October 10, 2022 at 1:08 p.m. EDT
Tony's Diary Package, pp.1079-1081 · fauci_diary:entry:00961
Page text: p.1079, p.1080, p.1081 · original PDF
- Date
- 2022-10-10 00:00 (day precision)
- Type
- diary entry · diary
- author
- Anthony S. Fauci
October 10, 2022 at 1:08 p.m. EDT
American political disagreements have often come down to us in the form of vivid dyads. Alexander
Hamilton vs. Thomas Jefferson. Stephen A. Douglas vs. Abraham Lincoln. Franklin D. Roosevelt vs. Arthur
H. Vandenberg.
One such conflict over the past few years has been Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) vs. Anthony S. Fauci, the
longtime head of the department of infectious diseases at the National Institutes of Health.
I am not referring here to any moral or intellectual equivalence between the figures. Their inequality, in
fact, is a central part of the story. Paul's contempt for expertise, his spread of conspiracy theories, his
use of oversight as ambush -- all this indicates a performative approach to governing. Reality does not
ultimately count; the play is the thing. And Paul has found an audience among ideologues who
demonstrate their fidelity by taking some extra poison in their pudding.
The single most shocking fact to come out of the recent pandemic has been the unfair selfapportionment of pain and death. People in majority-Republican counties experienced 73 more deaths
from covid-19 per 100,000 people than those in majority-Democratic counties. There are a variety of
explanations. One is certainly the use of high office to discourage the most basic means of selfpreservation during a deadly disease outbreak. Imagine if it had been Democratic public authorities
encouraging Republican self-victimization. But it was Republican officials who did it -- and found it an
effective method of self-publicization.
On the other side has stood Fauci. In more than 50 years at the NIH, Fauci has been accustomed to
scientific debates in which disagreements emerge as the result of seeking different methods in the
pursuit of the same goals. But Paul and his co-ideologues have left the assumption of shared objectives
in tatters. And this has constituted an attack on the very idea of public service -- the notion that true
experts can make a career in seeking the common good.
For Fauci, it has been a professional and moral commitment that politics should stop at the human
biome's edge. This does not imply that scientific experts are perfect. To the contrary, the purpose of the
scientific method is to organize failure into deeper insight. But it does mean that scientific truth is not
relative -- or determined in the political realm.
In attempting to demonize Fauci, his critics gained a fundraising target. And that, by their own lights, is
the definition of political success. But seldom has the choice of an attack been more of a self-indictment.
Fauci is not only a symbol of public health orthodoxy; he has done as much as any scientist to turn
medical innovation into humanitarian progress.
For generations, Fauci has applied a low-key excellence to fighting domestic AIDS, tropical infectious
diseases, global AIDS and Ebola. His role in the creation of the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS
Relief has helped save tens of millions of lives and built medical infrastructure across the developing
world. His focus and public investment have brought us to the verge of vaccines against malaria, one of
the world's deadliest parasites.
Fauci is a symbol of sorts. He demonstrates what can happen when a nation at the height of its power
employs the finest scientific minds of their generation to the pursuit of public health goals few believed
were possible. The result has been a golden age of public health, motivated by an American belief in
human dignity.
This is not the kind of reputation to be dented by political attacks or internet rumors. It is a legacy
praised each day by the chorus of millions of breaths that would otherwise be silent. A vast chorus of
the nearly lost.
As someone who worked for a few years with Fauci during George W. Bush's administration, I saw how
he pushed for new ideas and new funding: by expressing his passion for the scientific project itself. He is
the ultimate explainer. In briefings, he did not conspire to make himself seem smart. He made those he
briefed feel they had spent a few minutes looking out on a vast landscape of innovation.
Robin Givhan: Fauci carried all our angst and anger with patience and decency
Fauci assumes that everyone is rational and thus persuadable. That is not quite true. But when he
described to me the shifting shell of sugars that surround and protect the AIDS virus, or how mRNA
vaccines work, it left a few impressions. First, how something that can kill you can be so fascinating. But
also how much Fauci's friendship felt like mentorship. The greatness of his calling rubbed off a bit. And
one was left with the infection of his mission.
Fauci's forthcoming retirement as director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
will cost Americans, and people around the world, far more than they realize. But he will ever remain
the greatest public servant I have known.