# Some factual information about Dr. Fauci



## Nathan (May 30, 2021)

Amid all the nonsensical claptrap presented about Covid and Dr. Fauci, it's always good to catch a breath of fresh air, because as they say,"The truth is a good fallback position".   
Rather than links and quotes from media *opinion pieces*, Wikipedia's entry for Dr. Fauci brings level headed prose to the conversation, rather than the emotionally charged rhetoric posted on discussion boards.

Shamelessly copied n' pasted from the beginning of Wikipedia's article:


> *Anthony Stephen Fauci* (/ˈfaʊtʃi/; born December 24, 1940) is an American physician-scientist and immunologist who serves as the director of the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and the chief medical advisor to the president.
> 
> As a physician with the National Institutes of Health (NIH), Fauci has served the American public health sector in various capacities for more than 50 years, and has acted as an advisor to every U.S. president since Ronald Reagan.[1] He became director of the NIAID in 1984 and has made contributions to HIV/AIDS research and other immunodeficiency diseases, both as a research scientist and as the head of the NIAID.[2] From 1983 to 2002, Fauci was one of the world's most frequently-cited scientists across all scientific journals.[2] In 2008, President George W. Bush awarded Fauci the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the highest civilian award in the United States, for his work on the AIDS relief program PEPFAR.[3]
> 
> ...


----------



## ProTruckDriver (May 30, 2021)

I believe anyone can edit Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Introduction_to_Wikipedia


----------



## Nathan (May 30, 2021)

Vandalism of Wikipedia articles is a constant challenge, with only volunteer editors available to curb such activity.    Certain people and groups don't like fact checking, probably because the truth has been told, which proved unfavorable to their particular cause.


----------



## StarSong (May 30, 2021)

Fauci's page is "Semi-Protected," meaning it can only be edited by established, registered users.  
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Anthony_Fauci&action=edit

Why is the page protected?​
While most articles can be edited by anyone, semi-protection is sometimes necessary to prevent vandalism to popular pages.
The reason for protection can be found in the protection log. If there are no relevant entries in the protection log, the page may have been moved after being protected


----------



## Irwin (May 30, 2021)

ProTruckDriver said:


> I believe anyone can edit Wikipedia:
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Introduction_to_Wikipedia


While it's true that anyone can edit Wikipedia entries, they have to be approved before the edits become permanent.


----------



## terry123 (May 30, 2021)

I trust his info on this subject.  I will continue to take his word about this horrible disease until I decide different.  To each his own.


----------



## Sunny (May 30, 2021)

Ditto, Terry.  I will take the word of a professional, highly intelligent scientist who has been working around the clock for over a year to understand and conquer this horrible killer of a disease, over the word of an ignorant politician and his cohorts.  Enough said.


----------



## Nathan (May 30, 2021)

Sunny said:


> I will take the word of a professional, highly intelligent scientist who has been working around the clock for over a year to understand and conquer this horrible killer of a disease, over the word of an ignorant politician and his cohorts.  Enough said.


Well said.


----------



## ProTruckDriver (May 30, 2021)

I've learned a long time ago not to put all my eggs into one basket. I don't believe I have any eggs in the Fauci basket.


----------



## SeaBreeze (May 30, 2021)

Nathan said:


> Amid all the nonsensical claptrap presented about Covid and Dr. Fauci, it's always good to catch a breath of fresh air, because as they say,"The truth is a good fallback position".
> Rather than links and quotes from media *opinion pieces*, Wikipedia's entry for Dr. Fauci brings level headed prose to the conversation, rather than the emotionally charged rhetoric posted on discussion boards.
> 
> Shamelessly copied n' pasted from the beginning of Wikipedia's article:


Thanks for posting that Nathan, I've always respected Dr. Fauci and am glad he's able to speak freely again about COVID-19 and anything else of importance.


----------



## SeaBreeze (May 30, 2021)

StarSong said:


> Fauci's page is "Semi-Protected," meaning it can only be edited by established, registered users.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Anthony_Fauci&action=edit
> 
> Why is the page protected?​
> ...


Thanks, I didn't know about those protections....very good!


----------



## JonDouglas (Jun 1, 2021)

*Fauci To Go? *Word on some streets is that Fauci will probably be gone in 90 days or less. Personally, I'd give it about a 45% chance of happening. Others think it is more certain simply because, as of this moment, all covid roads and related issues (e.g., the economy) lead back to him. His wanting to jump in front of the cameras and flip-flopping hasn't helped. Being the highest paid employee in the whole federal government while being at the forefront of what's increasingly being thought of as debacle may also be a factor. Anyway, for right or wrong, you heard it here.

Edit Note:  According to Rasmussen Reports; _“*Nearly two-thirds of voters (65%) believe political considerations have influenced Fauci’s decisions and public statements about the COVID-19 pandemic*, including 40% who think political considerations have had a lot of influence on him. Only 11% believe Fauci’s decisions and statements about the pandemic haven’t been influenced at all by political considerations.”_


----------



## Lethe200 (Jun 1, 2021)

Dr. Fauci has worked with seven presidents, beginning with Ronald Reagan. He is highly respected by not only epidemiologists and virologists in the US, but also globally.

It doesn't impress me what people who know very little about science, medicine, or technology think of someone who has worked tirelessly to save millions of lives. It is a fact, for example, that Wiki is correct that the American Rheumatism Association ranked Fauci's work on the treatment of polyarteritis nodosa and granulomatosis with polyangiitis as one of the most important advances in patient management in rheumatology over the previous 20 years. 

It is a fact that he is one of the most cited immunologists. My sister did her PhD on tubercular epidemiology and has the highest respect for him.

It is a fact that Larry Kramer, AIDS activist, spent years denouncing Fauci - if you don't remember the things he said, I certainly do! - until finally recognizing Fauci's contributions and calling him a hero, apologizing for his earlier remarks. 

Fauci is 81 yrs old and has spent decades in the public eye. He has been threatened with physical violence and publicly slighted by people with their own political axes to grind. He has more than earned a peaceful retirement, IMHO; but I for one am grateful he has remained as head of NAIAD since 1984.

The day he retires is going to be a sad day for science, and those who understand that science is an ongoing process of acquiring knowledge, not an artificial list of absolutes.


----------



## JonDouglas (Jun 1, 2021)

Lethe200 said:


> Dr. Fauci has worked with seven presidents, beginning with Ronald Reagan. He is highly respected by not only epidemiologists and virologists in the US, but also globally.
> 
> It doesn't impress me what people who know very little about science, medicine, or technology think of someone who has worked tirelessly to save millions of lives. It is a fact, for example, that Wiki is correct that the American Rheumatism Association ranked Fauci's work on the treatment of polyarteritis nodosa and granulomatosis with polyangiitis as one of the most important advances in patient management in rheumatology over the previous 20 years.
> 
> ...


How'd he do with the billions he spent on an AIDS vaccine?


----------



## Nathan (Jun 1, 2021)

> Dr. Fauci has worked with seven presidents, beginning with Ronald Reagan. He is highly respected by not only epidemiologists and virologists in the US, but also globally.
> 
> It doesn't impress me what people who know very little about science, medicine, or technology think of someone who has worked tirelessly to save millions of lives.



Agreed.   Unfortunately there will always be those who seek to malign intelligent and effective public figures in order to support their own questionable agenda.


----------



## JonDouglas (Jun 1, 2021)

Nathan said:


> Agreed.   Unfortunately there will always be those who seek to malign intelligent and effective public figures in order to support their own questionable agenda.


His handling of AIDS/HIV and vaccine was a billion dollar debacle.  His flip-flop handling of covid-19 was a debacle.  His connections with the Wuhan lab are suspect if not ignominious.  What's not to like?  Oh, and some of us are versed in math, science and technology.


----------



## squatting dog (Jun 1, 2021)

Sunny said:


> Ditto, Terry.  I will take the word of a professional, highly intelligent scientist who has been working around the clock for over a year to understand and conquer this horrible killer of a disease, over the word of an ignorant politician and his cohorts.  Enough said.


Me too, because everyone knows it's all about science.


----------



## Nathan (Jun 1, 2021)

JonDouglas said:


> His handling of AIDS/HIV and vaccine was a billion dollar debacle.  His flip-flop handling of covid-19 was a debacle.  His connections with the Wuhan lab are suspect if not ignominious.  What's not to like?  Oh, and some of us are versed in math, science and technology.


Merely your words, your opinion.  



JonDouglas said:


> Oh, and some of us are versed in math, science and technology.


If you're referring to yourself("some of us")  that's something that's *not* readily apparent, judging by your continued attempts to spread FUD.


----------



## JonDouglas (Jun 1, 2021)

Nathan said:


> Merely your words, your opinion.
> 
> 
> If you're referring to yourself("some of us")  that's something that's *not* readily apparent, judging by your continued attempts to spread FUD.


Us is plural, not singular, but think what you like.  As for me, I dislike overly-paid, attention hungry, flip-flopping bureaucrats with a trail of failures.  Fauci is just one of them who's rapidly becoming the villain du jour.  It will be interesting to see if the current administration dumps him now that he brings in bad press.  

PS:  Pointing out multiple sides to an issues is not spread FUD.  It's spreading information for others, NOT YOU, to judge.  Also, I reserve the right to make and express personal judgements, without regards to whether you get your panties in a bunch or not.


----------



## JonDouglas (Jun 2, 2021)

From Yahoo News:   *Researcher Tied to Wuhan Lab Thanked Fauci for Dismissing Lab-Leak Theory*.

_Peter Daszak, a zoologist whose non-profit steered U.S. funding to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, thanked Dr. Anthony Fauci for pushing back on the theory that the coronavirus leaked from a lab, in an April 2020 email published as part of a FOIA request by Buzzfeed._​​_Daszak’s organization, the EcoHealth Alliance, funneled $3.4 million in grants from the National Institutes of Health to the WIV to study bat coronaviruses between 2014 and 2019. While politicians and scientists in the U.S. have suggested that the novel coronavirus initially leaked from the WIV before spreading across the globe, Daszak has vehemently denied the allegation._​​_“I just wanted to say a personal thank you on behalf of our staff and collaborators, for publicly standing up and stating that the scientific evidence supports a natural origin for COVID-19 from a bat-to-human spillover, not a lab release from the Wuhan Institute of Virology,” Daszak wrote to Fauci on April 18, 2020._​​More at source.  You might find Fauci's email interesting, especially the one where he doesn't have time to read the concern of a physicist (with ties to Chiina) warning Fauci of fake Covid data.  Below are the words of Dr. Erik Nilsen, a published PhD physicist and CEO of neuroscience research company.​​_I’m confident that China stop counting dead COVID-19 infected bodies since —January 7 2020. They’ve been adding fabricated data daily to show (to save face) the world and their own people an impressive flattening of China outbreak curve. It’s easy to prove this via data analysis because, for example, improbable coincidences occurred in much of the data. My suspicions were eventually confirmed by at least two of my sources in China [REDACTED]. The data posted by China is not only garbage, it has misled the world into a false sense of security wrt death rate, age vs death, and other things; that is, if people analyzed the world’s data including China, the results are heavily biased towards nonsense, because China’s number of cases accounted for the majority of cases worldwide (until a day or so ago)._​​Fauci responded that it was "too long for me to read". That this kind of stuff is out there is more proof that the guns are out for the "good" Dr. Fauci.  Fauci didn't think through the media attention he seemed to crave and certainly not the flip-flopping he did on just about every major covid issue.​


----------



## Sunny (Jun 2, 2021)

Lethe200 said:


> Dr. Fauci has worked with seven presidents, beginning with Ronald Reagan. He is highly respected by not only epidemiologists and virologists in the US, but also globally.
> 
> It doesn't impress me what people who know very little about science, medicine, or technology think of someone who has worked tirelessly to save millions of lives. It is a fact, for example, that Wiki is correct that the American Rheumatism Association ranked Fauci's work on the treatment of polyarteritis nodosa and granulomatosis with polyangiitis as one of the most important advances in patient management in rheumatology over the previous 20 years.
> 
> ...



Excellent reply, Lethe.  Especially your last sentence.  I don't know how many times I've seen mocking comments on this forum about the fact that Dr. Fauci has changed his mind about something, maybe some new facts have come to light, some theories have had to be amended, etc.  There is a mindset among some that THE TRUTH is carved in stone, and every time the scientific community announces a new finding, this proves that they were wrong.  This dark age mentality is their own business, except when their stubbornness is affecting the health of everyone else.  I've even seen him once referred to as "the idiot Fauci," which kind of speaks for itself.

A question for JonDouglas:  Have you gotten the vaccine yourself?  In spite of Dr. Fauci being associated with it?


----------



## Nathan (Jun 2, 2021)

JonDouglas said:


> Us is plural, not singular, but think what you like.  As for me, I dislike overly-paid, attention hungry, flip-flopping bureaucrats with a trail of failures.  Fauci is just one of them who's rapidly becoming the villain du jour. * It will be interesting to see if the current administration dumps him now that he brings in bad press.*
> 
> PS:  Pointing out multiple sides to an issues is not spread FUD.  It's spreading information for others, NOT YOU, to judge.  Also, I reserve the right to make and express personal judgements, without regards to whether you get your panties in a bunch or not.


The 'bad press' you refer to is the same _bad press_ that attacks to current administration, and despite the best efforts of the FUDsters and spin peddlers the truth will prevail.   The previous administration villianized Dr. Fauci in virtually every daily tweet, but chose not to dump him, as they needed at least one competent person in that administration.



JonDouglas said:


> Also, I reserve the right to make and express personal judgements



That goes without saying, sure wouldn't want to miss a second of your attempts to push your personal beliefs on others.


> you get your panties in a bunch or not.



Well there's you favorite saying again, so glad you got to utter _that_, although in some way I can't help but suspect if there's a more dark, perverse mindset behind that.


----------



## helenbacque (Jun 2, 2021)

In my opinion, Dr. Fauci - as most of us - does the best he can with what is available AT THE TIME.


----------



## Irwin (Jun 2, 2021)

helenbacque said:


> In my opinion, Dr. Fauci - as most of us - does the best he can with what is available AT THE TIME.


He screwed up by not advocating for the wearing of facemasks in the beginning under the guise of not wanting to cause shortages in hospitals. That's just nonsensical. It caused more people to get the virus. I don't know if he truly believed that or what, but it was wrong for him to do that.


----------



## JonDouglas (Jun 2, 2021)

Nathan said:


> The 'bad press' you refer to is the same _bad press_ that attacks to current administration, and despite the best efforts of the FUDsters and spin peddlers the truth will prevail.   The previous administration villianized Dr. Fauci in virtually every daily tweet, but chose not to dump him, as they needed at least one competent person in that administration.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


There nothing like one of my posts to get you going, is there, Nathan?   Well here's another tidbit about your hero.  Fauci's upcoming book has been scrubbed by both Amazon and Barnes & Noble.  What do they know that you don't?  Smells like major backlash - smoke, fire and all that.  History is not going to be kind to this man.


----------



## Nathan (Jun 2, 2021)

JonDouglas said:


> *Fauci's upcoming book has been scrubbed by both Amazon and Barnes & Noble. * What do they know that you don't?  Smells like major backlash - smoke, fire and all that.  History is not going to be kind to this man.


I hope that's true, I'm sure it would be a major disappointment for you if that turned out to be yet more fake news.      I can't even guess as to what triggers your hatred of honest, hard working public figures.  ?
Actually I _could_ guess, and probably be correct, but I don't want to run afoul of forum policy.


----------



## Pink Biz (Jun 2, 2021)

*Dr. Anthony Fauci is set to release a book on COVID and appear in a new Disney-backed documentary despite being accused of multiple flip-flops on the virus.

On Tuesday, it was revealed that the infectious disease expert, 80, will publish a tome titled 'Expect the Unexpected: Ten Lessons on Truth, Service, and the Way Forward'. It will be released by National Geographic Books on November 2.  

A spokesperson from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases told DailyMail.com that Fauci won't be paid for the project. 

Both Barnes & Noble and Amazon have listed the 80-page book for pre-order at the price of $18.  

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...k-TRUTH-appear-Disney-backed-documentary.html*


----------



## JonDouglas (Jun 2, 2021)

From the FOIA release:


----------



## JonDouglas (Jun 2, 2021)

One last parting shot that might help people understand why the guns are trained on Fauci.






Real professionals don't prevaricate or flip-flop.  Real professionals don't seek out the spotlight.  Real professionals know what they don't know and don't pretend otherwise,  Real professionals aren't swayed by political winds.


----------



## JonDouglas (Jun 3, 2021)

Statements from someone familiar with all of this:


----------



## Nathan (Jun 3, 2021)

JonDouglas said:


> From the FOIA release:
> Image link


So just to try and help you lend some credence: who exactly made this FOIA request?    I'm sure they were bitterly disappointed with the result, an utterly meaningless memo...      I doubt the authenticity of this image, any middle school child could construct a much more conviencing one.


----------



## Nathan (Jun 3, 2021)

JonDouglas said:


> One last parting shot that might help people understand why the guns are trained on Fauci.
> ---Cute image removed---
> 
> Real professionals don't prevaricate or flip-flop.  Real professionals don't seek out the spotlight.  Real professionals know what they don't know and don't pretend otherwise,  Real professionals aren't swayed by political winds.


While I disagree with your premise that Dr. Fauci is guilty of the above mentioned transgressions,   I should point out that "real professionals" will change their minds on issues when the discovery of new conditions warrant...that is how science works.


----------



## Nathan (Jun 3, 2021)

JonDouglas said:


> Statements from someone familiar with all of this:
> media link


...yet more hot air and nay-saying from a politically slanted media outlet.      

You know what @JonDouglas ,   The title of this thread is "Some factual information about Dr. Fauci", so if you feel compelled to continue posting this type of swill then why don't you start a new thread, maybe titled "Some fairy tale hogwash about Dr. Fauci".


----------



## JonDouglas (Jun 3, 2021)

NY Post:  *Fauci finally admits COVID-19 may have come from a ‘lab leak’ after his emails exposed*

PS:  Nathan, I am not sure but I don't think anyone has anointed you the sheriff of this thread or the judge of what is or isn't swill.  That said, I hope you're in good health and having a nice day otherwise.


----------



## Nathan (Jun 3, 2021)

JonDouglas said:


> NY Post:  *Fauci finally admits COVID-19 may have come from a ‘lab leak’ after his emails exposed*
> 
> PS:  Nathan, I am not sure but I don't think anyone has anointed you the sheriff of this thread or the judge of what is or isn't swill.  That said, I hope you're in good health and having a nice day otherwise.


You are correct, nobody did anoint me as sheriff of this thread, although I admit that I have not checked my email yet today.      As for being "the judge" of what is or isn't swill, I can tell you this, that I can recognize swill when I see it, as can most readers here, I'm sure.   The suggestion that you start your own thread was a practical one, whose purpose was to preserve content continuity and quality.  If I were intent on forcing you out of posting in this thread, don't you think I would have said something to that effect?      At any rate, it is a pleasant day today, so have a good one yourself.


----------



## squatting dog (Jun 3, 2021)

Nathan said:


> So just to try and help you lend some credence: who exactly made this FOIA request?    I'm sure they were bitterly disappointed with the result, an utterly meaningless memo...      I doubt the authenticity of this image, any middle school child could construct a much more conviencing one.


Through the _Freedom of Information Act_, The Washington Post and BuzzFeed obtained and _made_ public Dr. Anthony _Fauci's email_ ...


The emails are damning and prove that Fauci lied over and over again (including under oath).

If they were phoney, then why would  White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki on Thursday deflect when she was asked about Fauci’s emails.
Psaki said... “He’s been an undeniable asset in our country’s pandemic response but it’s obviously not that advantageous for me to re-litigate the substance of emails from 17 months ago.”


----------



## ProTruckDriver (Jun 3, 2021)

Mark my words, Fauci will retire sometime this year, may be soon. People are getting tired of the flip flopping decisions. I doubt if he sells a lot of books. Who would want to read a book about Covid when we hear it every day. Right / Left doesn't matter, Fauci is history, gone. After he retires and if he goes on the cable news networks, who cares. Their rating are dropping like a rock, people are not watching anymore.


----------



## Irwin (Jun 3, 2021)

Never mind.


----------



## ProTruckDriver (Jun 3, 2021)

Irwin said:


> What "flip-flop decisions?"


Here is some:


----------



## JonDouglas (Jun 4, 2021)

Sometimes history can be instructive.  I believe this is from Robert Kennedy Jr.’s Children’s Health Defense (3/27/20):

_"For example, [Dr. Anthony] Fauci once shilled for the fast-tracked H1N1 influenza (‘swine flu’) vaccine on YouTube, reassuring viewers in 2009 that serious adverse events were ‘very, very, very rare.’ Shortly thereafter, the vaccine went on to wreak havoc in multiple countries, increasing miscarriage risks in pregnant women in the U.S., provoking a spike in adolescent narcolepsy in Scandinavia and causing febrile convulsions in one in every 110 vaccinated children in Australia—prompting the latter to suspend its influenza vaccination program in under-fives.”_​
Such are the dangers of being a media darling when it's found out that you're mostly just another pandering bureaucrat.   This is my opinion and I am entitled to it.


----------



## Nathan (Jun 4, 2021)

JonDouglas said:


> Sometimes history can be instructive.  I believe this is from Robert Kennedy Jr.’s Children’s Health Defense (3/27/20):
> 
> _"For example, [Dr. Anthony] Fauci once shilled for the fast-tracked H1N1 influenza (‘swine flu’) vaccine on YouTube, reassuring viewers in 2009 that serious adverse events were ‘very, very, very rare.’ Shortly thereafter, the vaccine went on to wreak havoc in multiple countries, increasing miscarriage risks in pregnant women in the U.S., provoking a spike in adolescent narcolepsy in Scandinavia and causing febrile convulsions in one in every 110 vaccinated children in Australia—prompting the latter to suspend its influenza vaccination program in under-fives.”_​
> Such are the dangers of being a media darling when it's found out that you're mostly just another pandering bureaucrat.   This is my opinion and I am entitled to it.


You are* full* of opinions to which you are undeniably entitled. It's your attempts to push your opinions onto others that is getting tiresome.


----------



## Butterfly (Jun 6, 2021)

If doctors and researchers were never able to "flip-flop" when new information comes to light or new discoveries are made, we'd all still be dying of smallpox, polio, typhoid, etc., and have no antibiotics, anesthesia, blood transfusions, organ transplants, or anything else and we'd still in the middle ages as far as health care goes.

Geez!!!


----------



## JonDouglas (Jun 6, 2021)

Butterfly said:


> If doctors and researchers were never able to "flip-flop" when new information comes to light or new discoveries are made, we'd all still be dying of smallpox, polio, typhoid, etc., and have no antibiotics, anesthesia, blood transfusions, organ transplants, or anything else and we'd still in the middle ages as far as health care goes.
> 
> Geez!!!


Just as an FYI, flip-flopping as the result of new light on something is not quite the same as saying one thing in public then flip-flopping in public while saying the original thing in private.  That's called lying or being two-faced.


----------



## Sunny (Jun 6, 2021)

JonDouglas said:


> There nothing like one of my posts to get you going, is there, Nathan?   Well here's another tidbit about your hero.  Fauci's upcoming book has been scrubbed by both Amazon and Barnes & Noble.  What do they know that you don't?  Smells like major backlash - smoke, fire and all that.  History is not going to be kind to this man.



JonDouglas, I'd love to know the source of the above disinformation.  Are you willing to share it with us?  Or did you just make it up?


----------



## JonDouglas (Jun 6, 2021)

Since we're back on the subject of Fauci and rather than hurling juvenile internet insults, I read an interesting observation by an American physicist and psychoanalyst (J. Satinover, MD, PhD).  He made the following observations about the Fauci emails that were released.



> 1. Almost ALL of the emails are from others to Fauci with his reply. There are very few, if any (I will have to review) initiated by him. It is very unlikely this represents his full correspondence using his official NIH address.





> 2. The rough per-day number of emails in Jan and Feb, then May, greatly exceeds March and April.





> 3. A very large proportion of text with what looks to me likely to be scientific detail, in others’ comments to Fauci,  has been blocked.





> 4. The largest proportion consists of requests to Fauci to speak either at scientific conferences or on major media television programs. Strikingly:
> 
> (a) Fauci refuses almost every invite in a medical or scientific setting
> (b) Fauci accepts almost every invite to go on TV





> 5. The most striking feature by far, so far, is this: Fauci’s responses are utterly devoid of either scientific curiosity or depth. He shows no evidence in these pages at least, of anything but the most superficial familiarity with viral illnesses. Whenever someone proposes a helpful idea, he hands it off to a deputy to respond. He is temperate to the point of vacuity.



This came to me in a private correspondence and whether you believe or consider it is not my concern.


----------



## JonDouglas (Jun 6, 2021)

Sunny said:


> JonDouglas, I'd love to know the source of the above disinformation.  Are you willing to share it with us?  Or did you just make it up?


The fact that Fauci's book was scrubbed (scrubbed means that mention of/ability to pre-order was deleted) was in all over the newswires.  Once again, I have no need to furnish you with references to stuff that made all the news wires.  All you had to do to check was Google "Fauci's book scrubbed".  Now that I've taught you about Google, do you think you can do it yourself next tiime?


----------



## Nathan (Jun 6, 2021)

JonDouglas said:


> Since we're back on the subject of Fauci and rather than hurling juvenile internet insults, I read an interesting observation by an American physicist


Glad to hear you're going to try to change your behavior.      There are two things I'd like to see you do:
1. Enlighten the audience as to your motivation for your unrelenting character assassination of Dr. Fauci.
2. Try to find factual(meaning truthful, accurate)material to substantiate your claims with links, as is the custom in online communication.


----------



## Nathan (Jun 6, 2021)

JonDouglas said:


> The fact that Fauci's book was scrubbed (scrubbed means that mention of/ability to pre-order was deleted) was in all over the newswires.  Once again, I have no need to furnish you with references to stuff that made all the news wires.  All you had to do to check was Google "Fauci's book scrubbed".  Now that I've taught you about Google, do you think you can do it yourself next tiime?


Well no juvenile insults from of you in *this* posting, but still the arrogant, condescending attitude.    
Please tell us something that is outstanding or special about you, so that we can _admire_ you as much as *you* do.


----------



## Becky1951 (Jun 6, 2021)

JonDouglas said:


> The fact that Fauci's book was scrubbed (scrubbed means that mention of/ability to pre-order was deleted) was in all over the newswires.  Once again, I have no need to furnish you with references to stuff that made all the news wires.  All you had to do to check was Google "Fauci's book scrubbed".  Now that I've taught you about Google, do you think you can do it yourself next tiime?


When your online reading articles its simple to copy the URL of that article and post it along with the article. It only takes a few seconds to do that. Why post information with out posting the link to it?  No one would be able to doubt that the information was indeed as it was presented here.


----------



## JonDouglas (Jun 6, 2021)

Becky1951 said:


> When your online reading articles its simple to copy the URL of that article and post it along with the article. It only takes a few seconds to do that. Why post information with out posting the link to it?  No one would be able to doubt that the information was indeed as it was presented here.


If something is blasted all over the news media, I figure it's obvious to those who're paying attention and truly interested in the subject.  If otherwise and not something private, I post the link.  I am not other people's newsboy or research assistant. If or when  people are truly interested, they chedk the news and/or Google the subject for themselves. My approach is one way of finding who's really interested in what you're posting and who's more of an ankle biter.


----------



## Nathan (Jun 6, 2021)

Attacks on Fauci grow more intense, personal and conspiratorial



> It all stemmed from a tranche of Fauci’s emails that were published as part of a Freedom of Information Act request filed by various news outlets. Within hours of publication, the hashtag #FauciLeaks was trending on Twitter, accusing the nation’s top infectious disease doctor of lying under oath about the origins of Covid. It became a trending topic on Facebook too, *where detractors added an inaccurate and more nefarious framing that the emails were secretly “leaked”* — drawing on a *playbook that has worked for partisans* on the right in the past, despite the fact that Fauci's publicly disclosed emails were not state secrets.  More here


----------



## JonDouglas (Jun 6, 2021)

Nathan said:


> Well no juvenile insults from of you in *this* posting, but still the arrogant, condescending attitude.
> Please tell us something that is outstanding or special about you, so that we can _admire_ you as much as *you* do.


You're going to need much better bait than that, Nathan.   Get a life, man!


----------



## JonDouglas (Jun 6, 2021)

Nathan said:


> Attacks on Fauci grow more intense, personal and conspiratorial


Well, they certainly did in some circles.  Most, however, knew the information came from FOIA requests and printed them as sent, which wasn't conspiratorial in any sense.  What might be construed as conspiratorial are the hypotheses as to the wny, when of and redactions in the release.


----------



## Nathan (Jun 6, 2021)

So in keeping On Topic in this thread titled "Some factual information about Dr Fauci", I'll continue with focus on* factual* matters.

Here is an excerpt from an article from Holy Cross magazine, featuring decades of Dr. Fauci's background as a  researcher, clinician, administrator, as well as his time at Holy Cross


> One of the country’s most visible and admired physicians and the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the National Institutes of Health, Anthony S. Fauci, M.D.,’62 has led the fight against AIDS and, in the process, won the trust and respect of his one-time opponents.   Article


----------



## JonDouglas (Jun 6, 2021)

Nathan said:


> So in keeping On Topic in this thread titled "Some factual information about Dr Fauci", I'll continue with focus on* factual* matters.
> 
> Here is an excerpt from an article from Holy Cross magazine, featuring decades of Dr. Fauci's background as a  researcher, clinician, administrator, as well as his time at Holy Cross


Fauci was certainly one of those at the forefront of the fight on AIDs; however, one has to question what the result was of the Billions he spent.  It certainly wasn't the AIDs vaccine he was supposed to be working on.  See:  The Most Influential People in the Fight Against AIDS


----------



## Becky1951 (Jun 6, 2021)

JonDouglas said:


> If something is blasted all over the news media, I figure it's obvious to those who're paying attention and truly interested in the subject.  If otherwise and not something private, I post the link.  I am not other people's newsboy or research assistant. If or when  people are truly interested, they chedk the news and/or Google the subject for themselves. My approach is one way of finding who's really interested in what you're posting and who's more of an ankle biter.


Some people may be very interested however they may not have the time to spend online checking news, searching. It may not be a habit of theirs to check news daily and when they are online, its to come here and enjoy conversation and information. If they do check the news it may not be the first articles seen, they read a few then go about with other things in their lives, missing some information. Those people would appreciate a link to articles.


----------



## Nathan (Jun 6, 2021)

JonDouglas said:


> You're going to need much better bait than that, Nathan.   Get a life, man!


Name calling and BS accusations aren't going to earn you any literary awards @JonDouglas.


----------



## JonDouglas (Jun 6, 2021)

Becky1951 said:


> Some people may be very interested however they may not have the time to spend online checking news, searching. It may not be a habit of theirs to check news daily and when they are online, its to come here and enjoy conversation and information. If they do check the news it may not be the first articles seen, they read a few then go about with other things in their lives, missing some information. Those people would appreciate a link to articles.


I trust you're not suggesting their time is more important than mine.  Is it easier to make a post in a thread asking for a link or just Googling it for yourself?   Do I need to take the time to copy and paste a link for something that's blasted all over the news?  I don't think so.


----------



## Nathan (Jun 6, 2021)

*The Fauci Ink Blot Test*
Analysis by Tara McKelvey, BBC White House reporter

Fauci's emails are like a Rorschach ink blot: what you see in them reveals more about you than the ink blot, or, in this case, the emails.
More in the article.


----------



## Nathan (Jun 6, 2021)

...so I just have to ask: Who are Dr Fauci's detractors?   What is their motive? What do they hope to gain?
I Googled "Who are Dr Fauci's detractors?" and the first 'hit' on Google search was this article.  
Not a big surprise, very predictable.


----------

