know for sure because it’s a counterfactual, but as a general rule people attain and retain positions of power by promising to “do something”, and following through.
edit: That's the libertarian conundrum. How do we elect people who promise to take a sledgehammer to the works? We come off as political Luddites. Need better marketing.
I dispute this recollection of history. I am sure there were some very libertarian-minded rugged individualists who truly thought they knew exactly what to do and didn't need anyone else telling them what to do, but I think it was more the case that the much larger share of the population was demanding some advice on what to do to keep them safe.
When they warn you about being scammed by people who alarm you into making a rash decision over the phone or email, they never warn you to treat politics the same way.
Notice how Jeffey downplays Fauci's claims that anyone criticizing him is anti-science and using his position to convince others to blacklist dissenters.
"He just told them it is best to wear masks".
(with a vaccine they mysteriously had in the pipeline for JUST this virus)
mRNA technology for vaccines had been in the pipeline since at least the 1990's. It was just this pandemic that rapidly sped up the development. There is no sinister conspiracy here.
But the lie was a lie. He didn’t lie to protect the supply, he lied because of a series of meetings that essentially determined that the government had to do SOMETHING to give people confidence that they could operate somewhat normally- and have a feeling that there were in fact measures you could reasonably take to avoid getting covid.
And by the way, I want to be clear here, this isn't the worst thing that happened. This is, in its own twisted way, someone understandable.
Hey, here's this disease, it looks like it might be pretty bad... what do we do, how do we fight it?
Not enough info, we're still trying to figure out what to do. But the headlines are blaring. Well, we need to give people some confidence, and we can't tell them right now that there's nothing you can do, and if you're gonna get it you're gonna get it... so let's have them mask up and keep 6' apart.
Will that work?
No idea, but it certainly can't hurt. It will give us time to further analyze.
Ok, let's do it.
That, in my opinion is perfectly acceptable in the early part of a pandemic. But an honest, transparent government would then produce guidance that would say, "look, mask if you want, it might provide you with a tiny bit of protection depending on the circumstances, and if this disease is deadly, a tiny amount of protection is better than no protection... and we still recommend 6' distancing to be safe, but again, that's going to provide very little overall protection, so no, Safeway doesn't need to invest millions in reconfiguring their store aisles for 6' distancing.
All of the above would have been perfectly acceptable, but instead they took an early position, and then stuck with it AT ALL COSTS, and then lied about the effectiveness of that position.
All of the above would have been perfectly acceptable, but instead they took an early position, and then stuck with it AT ALL COSTS, and then lied about the effectiveness of that position.
I agree with you here. They should have been more candid and transparent about what really will help once more information was known.
But it is also ludicrous IMO to claim that anyone in DC in a position of respected authority was NOT going to recommend something along the lines of what they did end up recommending, at least initially.
All of the above would have been perfectly acceptable, but instead they took an early position, and then stuck with it AT ALL COSTS, and then lied about the effectiveness of that position.
^
All of the above would have been perfectly acceptable, but instead they took an early position, and then stuck with it AT ALL COSTS, and then lied about the effectiveness of that position.
Slight disagreement. They took many early and late positions. Masks and 6 ft. were the ones they could actually push outside of city limits, if at all, and either weren't going to wind up getting shot in the face over and/or could get toadies to throw milkshakes at the opposition over.
That is "Maybe the masks don't work, but it's all we've got right now." is pretty frank but it was more of a "OK, the wiping things down didn't work and forcibly separating people didn't work, the tests didn't work, the contact tracing apps didn't work, maybe the masks don't work, but it's all we've got right now. Oh, and, when we get a vaccine, we're going to need you to get jabbed and tag... er... documented as immune for your records."
"We're just doing the best with what we've got." does sound great and fair but their approach was more "To succeed in senseless oppression you've got to diversify!"
My father died alone because of a Fauci recommendation. He was hospitalized for seven days before dying. The family could've seen him a hundred times in a week. Masks and social distancing wasn't an option. I'd almost forgive the stupid Covid theater, but cutting off visitation to the dying? I hope to see Fauci and the rest choking on their own blood.
My father died alone because of a Fauci recommendation. He was hospitalized for seven days before dying.
That's literally exactly the same as Republicans voting for a relief package for your troubles. A pox on both their houses... or something.
I am terribly sorry for your loss. But the problem in this situation IMO was not what Fauci said, but the inflexible and thoughtless way his recommendations were applied, by people who should know better (medical personnel).
the problem is that Fauci was not honest, and made some spectacular lies that destroyed all hope of any of the guidance being trustworthy. he first said masks probably would not help, and then admitted he had lied because he was worried about a run on supplies. when the lab leak theory started floating around, he could have just said "we don't know, but it does not change how we deal with it." instead he dug in on the political narrative of nobody should be angry about it. this was not relevant to the job of offering guidance.
I'm not one of the do nothing crowd that wants to believe nobody should have done anything and we should not have followed any of the guidance, (ridiculing them has become a bore) but i don't think there would have been so many in that crowd if Fauci had not been such a big (and terrible) liar. he gave them every reason not to trust him, and that is why he should have been fired right in the beginning.
I absolutely agree that there were times when Fauci acted more like a politician than a respected authority figure, and his credibility suffered as a result.
And I agree that it is utterly ludicrous to think that anyone in his position would have acted any differently substantively, at least at the outset.
And I agree that it is utterly ludicrous to think that anyone in his position would have acted any differently substantively, at least at the outset.
Yeah, I hear Sweden fell in line with what all the cool kids were doing. The Great Barrington Declaration people may have done things a bit differently too.
Even in Sweden, the government still issued recommendations and expected citizens to follow them - they just didn't make the recommendations mandatory like a lot of places did. Even in Sweden the people still wanted to be told what to do. The government there just didn't FORCE the people to obey the recommendations.
And the Great Barrington Declaration was always a pie-in-the-sky fantasy. If you actually read it, it made recommendations that yes, would have been better than all of the mandates that we had, but there was no feasible way for those recommendations ever to have been implemented given our current timeline. If in some alternate timeline there was some mechanism for local governments to implement those recommendations then yeah it would have been better. And maybe it would have been feasible in some European country that has a more efficient social welfare system. But in this country, no way in hell.
you don't need a whole lot of experience working with people to learn that the first rule of being trustworthy is to not lie. he failed to follow that rule.
getting the educated guesses wrong is one thing. he wasn't even honest about his guesses. he flat out admitted that he lied about masks because of the supply concern. (i know some want to pretend the admission was the lie.... but if he really didn't see how a properly fitted mask for short term exposures might help he was even less qualified than i am giving him credit for.) that isn't guessing wrong, that isn't failing to recognize what you don't know, that isn't even just being wrong..... that is demonstrating absolute contempt for the right of the public to be told the truth. (with a bit of a power trip to try and force the public to do your will, not for their benefit but for yours.)
you don’t need a whole lot of experience working with people to learn that the first rule of being trustworthy is to not lie. he failed to follow that rule.
^
Once he said "well, I lied to you before, but it was for your own good, but I'm not lying to you now" his credibility was gone, never to return.
And it's worth noting that the "for your own good" was not actually for literal you, but more a generalized "you" that was "healthcare workers" not you-you, which feeds into your point that he was demonstrating for us his belief that certain people are to be saved with correct information and certain people are to be sacrificed with incorrect information, and that that decision is his to make.
This is not what a "public health official" ought to be doing.
exactly. as fun as it is sometimes to point and laugh at the people listening to a random you-tuber in his mom's basement spouting absolute nonsense...... he is the one who made that seem more reliable. he shattered any credibility he had, and he should have been replaced as the one we were being told to trust.
The people want to be told what to do by a respected authority figure about how to keep themselves safe.
This is true. What the government does with this fact, though, is to take advantage of people's fear and need for a respected authority to present something that feels like authority whether that authority is telling you to do something useful, dangerous, or, in fact, whether that authority can be trusted to disseminate any accurate information at all.
The issue is not that Fauci expressed opinions - it's that he expressed opinions that he knew to be false, that formed the basis of many misguided and destructive policies, and then used the force of government to suppress any criticism of his opinion and the resultant policies.
People having a need for a respected authority figure does not in and of itself ensure that the authority figure assigned to you by the government is going to be worth listening to and isn't going to do more harm than good, since the government's #1 priority is reinforcing its hegemony, with public health as a distant other number that isn't #1.
I will agree that it was the unthinking application of the experts' recommendations into rigid mandates was what was the real problem in the context of liberty.
It should be pointed out that Fauci or the CDC or NIH never had the power to issue mask *mandates* or lockdown *mandates* or social distancing *mandates*. That was all the result of other layers of government which did not exercise any critical thought or flexibility in applying the recommendations when writing their mandates.
I suppose Fauci et al. could have said "wait a minute, you guys are applying your mandates too rigidly, the science doesn't really support such a rigid application of my recommendations", but then again I imagine he probably didn't see that as part of his job.
It should be pointed out that Fauci or the CDC or NIH never had the power to issue mask *mandates* or lockdown *mandates* or social distancing *mandates*.
They never had the power to issue an eviction moratorium, either.
I suppose Fauci et al. could have said “wait a minute, you guys are applying your mandates too rigidly, the science doesn’t really support such a rigid application of my recommendations”, but then again I imagine he probably didn’t see that as part of his job.
He also could have not said that questioning him is the same thing as questioning Science, he could have not lied about the lab leak theory being impossible when he knew otherwise, he could have not impugned Rand Paul for pointing out that cloth masks are not effective, he could have not equivocated about the GOF research, and he could have said something to the effect of "the government shouldn't be trying to silence my colleagues who may have different views than me, as true science is a dialogic process."
While I agree that Fauci was in a difficult position, I do not agree that he responded well to that difficulty nor did he do what "any reasonable person" would have done. He abused his authority and prioritized politics (and his own ego) over science and "public health."
"They never had the power to issue an eviction moratorium, either."
Apparently they did have the power, just not the legal constitutional authority.
I'm shocked Jeffey is defending authoritarian left wingers. Shocked. Really, whoever could have seen that coming?
I think even a blind man could've seen that coming.
So now we have the disappearing middle between “Incompetent Fauci” and “Criminally Lying Under Oath Fauci.” The only thing left to decide is how many of his lies represent separate criminal charges. I'm pretty sure that qualified and unqualified immunity would protect him against tort liability for damages caused by his incompetence, though.
"6-Foot Social Distancing Guidance Likely Not Based on Data"
Likely not based on data!!! The virus is an aerosol, distance is irrelevant. The decisive factor is ventilation, keeping the number of viral particles inhaled to a minimum. You could be 50 ft from a COVID spreader and have no protection, if the air isn't being refreshed continually. Outdoors you will not get COVID from someone 3 feet away unless you inhale their exhalations thorough a tube.
When do they release the transcript so we can find out what he actually said?
"Republican lawmakers criticized the former NIH official for playing "semantics""
What a bunch of crazy anti-semants. Haven't they suffered enough?
It’s cute he says “likely” as if we don’t know. In reality we knew the first minute that standard was held out. But the bureaucrats are still clinging to the pretense of ignorance.
They’re pathetic.
Do we have to wait for Trump to be elected before this asshole is held accountable for his crimes?
People like Fauci never get their comeuppance.
6-Foot Social Distancing Guidance Likely Not Based on Data
You know the members of the Subcommittee are padding their time cards when they start with the list of COVID recommendations not based on data first.
Remember everything getting wiped down before we even knew if the virus was spread via contact or not?
Remember people being told to stay inside?
Remember doctors crying because their hospitals were running out of ventillators?
Remember shuttered factories being converted to making hand sanitizer, masks, and ventillators?
(Personally, most hilariously, remember all the absolute retards doing CFUs/IUs-per-Liter-minute calculations as if they were doing science at all?)
100% safe and effective… all of it.
You mean a virus doesn't abide by men's 6 foot social distancing rule? They can strike you within 5 feet, 15 feet, 30 feet, etc? Oh no, what's next, the 3 second rule isn't based on science? I shouldn't eat things that fell on the floor?
500 years from now, assuming the world still exists, people will laugh at us for fining a man for being unmasked in his own car while allowing dozens of people to eat with their masks off inside the restaurants. Only after the food comes out or they're seated, or course.
This is my shocked face.
We all know that Fauci is the scum of the earth. But I agree with Jeffrey Tucker at the Brownstone Institute, a question that I'm way more interested in is: exactly who was it who managed to convince Trump to do a complete 180 and successfully suckered him into destroying not only his own presidency, but arguably the country along with it?
It's crazy that almost four years later we still don't know the answer to this basic fundamental question, because Fauci could never have gotten away with his crimes if this mystery person hadn't successfully duped Trump into going against his instincts and caving in..
Trump often talks tough but really doesn't deliver much. On domestic policies, he was little different in practice from prior administrations. In the few areas where he tried to break with orthodoxy, Democrats and half the GOP just got together and sabotaged him.
During that month or so period before the Cathedral decided to make COVID-19 a partisan issue, the New York Times actually ran an article on where the six foot thing came from. According to them, it was a school science project done by a government bureaucrat's 14 year old daughter.
Yeouch. Do you have a link to the story?
I found this. It's the New York Times, so what's there now may not be what I read in 2020: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/22/us/politics/social-distancing-coronavirus.html
Jail for Fauci.
The word "likely" should not be in the statement. The 6 foot rule could not possibly be based on data.
It had nothing to do with lab leaks or gain of function.
The feds pushed that "oft-repeated six-foot rule" and mask mandates had nothing to do with public health and everything to do with building federal biometric databases. Trying to get clean shots of people? Force them to distance themselves. Need to build up the success rate of identifying partials? Make them wear masks. Ever have to stand in front of one of those cameras that takes your temperature? It was taking NGI data too.
https://iapp.org/news/a/u-s-facial-recognition-roundup/
They had a major boner for this back in 2020-2021, and a scamdemic was the perfect opportunity to collect huge swaths of data on people. And we just handed it to them, because we're sheep.
"Dr. Fauci's transcribed interview revealed systemic failures in our public health system," said Wenstrup today.
Commie-Healthcare fails? Isn't it truly amazing how many times people can just keep resorting to a failed government ideology.
Anthony Fauci is a Stain on society and deserves that his legacy is a disgrace. His name should be remembered in history for the evil misdeeds he fostered and shielded. He chopped down truth with a sickle like efficiency harvesting grain.
To "Fauci" is synonymous to being a Liar with more emphasis on lying due to the disillusion belief that the population is too stupid to know the truth or lying to achieve political goals by controlling access to information.
Even a 10 ft pole isn't enough to keep Fauci at a safe distance.