reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Critics question the effectiveness of masks and the handling of the pandemic. Dr. Fauci defends his decisions and denies funding gain-of-function research. The origins of COVID-19 are debated, with conflicting reports on a lab leak. Mental health concerns for children due to school closures are raised. Dr. Fauci clashes with Senator Paul over gain-of-function research. The debate continues on the virus's origins and research funding.

The government funded gain of function research from 2014 to '16, but it continued in Wuhan without approval from the committee. In 2017, the funding was resumed, but the Wuhan research was not reviewed by the committee. When questioned, Fauci claimed that his experts said it wasn't gain of function, but there was no discussion or paperwork. The person in charge of the safety committee only reviewed three studies in four years, and this research was exempted from their scrutiny. It could only have been done with Fauci's permission. We haven't found the paperwork yet, but it's likely that Fauci allowed the research in Wuhan without the safety committee's oversight.

This virus likely did not originate naturally; it stems from scientific arrogance. In the early pandemic days, there were claims about a wet market origin, but evidence soon emerged showing many cases unrelated to it. By early January, I informed the National Security Council and Anthony Fauci that the virus was highly infectious in humans, suggesting a lab origin. The Wuhan Institute of Virology is well-known for coronavirus research, making the lab leak theory plausible. Despite discussions, Fauci maintained a focus on the wet market hypothesis, disregarding other possibilities. I believed a broader scientific investigation was necessary, but only a single hypothesis was considered.

The speaker defends their representation of science, stating that vaccinated individuals are unlikely to experience serious illness or transmission, though acknowledging vaccinated people are capable of transmitting the infection. Mask mandates are discussed, with the speaker admitting masks work "at the margins, maybe 10%," while also stating they often wear two masks. The speaker denies recommending lockdowns but admits to advising the president to shut the country down, anticipating economic consequences. The speaker believes school closures may have gone too far but denies they caused irreparable damage. The origin of COVID-19 is debated, with the speaker stating the place of origin was not within the wet market itself, while also stating "I don't think you could say that." The speaker denies NIH funding of gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute, a claim disputed by others who cite NIH funding of research that enhanced a bat coronavirus, making it more contagious. The speaker denies this constitutes gain of function research, leading to heated exchanges.

From the start, the lines were drawn regarding the virus's origins. I believed it came from a lab, while others disagreed. My position as head of the CDC was undermined, and I was told it was a White House decision. I find that hard to believe; it seems like a cover-up. Why would we share advanced biotechnology with China? I doubt the measures in place will be foolproof; issues will arise. There have been multiple lies throughout this situation.

We prioritize transparency and honesty. Vaccination reduces risk of COVID. No vaccine is 100% effective, but vaccines are highly efficacious. CDC guidelines recommend masks and social distancing. No study on masks for kids, but masks are advised. Lab leak theory not downplayed by me. Virus likely evolved in nature, not man-made. Criticism of me is criticism of science. It's not a simple yes or no answer.

Republicans on the subcommittee recount two years of work aimed at linking the COVID-19 origin to a Wuhan lab, arguing that Democrats hindered the pursuit of truth by blocking hearings. They contend mounting evidence supports a lab-origin, and they frame the hearing as a step toward uncovering the truth for Americans who have suffered from COVID-19. Dr. Redfield is cited as having pointed to the lab-leak hypothesis as early as 2020, urging Fauci, Jeremy Farrar, and Tedros to take the lab-leak possibility seriously and to investigate both lab-origin and natural-origin hypotheses. Farrar convened an 11-scientist meeting across five time zones on February 1, inviting Fauci to join, with a note to treat the matter in total confidence. Redfield notes he was excluded from that call despite being included in prior discussions, and asks why he was left out. Emails following the February 1 conference show the four scientists who had attended later told Fauci that they found the genetic sequence inconsistent with expectations from evolutionary theory. Yet, just three days later, these four scientists drafted the proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2 paper, arguing the opposite. The subcommittee asks for the likelihood that these scientists, after making that earlier statement, could conclude with such certainty that COVID-19 came from nature instead of a lab leak, and suggests Fauci prompted the paper to discredit the lab-leak theory. Speaker 0 characterizes the February 2020 approach as antithetical to science, saying science requires debate and that this process squashed debate. They ask whether Fauci used the proximal-origin paper to hide gain-of-function research that created the virus. Speaker 1 responds that they cannot speak to Fauci’s motivation but asserts the paper is inaccurate and part of a narrative to support a natural-origin story. They state the pandemic did not start in January at the seafood market, noting infections as early as September, and allege a narrative was decided to claim a wet market origin and to negate discussion about a laboratory origin. With twenty seconds left, Speaker 0 raises a point that Fauci was told in January 2020 about NIH’s monetary relationship with the Wuhan Institute through EcoHealth Alliance and asks whether Fauci intentionally lied under oath when denying NIH funding of gain-of-function research. Speaker 1 asserts there is no doubt NIH funded gain-of-function research and adds that American tax dollars funded gain-of-function research from NIH, the State Department, USAID, and DOD. The exchange ends with Speaker 0 noting time and recognizing Ms. Dink.

Criticism of science often targets me, but vaccination significantly reduces the risk of serious illness and transmission. While masks may provide limited benefit, they can offer reassurance during outbreaks. School closures have impacted children's mental health, but I didn't recommend shutting everything down; it was a difficult decision due to economic consequences. The origins of COVID-19 are debated, with some suggesting a lab leak. However, the NIH has not funded gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute. Claims about enhancing a bat coronavirus for human transmissibility are disputed; the focus is on research that alters transmissibility and pathogenicity. Misunderstandings persist, but I stand by the scientific approach.

On January 9, 2024, Anthony Fauci admitted that the 6-foot social distancing guideline was arbitrary. He previously claimed that masks were necessary, despite acknowledging they don't provide perfect protection. Fauci also asserted that COVID vaccines would prevent infection, which later proved inaccurate. Both political parties allowed Fauci to dictate pandemic responses, leading to significant consequences for schools, businesses, and the economy, resulting in the highest COVID death rate globally. Critics of Fauci faced censorship and were labeled conspiracy theorists. Recently, Fauci acknowledged that the lab leak theory is a possibility. The speaker calls for a new political path, urging donations to their campaign to break free from the two-party system and restore democracy and moral authority in the U.S.

This virus likely did not originate naturally; it stems from scientific arrogance. In the early pandemic, there were claims about a wet market being the source, but evidence soon showed many cases unrelated to it. By early January, it was clear the wet market narrative was misleading. I informed the National Security Council and Anthony Fauci that the virus was highly infectious, suggesting it had been engineered in a lab. The Wuhan Institute of Virology is well-known for coronavirus research, making the lab leak theory plausible. Despite discussions, Fauci maintained a focus on the wet market hypothesis, dismissing the need for broader scientific investigation.

President Trump was not aware of the gain of function ban repeal process that started before he became president. Anthony Fauci worked without supervision during the 18-month period when Trump did not appoint a new science adviser. Congressional investigators confirmed that Fauci and the new science adviser kept information about the research from Trump's administration. Trump himself admitted in an interview that he was not informed about most of it. Fauci has been in charge since the virus became public and has worked with his scientists, many of whom he funds, to promote the narrative that the virus is natural and not from a lab. The US intelligence community, including the Department of Defense, FBI, and Department of Homeland Security, likely played a role in this deception.

Speaker 0 asks Dr. Fauci if he knows Sylvia Burwell and if she emailed him in February 2020 about wearing a mask while traveling during the early stages of the pandemic. Dr. Fauci acknowledges knowing Sylvia Burwell and that she sought his advice on personal safety during the pandemic. However, he does not specifically recall the email mentioned. Speaker 0 then reads a response allegedly written by Dr. Fauci, stating that masks are more for infected individuals to prevent spreading rather than protecting uninfected people. Dr. Fauci vaguely recalls discussing safety issues regarding masks but does not specifically remember recommending against wearing one while traveling. He suggests that if shown the email, he would not dispute it.

Dr. Fauci was asked about concerns that the virus was man-made. Some virologists believe that the virus does not look natural and may have escaped from a lab. However, Dr. Fauci believes it is more likely that the virus originated in nature. He acknowledges that discussing a lab leak would be detrimental to science's reputation. He emphasizes that COVID-19's origin is consistent with the scientific process, where the virus jumped from an animal to a human.

Conspiracy theories arise during public health crises and are distractions. A video alleging masks don't work was removed from social media for spreading misinformation. A study found mask mandates were an utter failure, according to the New York Times, citing a British review of 78 randomized studies. Lockdowns' effect on mortality was basically irrelevant, according to economists from Johns Hopkins, who warned against their future use. There is absolutely no evidence of an overcount of COVID fatalities, but the LA County health director acknowledged the county may be overcounting COVID deaths by as much as twenty percent. COVID can be a contributing or incidental cause of death. Initially, Dr. Fauci rejected the theory that coronavirus was man-made in a lab in Wuhan, China, but an intelligence arm of the US Energy Department has joined the FBI in concluding that COVID began with a lab leak in China. The Wuhan Institute of Virology worked on coronaviruses, which some find to be a large coincidence.

Speaker 0 and Speaker 1 discuss the origins of COVID-19, focusing on claims that the virus originated in a Wuhan lab and the handling of scientific debate around the lab-leak hypothesis. - Speaker 0 states that for two years Republicans connected the dots and exposed evidence supporting the belief that COVID-19 was developed and leaked from the Wuhan lab, while Democrats hindered hearings and blocked truth-seeking. He asserts mounting evidence supports a lab-origin theory and frames the hearing as a pursuit of truth for Americans who suffered from the pandemic. He notes Doctor Redfield pointed to the lab-leak hypothesis early on and urged Fauci to investigate both the lab and natural hypotheses. - Speaker 0 recalls a February 1 meeting convened by Jeremy Farrar with 11 top scientists across five time zones, inviting Fauci to join, with a preference for a tight, confidential group. He says Redfield was excluded from the call, and asks why he was excluded. - Speaker 1 confirms that in January and February 2020 he spoke with Fauci, Farrar, and Tedros about pursuing both hypotheses, and as a clinical virologist argued it was not scientifically plausible that the virus jumped bat-to-human and became highly infectious; he notes that coronaviruses differ from Ebola and that intermediate hosts are involved for SARS and MERS, and that they never learned to go human-to-human in those contexts. - Speaker 0 asks why Redfield was excluded from the calls. Speaker 1 responds that he was told there was a desire for a single narrative and that his viewpoint differed. - Speaker 0 references emails after the conference call in which four of the 11 scientists said the genetic sequence was inconsistent with evolutionary expectations, but three days later those scientists drafted the paper Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2 arguing the opposite. He asks how those scientists could conclude certainty about a natural origin after three days. - Speaker 1 describes the process as unfortunate and says the approach in January–February 2020 was antithetical to science, noting that science involves debate, which he claims was squashed. - Speaker 0 asks if Fauci used the Proximal Origin paper to hide gain-of-function research and to what extent the paper hides the truth. Speaker 1 declines to discuss Fauci’s motivations but calls the paper inaccurate and part of a narrative intended to negate the possibility that COVID-19 came from a laboratory. He emphasizes that the pandemic did not start in January at the seafood market and that infections date back to September. - Speaker 0 notes an email from 01/27/2020 stating NIH had a monetary relationship with the Wuhan Institute via EcoHealth Alliance, and asks if Fauci intentionally lied under oath about NIH funding of gain-of-function research. Speaker 1 asserts there is no doubt NIH funded gain-of-function research and says American tax dollars funded such research not only through NIH but also via the State Department, USAID, and the DOD. - The exchange ends with Speaker 0 signaling time and introducing Ms. Dink.

Criticism of science and mask effectiveness are discussed. The need for vaccination to prevent serious illness and transmission is emphasized. School closures' impact on mental health is debated. The origins of COVID-19, gain of function research, and lab leaks are disputed. Dr. Fauci defends his recommendations and denies funding gain of function research. Accusations of misinformation and calls for prosecution are exchanged.

The speaker believes criticism of them is an attack on science. They stated vaccinated people don't need to worry about serious illness or transmission, but later acknowledged fully vaccinated people can transmit the infection. Masks were described as working "at the margins, maybe ten percent." School closures were considered an appropriate approach initially, but remote learning may have "forever damaged" kids, though the speaker doesn't believe it's "irreparably damaged anyone." The speaker claims they didn't recommend lockdowns, but recommended shutting the country down to the president, knowing it would have serious economic consequences. The speaker suggests the virus originated from the animal-human interface in wet markets, but that the place of origin was not within the market itself. Another intelligence arm concluded COVID began with a lab leak in China. The speaker denies the NIH funded gain of function research in the Wuhan Institute, while others claim NIH funded research that made a bat coronavirus more contagious. The speaker denies that this is gain of function.

Without your mask, you enjoyed the game next to others, while many were forced to stay home. Your science led to children being placed in plastic bubbles at school. In your own email, you stated that typical masks from drugstores are ineffective and do not recommend wearing them. Yet, healthy children across America were forced to wear masks and learn from home due to your guidance. Meanwhile, you and your associates benefited financially from big pharma. This committee should consider recommending your prosecution for crimes against humanity. You belong in prison, doctor Fauci.

Critics question the effectiveness of masks and the handling of the pandemic. Dr. Fauci defends his recommendations and denies funding gain-of-function research. The origins of COVID-19 are debated, with accusations of misinformation and calls for accountability. Mental health concerns in children due to lockdowns are raised. The discussion highlights the challenges faced during the pandemic, including balancing public health and economic impacts.

If COVID-19 originated from risky experiments at the Wuhan lab, it's important to note that the lab received funding from America. During a congressional hearing, Senator Paul questioned Dr. Fauci about the NIH's funding of gain-of-function research in Wuhan, to which Fauci denied lying. However, a scientific paper from 2012 written by Fauci supports the benefits of gain-of-function research despite the risk of a pandemic. The decision to lift the ban on gain-of-function research during the Trump administration remains unclear. Former President Trump mentioned that Fauci did not inform him about the Wuhan Institute of Virology's activities, and emails later revealed Fauci's discussions about the possibility of genetic manipulation. Trump stopped the payments to the Chinese lab upon discovering them. Despite the controversy, Trump believes his administration did a great job with the vaccine and Operation Warp Speed.

We did not fund gain of function research in Wuhan. A bat coronavirus was enhanced in a lab. NIH funded research at Wuhan Institute, making a virus more contagious. Fauci denies lying to congress. Questions raised about experiments in Wuhan lab. NIH funded EcoHealth Alliance for bat coronavirus experiments. Fauci denies lying, blames Senator Paul. NIH admitted funding gain of function research in Wuhan lab. Fauci insists he did not lie.

"Please wear a mask. There's no reason to be walking around with a mask. I often myself wear two masks. If you wear a mask, you can decrease the likelihood of transmitting or requiring COVID nineteen by fifty, sixty, seventy, maybe eighty percent. Said masks work at the margins maybe ten percent. Mask mandates did nothing. Forget the politics. Look at the data. There is just no evidence that they, masks, make any difference, full stop. The mask that you buy in a drugstore would be not particularly efficient in keeping out virus. Cloth coverings work. Two year old with asthma thrown off a flight. Mom is arrested in front of a young child. Isn't that theater? Isn't it just theater? There's no science behind it. Keep everybody masked."

Doctor Fauci misled the country by withholding key information about the origins of the virus. He knew American tax dollars funded a lab in Wuhan conducting gain-of-function research. Despite this, he did not disclose the lab's deficiencies or compliance issues. Fauci organized a conference call with virologists who changed their tune on the lab leak theory shortly after. The government failed to share the truth, leading to misinformation about the virus's origins. The Director of National Intelligence believes Fauci and Collins withheld information to avoid scrutiny over their relationships with the lab in China.

Senator Rand Paul discusses the NIH's funding of gain-of-function research in Wuhan, asserting that Dr. Fauci misled Congress about it. He explains that gain-of-function research increases a virus's lethality or infectiousness, which poses significant risks if it escapes the lab. Paul criticizes Fauci's advice on masks and social distancing, claiming they were ineffective and potentially harmful. He emphasizes that people who had COVID should not have been mandated to get vaccinated again. Paul expresses skepticism about government mandates and believes the public has become more resistant to government overreach. He also mentions his committee's investigation into COVID-related decisions and the misuse of surveillance programs, advocating for stricter adherence to the Fourth Amendment regarding data collection.

On January 9, 2024, Anthony Fauci admitted that the 6-foot social distancing guideline "sort of just appeared," revealing it wasn't based on scientific evidence. He also previously stated that masks were not necessary during outbreaks and acknowledged that vaccines wouldn't guarantee protection against infection. Both political parties allowed Fauci to lead pandemic responses, resulting in significant consequences for schools, businesses, and the economy, while dissenting voices faced censorship. Recently, Fauci acknowledged the possibility of a lab origin for COVID-19, which some had long suspected. A rally against vaccine mandates took place in Washington, D.C. The speaker calls for a new political path and urges donations to their campaign to restore self-governance and moral authority in democracy.