Dr. Fauci Should Resign

You have to feel bad for Dr. Anthony Fauci. The long-serving director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and chief medical advisor to President Biden has spent more than 50 years in the field of public health working tirelessly to prevent pandemics, only to be hauled before Congress, threatened with a perjury charge, and accused of "responsibility for 4 million people dying around the world," according to dependably obnoxious Senator Rand Paul. How on Earth did we get here?

If you're unfamiliar with the conspiracy theory surrounding Dr. Fauci, it goes something like this: the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) has for years conducted research on bat coronaviruses, increasing their transmissibility to humans in order to help develop vaccines and therapeutics (so called "gain-of-function research"). One of these coronaviruses—SARS-CoV-2—escaped from the lab, starting the Covid-19 pandemic that has killed more than 4 million people. This research in Wuhan received a $600,000 grant from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) under the direction of, you guessed it—Anthony Fauci. Or so the theory goes.

Tuesday wasn't the first time that Paul and Dr. Fauci have locked horns. On May 11, when Paul pressed Fauci on whether the NIH had funded gain-of-function research at Wuhan, Fauci was adamant in his response. "Senator Paul," he said, "with all due respect, you are entirely and completely incorrect." He insisted that the NIH had never funded gain-of-function research at the WIV.

But come Tuesday, Paul was undeterred. "Knowing that it is a crime to lie to Congress, do you wish to retract your statement of May 11 where you claimed the NIH never funded gain-of-function research in Wuhan?" he asked.

"I have never lied to Congress and I do not retract that statement," Fauci said. "Senator Paul, you do not know what you are talking about, quite frankly. And I want to say that officially: you do not know what you're talking about."

So what are the facts? Did the Wuhan Institute of Virology conduct gain-of-function research? Yes—we know that Dr. Shi Zhengli was increasing the transmissibility of bat coronaviruses to humans. Did the NIH fund the Wuhan Institute of Virology? Yes—the WIV was awarded a five-year, $598,500 sub-grant from the NIH to study bat coronaviruses. So isn't Senator Paul correct that the NIH funded gain-of-function research at the WIV? Well, that depends on how you define "gain-of-function."

"Fauci doesn't deserve such shabby treatment from the likes of Rand Paul."

"They took animal viruses, that only occur in animals, and they increased their transmissibility to humans," Paul said, "How you can say that's not gain-of-function—"

"It is not," Fauci retorted.

In 2014, the White House put a three-year pause on NIH funding of gain-of-function research—specifically, "gain-of-function research projects that may be reasonably anticipated to confer attributes to influenza, MERS, or SARS viruses such that the virus would have enhanced pathogenicity and/or transmissibility in mammals via the respiratory route." So, by this definition, isn't Senator Paul correct?

Well, he appears to be, and it certainly looks as though Fauci is equivocating. But Dr. Francis Collins, the director of the NIH, clarified in testimony to Congress on May 25 that, although the NIH had funded the Wuhan Institute of Virology, and although the WIV had conducted gain-of-function research, the NIH funds were not used for that particular project. "We are, of course, not aware of other sources of funds or other activities they might have undertaken outside of what our approved grant allowed," Collins said.

In other words, yes, we gave them money, but the money did not go to gain-of-function research. Such research at the WIV was funded by other sources, not the NIH.

But Fauci, on Tuesday, seemed unable to articulate this. Viewers of Fauci's exchange with Paul are left not knowing what, or who, to believe. Perhaps Fauci is tired—after a year-and-a-half of attempting to manage a pandemic amid non-stop spurious attacks on his character, the 80-year-old Fauci may be exhausted. I feel bad for the man; he easily could have leveraged his years of experience and government connections into a lucrative career in the private sector, but instead he puts up with the ravings of Rand Paul out of an earnest dedication to public service and public health.

Fauci should resign, for three reasons.

First, someone in his position needs to be an effective science communicator, and I believe Fauci's communications skills have become fatigued. On Tuesday, he quibbled with Paul's definition of gain-of-function research without ever explaining what gain-of-function actually is. Like it or not, Rand Paul is an elected representative of the people, and if Fauci is testifying to Congress, he needs to be able to explain scientific concepts intelligibly. He failed on Tuesday.

Second, throughout the pandemic, Fauci has had to balance the truth with the public interest—for instance, he downplayed the effectiveness of face masks early in the pandemic to prevent panic-buying so that first responders would have enough masks to go around. Fauci misled the public, and even if his reasoning is understandable, he has undermined his credibility.

Third, Fauci doesn't deserve such shabby treatment from the likes of Rand Paul. As I write this, Paul is on FOX News vowing to seek a perjury charge against Fauci because "he’s lying about whether or not he funded gain-of-function research, and yes, he should be punished." This is absurd. Fauci deserves better after more than 50 years in public service. You may not agree with him, but the man is clearly in earnest. He shouldn't be subjected to petty political points-scoring.

Take a rest, Dr. Fauci. You've earned it.