“I Keep an Open Mind as to What the Origin Is” – Anthony Fauci Faces Tough Questions in Congress

In a highly anticipated session, Dr. Anthony Fauci, the former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), testified before the House Oversight and Accountability Committee’s Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic.

This marked his first appearance before Congress since retiring from federal service in 2022.

During the three-hour session, Fauci defended his actions during the COVID-19 pandemic, responding to intense scrutiny from Republican lawmakers about his role in shaping the U.S. response to the virus and the origins of COVID-19.

He explained that the evolving nature of scientific knowledge necessitated changes in public health recommendations.

“When you’re dealing with a new outbreak, things change,” Fauci said. “The scientific process collects the information that will allow you, at that time, to make a determination or recommendation or a guideline.”

He also addressed accusations that he used personal emails to avoid oversight, firmly denying these claims.

A significant portion of the hearing focused on the origins of COVID-19, with House Republicans questioning Fauci about the possibility that the virus originated from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, which had received U.S. grant funding.

Fauci clarified that the viruses studied at the institute under an NIH subgrant could not have been the precursor to SARS-CoV-2. He maintained an open mind about the virus’s origins, acknowledging that “other things that might be going on in China” remain unknown. He defended the small grant sent to the Wuhan Institute, emphasizing that it funded research on potential emerging infections, not dangerous gain-of-function research.

The hearing also delved into the public health measures implemented during the early months of the pandemic, such as social distancing, mask mandates, and vaccination campaigns.

Fauci argued that these actions were crucial in saving lives.

“If we had let the virus just spread through the country without any precautions, there very likely would have been another million people who would have died,” he testified.

One contentious topic was the six-foot social distancing rule. Critics, including Select Subcommittee Chairman Brad Wenstrup, claimed it lacked sufficient scientific backing and led to widespread disruptions, including the closure of schools and businesses. Fauci countered that the guidance was based on the best available knowledge at the time and aimed at reducing virus transmission.

The hearing highlighted the deeply polarized views surrounding Fauci, with Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia refusing to address Fauci as “doctor” and calling for his imprisonment, a move that drew criticism from other lawmakers.

Despite the personal attacks, Fauci revealed that he and his family had faced credible death threats, attributing the increased hostility to political performances by figures like Greene. He remained focused on the need to learn from the pandemic.

“This session should be about understanding past experiences to improve responses to future pandemics,” he told CNN after the hearing, criticizing Greene’s comments as unproductive.

The hearing underscored the intense debate over the U.S. pandemic response and the role of public health officials. While Dr. Fauci defended the scientific basis for his decisions, the scrutiny highlighted the need for greater transparency and accountability in public health guidance.