What Has Dr. Fauci Said Publicly About the Widespread Protests?
While he has expressed concern and called for mask-wearing, it’s true he never called for them to be disbanded.
In a viral tweet that he then shared on Instagram, Dinesh D’Souza claimed that Dr. Anthony Fauci was never critical of the recent protests that swept the nation despite the risk of spreading that such large gatherings pose:
Here we have an example of why fact-checking can be so difficult. D’Souza’s claim is literally true: Fauci has not called for an immediate end to the protests using the exact words in D’Souza’s tweet. But Fauci has spoken out repeatedly—and aggressively—about the public health risks such mass gatherings present.
Fauci has addressed the risk of transmitting coronavirus at protests on several occasions. On June 5, Fauci said in an interview with radio station WTOP that “the reasons for demonstrating are valid, and yet the demonstration itself puts one at an additional risk.” He called protests “the perfect setup [for coronavirus transmission]” and went on to say: “I get very concerned, as do my colleagues in public health, when they see these kinds of crowds.” Fauci told his interviewer that he recognized why people would want to go to demonstrations and that it was important to practice the constitutional right to do so, but that he would advise demonstrators to keep their masks on.
A few days later on June 10, Fauci participated in an interview with ABC News in which he was again asked about the risk of protests spreading coronavirus. He responded:
“The issue of physical separation is important. Masks can help, but it’s masks plus physical separation. And when you get congregations like we saw with the demonstrations, as we have said, myself and other health officials, that’s taking a risk and unfortunately what we’re seeing now is just an example of the kinds of things we were concerned about. So I wouldn’t be surprised that members of the congregation that were there demonstrating could also be infected and many of them will then go back to where they were. … So it’s the kind of things we were concerned about and unfortunately we’re seeing it come true right now.”
While on ABC’s Powerhouse Politics podcast, Fauci reiterated that the “best way that you can avoid—either acquiring or transmitting infection—is to avoid crowded places, to wear a mask whenever you're outside.” Later in the interview he said:
“From a public health standpoint, you shouldn’t be congregating in that close quarters that you see in demonstrations. But almost everyone understands the need to be able to express your constitutional right, to be able to demonstrate in a peaceful way against something that is really an important social issue. I respect that. However, I have to, as a public health official, say, that is risky when you do that. Now, you can always say the two things that get in the way of the virus are social distancing, or physical distancing, as well as a mask. So what I’m saying, for those that want to avoid an infection, implement both of those. But you know, no matter what I say, and reality has proven that, people are going to go out and demonstrate. So my advice and pleading with them would be, that if you feel that you must do that please make sure that you wear a mask at all times.”
It is true that Fauci did not use the words D’Souza quoted to demand that the demonstrations be disbanded or that the protesters go home. But he has consistently warned about the risks of participation and said that they do increase the odds of spreading coronavirus.
Photograph by Brendan Smialowski/AFP/Getty Images.
Dr. Fauci can only express clear concern and make recommendations for the protests based on public health which he clearly and diplomatically did, in contrast to some who took a more political stance in supporting them. I am not aware that he even has the legal authority to insist and enforce that the protesters go home. If he attempted that, he might be seen as acting for political purposes on behalf of his boss and have any further statements disregarded in the current partisan minefield.
To have some perspective, he has a novel coronavirus to deal with, and worse than just unknown behavior from the new virus, some of the initial info given from China was inaccurate. He can only respond to the data (on the virus and availability of medical equipment) he has at any given time. He also has an idiosyncratic administration to deal with where he is often randomly criticized for political reasons by people who have neither the responsibility nor expertise to make their own recommendations.
If you read other media, Sweden has questioned their response to the coronavirus, there was an article in the WSJ about how Israel had a resurgence after opening schools too soon, France and England have increased their mask requirements due to the uptick in coronavirus numbers, and Beijing has dealt with a recent resurgence as well. We are not the only ones dealing with this difficult virus.
Dr. Fauci has been methodical and unflappable. He has responded to his continuous criticism with grace and patient explanation. He is our ally but has been treated by some unfairly as an enemy. He deserves our support and good will--particularly as the flu of 1918 had three waves over a year so this is not over yet.
Thanks Alec's for the breakdown! Dinesh sure has come a long way huh...still remember Jonah Goldberg saying how he crib his book idea's from Liberal Fascism, and then went all Leroy Jenkins on the issue.
On a similar note, I feel bad for Fauci. A man who ran into the fire during the AIDS crisis, being sidelined for some errors he made (saying for example that people don't need to wear masks, then admitting he said it to keep people form buying out the PPE. Should have said let First Responder's have PPE and bandanna or cloth over your face).
I mean, come on everyone, if you are going to sideline Facui, don't try to destroy a man's reputation. He's one of the good guys even if he was wrong on points.
For well meaning republicans angry with Fauci, just think: After 9-11, when people were saying "Bush lied people died", after the invasion of Iraq and toppling of Saddam Hussein, were you angry when (rightly or wrongly) people were tarring Bush as intentionally wanting to take the oil from the middle east and starting the war based on fake premises? Was Bush intentionally trying to destroy a country and steal oil? Or was the intelligence apparatus (including the UK) wrong on the issue of weapons of mass destruction? I am not defending these points, just asking people to think about the outcry here.
Fauci was wrong, and ill headed trying to balance lesser of two evils on some points, but the guy's on our side and is good. Give the guy some grace. I hope the administration will too, but the way the seem to handle people that don't like is to get rid of them.