Trump vs Fauci: 2 Truths 1 Lie
Opinion analysis by Michel Sadek, Staff Writer
November 27th, 2020
It’s not too uncommon that we hear a “Trump vs. _____” headline.
Trump vs. Clinton, Trump vs. Biden, Trump vs. CNN, and even Trump vs. Truth, as televised on Last Week Tonight with John Oliver. An inevitable outcome of his provocative views, this reality has put the former president at the bad end of almost every blame game, the fingers of the world pointed at him in light of every mishap.
So today, with the Unites States knee-deep in an escalating COVID crisis, it is natural that the realm of science has declared its rivalry with Mr. Trump. Spearheaded by Dr. Anthony Fauci, Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) since 1984, the scientific community has had a lot to say about Trump’s handling of the pandemic, particularly his spreading of misinformation regarding the virus and misleading of the populace. Subsequently, Trump’s three-phased strategy to reignite the economy, “Opening Up America Again,” has drawn significant criticism from some of the world’s most prominent infectious disease experts, described as being rushed and founded on ungrounded claims.
The thing is, though, we all know Trump has lied before. According to the Washington Post, Trump has made over 20,000 false or misleading claims in just the first 27 months of his presidency.
What is often eclipsed in global media is that Dr. Fauci and other proponents of science have also made their fair share of dishonesties and mistakes. Fauci, contrary to public opinion, has not maintained the ideal standard of integrity and accuracy that scientists are expected to maintain, and has thus played his part in getting the United States and the world this deep into the crisis. While his experience and record are almost unparalleled, it would be biased not to point out where Fauci has gone wrong in his role as a world leader in the fight against the coronavirus.
To begin with, it is worth noting that Fauci was one of the anti-facemask advocates in early 2020. Not only was he neutral about the use of PPE, but rather was openly dissuading the masses.
As per his interview with Spectrum News DC in February, Fauci proclaimed that “there is no reason for anyone right now in the United States, with regard to coronavirus, to wear a mask.”
Fauci, like many others, downplayed the threat of the virus. He fought Trump’s decision to cut off routes to China, even mocked people who were worried about contracting the virus.
But it was his stance on masks, in specific, that sparked interest after his interview with financial news outlet “The Street” in mid-June was made public. When asked why the US government did not promote masks at the beginning of the pandemic, this was what Fauci had to say:
“Well, the reason for that is that we were concerned the public health community, and many people were saying this, were concerned that it was at a time when personal protective equipment, including the N-95 masks and the surgical masks, were in very short supply. And we wanted to make sure that the people, namely the health care workers, who were brave enough to put themselves in a harm way, to take care of people who you know were infected with the coronavirus and the danger of them getting infected.”
In this statement above, Fauci hints that he and his entourage did know just how important masks were at the beginning of the pandemic. Yet, they advocated against their use so that available masks could be saved for health care workers.
Albeit a superficially noble cause, Fauci’s initial stance on face masks has led to thousands refusing to use personal protective equipment in public spaces, deeming them useless. In fact, anti-mask advocates have referenced Fauci’s interviews when discrediting masks via social media. While Fauci’s heart may have been in the right pace, who knows how many lives could have been spared if Fauci had been honest about his knowledge on masks?
Another issue Fauci has not been utterly truthful about is the use of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) to treat COVID-19. In a series of public statements, Fauci emphasized that there exists no substantial data that proves the role of HCQ in fighting the virus, and that he was only approached with “anecdotal evidence.”
Trump’s trade adviser Peter Navarro, however, has stressed the falseness of these claims. Apparently, Navarro “confronted [Fauci] with scientific studies providing evidence of safety and efficacy.” He made the expert aware that a Detroit hospital study witnessed a 50% reduction in the mortality rate when HCQ is used early on in treatment.
Likewise, in an open letter addressed to Dr. Fauci on the 20th of August 2020, a group of researchers and professors included a list of studies conducted by American epidemiologists that show promising results for HCQ. They went on to criticize Fauci’s refusal to delve deeper into the prospect of using the medicine, asking him to “reconsider his current approach to COVID-19 infection.”
Indeed, Fauci’s insistence that he was exposed to no concrete evidence is false: he was provided with data that many specialists considered could be a game-changer, and hence had the duty to take this prospect a bit more seriously.
Overall, I must reemphasize that the information in this article is in no way intended to defend Trump in his battle with the Fauci-led scientific community. The former president has arguably spread the most misinformation among all political figures in recent history, and thus carries a large share of the blame for misleading the public in these dreaded times.
This does not mean, however, that the entirety of the blame falls on Trump while science prizes an unblemished record of honesty, as anti-Trump media has fervently strived to exhibit. Starting with Dr. Fauci and down the line of scientific advisers and experts, numerous lies have been told and have translated to undesired consequences. Millions of people have lost all trust in politicians, and science must thus uphold a certain standard of integrity before the public loses faith in it too.