Anthony Fauci can’t use science to excuse his wrong moves

Form of words:
a-
A+

aNathoni Fauci, chief medical adviser to President Joe Biden and longtime head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, continues to say that his critics are “really criticizing science because I represent science.” Maybe he believes it too. But it may be time to find another spokesperson for science.

Fauci doesn’t have to bear any grudges—let alone credit Lara Logan’s insane suggestion to think she has anything other than the best interests of Americans to compare her to Joseph Mengele. To wonder whether his public statements are doing more harm than good at this point.

He arguably did a valuable job at the start of the pandemic by explaining the situation and reassuring the many Americans who had no confidence in former President Donald Trump. Fauci can’t do the same thing to the many Americans who have no confidence in Biden, though, because he doesn’t seem to stock much of what the doctor has to say. It’s hard to imagine anyone waiting for another Sunday-show appearance by vaccine-hesitation Fauci to (as almost everyone they should) get the shots. And there are plenty of other doctors and scientists who can and do speak with knowledge and insight about new developments in the pandemic.

Fauci has also taken some attacks on his credibility. His journalistic defenders only believe that he is not “perfect”, but the truth is much more disturbing than that. The main display in the anti-fascist case is his flip-flops on masks: he discouraged their use in early 2020, but then became a campaigner for them. (Details here.) The change was not the result of a new scientific discovery about the efficacy of the mask. He later emphasized that he wanted to ensure that health care workers were not run out of masks. But what they said was that they were ineffective. At best, his explanation suggests he was misleading the public into believing what he thought was his own good.

This is not the only time he has framed, or said so, his comments about COVID-19 to elicit a desired response from the public. He released ever-increasing estimates of the vaccination rate needed to achieve herd immunity, saying he did so partly to encourage more vaccinations and partly because polls indicated that the public was growing more confidently in vaccines. Was being Whether it is justified – or at least forgivable – this type of manipulation is self-diminishing. The closer the attention paid to the intended subject of manipulation, the less work it will do.

Obviously it is not science, regarded as either a method or a body of knowledge, that has compelled Fauci to say what he said about masks and herd immunity, and his decisions. should not be free from criticism because he “represents science.” He himself is getting demogic while arguing with politicians.

But the attitude he expresses is only an exaggerated look at what is pervasive in the public-health world and has great ramifications beyond. How many times has “following science” been presented as an adequate answer to the challenges of COVID-19? Science has created almost miraculous vaccines, but it can’t tell us to take them, because it can’t force us to care about our own or other people’s health. It certainly cannot tell us how to proceed in the presence of doubt. Can’t decide how to judge trade-offs, whether they involve eating steak (Centers for Disease Control guidelines forbid medium-rare) or setting policies related to COVID.

What we need from the public-health bureaucracy right now is not to lecture us about the value of our practice or science. This is action; Especially making rapid antigen tests cheap and widely available. It is that kind of mission which requires great contribution of experts. Very little of it has to be done on television. ,bloomberg

read also, ‘Heavily mutated’ Omicron has the world worried. But mutations can make it easier to detect

subscribe our channel youtube And Wire