What Fauci has said about COVID origins, gain-of-function research

Thursday\u0027s vote by a Senate panel on whether to recommend holding Dr. Anthony Fauci in contempt of Congress builds on more than five years of tension between the federal government\u0027s former top infectious disease expert and Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky \u2014 much of it hinging on the origins of the coronavirus and a controversial branch of biological research.In Senate hearings, Paul has repeatedly accused Fauci of downplaying the theory that the virus emerged from a lab in the Chinese city of Wuhan rather than jumping from animals to humans naturally. The senator has also argued risky "gain-of-function" experiments that aim to modify viruses took place at that lab with support from Fauci\u0027s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and has accused Fauci of lying about it.Fauci has strongly denied the senator\u0027s allegations, saying he has always kept an open mind about the virus\u0027 origins. He has also accused Paul of misrepresenting the types of federally supported research that took place in Wuhan, and has emphasized that the viruses studied there were far removed from the one that caused the COVID-19 pandemic.Then, in an appearance before the Senate Homeland Security Committee last week, Fauci invoked the Fifth Amendment in response to every question, citing Paul\u0027s "unhinged obsession with me" and desire to put him "behind bars." Paul has sought to hold Fauci in contempt, arguing he can\u0027t take the Fifth because he is already insulated from prosecution by a Biden-era pardon. Whether to charge Fauci would be up to the Justice Department.Here\u0027s what to know about the controversy:What is the "lab leak" theory?The precise origins of the virus that caused the COVID-19 pandemic have not been definitively nailed down \u2014 drawing years of debate among medical experts and intelligence officials.Many scientists believe the evidence suggests that the virus emerged naturally in bats, circulated to other species and spilled over to humans, spreading at a live animal market in Wuhan where the first human cases appeared in late 2019. Others believe the virus accidentally leaked from the nearby Wuhan Institute of Virology, which was researching bat viruses. That lab conducted some research that was funded by nearly $600,000 in U.S. government money due to a federal grant issued to a nonprofit research group.Last year, a panel of experts assembled by the World Health Organization was unable to reach a firm conclusion on how the coronavirus emerged, writing that the "weight of available evidence" suggested a natural origin but they couldn\u0027t rule out a lab leak.The U.S. intelligence community offered a similarly mixed view in 2023. The National Intelligence Council and four other agencies found the virus likely infected humans through natural exposure to an animal, while the FBI and Department of Energy believed it was likely a lab incident. The CIA didn\u0027t reach a conclusion at the time, though it favored a lab leak last year.Some of the debate revolves around "gain-of-function" research, a practice broadly defined as modifying or enhancing viruses to study how they might evolve \u2014 and allegations that some of the research in Wuhan fell into that category. The method can be controversial, with opponents warning it could be risky and proponents arguing it could help stop future pandemics.What has Fauci said about the lab leak theory?Fauci has said publicly in recent years he is open to the idea that the virus that caused COVID-19 could have leaked from a lab, but he believes most of the evidence supports a natural origin."We keep a completely open mind as to what the origin is," Fauci told CBS News\u0027 "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan" in late 2022. "Having said that, if you look at the examination by highly qualified international scientists with no political agendas, they\u0027ve published in peer reviewed journals, the best of the peer reviewed journals, that all the accumulated evidence \u2026 is quite strong that this is a natural occurrence."Fauci pointed to evidence "related to the Chinese bringing into the Wuhan market animals from the wild that should not have been there, that clearly could have brought [the virus] from a bat to them to a human." But he added that "we\u0027ve got to investigate every possibility because this is too important not to do that," and said the Chinese regime hadn\u0027t shared enough information.Early on in the pandemic, in interviews and news conferences, Fauci argued that the evidence pointed "very, very strongly" toward a natural origin. In one April 2020 White House news conference, Fauci told reporters a newly released study showed "the mutations that it took to get to the point where [the virus] is now [are] totally consistent with a jump of a species from an animal to a human."Paul and other congressional Republicans have accused Fauci of downplaying the possibility of a lab leak \u2014 and have suggested he helped steer the public debate toward a natural origin in the pandemic\u0027s early days even as experts privately thought a lab leak was possible. Fauci has denied that, saying he always kept an open mind.House Republicans in 2023 accused Fauci of exerting "undue influence" behind the scenes over the 2020 study that pointed toward a natural origin. In a dueling report, House Democrats argued Fauci didn\u0027t play a role in drafting the paper and wasn\u0027t trying to silence other theories.Fauci mentioned the uncertainty about the virus\u0027 origins in diary entries that Paul released last month. In January 2020, he wrote that "we know the market was not the source, it was the amplifier," though he added that "somewhere the virus jumped from animals to humans."What has Fauci said about gain-of-function research \u2014 and whether it\u0027s linked to COVID-19?Fauci has long argued the federally backed studies that took place at the Wuhan Institute of Virology did not con...

Indexed and credited by AIPROPX. Originating outlet: CBS News — Top. Open at source →