For one extraordinary moment, Anthony Fauci had the attention of the world.
For someone working in public health, epidemiology, and infectious disease, that kind of audience was almost unimaginable. A field normally confined to laboratories, medical journals, and government briefings suddenly occupied every household, with Fauci standing at its center.
Others will now have to rebuild the public’s trust in public health. That work will require humility, candor, and a willingness to answer questions without treating the questioner as an enemy.
He had the credentials, the access, and the attention of a frightened public. Imagine what he might have done with it.
I am willing to believe noble aspirations drew Fauci into public health. It is largely unglamorous work performed by people concerned with disease prevention, sanitation, research, and the countless measures that help people live longer and healthier lives. Public health is one of America’s noblest forms of stewardship.
Yet at the field’s most visible and consequential moment, Americans increasingly saw less of a champion for that calling than an indefatigable champion of Anthony Fauci.
A large ego does not necessarily prevent faithful stewardship. A cherished calling, however, can bring even an enormous ego to heel by reminding the steward that the work was never chiefly about him.
Fauci’s media choices reinforced the opposite impression. He became a familiar presence on CNN and MSNBC (now MS NOW) while the country’s highest-rated cable news programs aired on Fox. If persuading skeptical Americans truly mattered, why not spend at least as much time with the audience most skeptical of him?
Truth does not require friendly lighting. Someone confident in his work should be willing to face hostile questions and answer evidence with evidence. Fauci could have engaged Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) that way. He might not have persuaded Paul or millions of skeptical Americans, but the public could have watched the exchange and learned from it.
Good teachers do not treat questions as threats to their authority or grounds for censorship. They use questions to explain, clarify, and sometimes reconsider.
RELATED: The Biden autopen scandal has one big winner: Anthony Fauci
Alex WROBLEWSKI/AFP/Getty Images
Americans initially accepted Fauci’s guidance because of the authority of his office. Over time, persuasion gave way to institutional pressure. OSHA imposed a vaccination-or-testing mandate covering roughly 84 million workers before the Supreme Court blocked it. Meta reported removing more than 20 million pieces of content and 3,000 accounts, pages, and groups under its COVID-19 misinformation policies.
Those decisions were not Fauci’s alone. They nevertheless formed the climate in which he told CBS that his critics were “really attacking science because I represent science.”
That was the moment stewardship gave way to something else.
I am not an epidemiologist. My authority to write this comes from more than 40 years of accompanying my wife through scores of operations, intensive care, amputations, complications, and consequential medical decisions. At times, Gracie could not speak for herself.
I have watched her medical challenges confuse, frustrate, frighten, and even humble some of the finest surgeons one could hope to meet. I have also watched those physicians respond by working harder to explain what they saw, acknowledge what they did not know, and guide us through their decisions.
We have disagreed and, at times, argued. The respect remained mutual. The physicians knew medicine. I knew Gracie. Good care required both.
Those rooms taught me that medical authority does not eliminate questions. It creates an obligation to answer them. Uncertainty honestly disclosed earns more trust than certainty falsely projected. Condescension and concealment have no place in examination rooms, intensive care units, or public health.
Scripture provides a simple standard: “It is required of stewards that they be found faithful” (1 Corinthians 4:2).
For a time, Fauci’s voice, opinions, assurances, and even his jokes traveled around the world. But the microphone has passed to others, as microphones always do.
RELATED: Two Americas, under Fauci, with liberty and justice for none
Alex WROBLEWSKI/AFP/Getty Images
The man who once had so much to say was eventually left repeating essentially the same answer 111 times. Invoking the Fifth Amendment is not evidence of guilt. Yet Fauci had already received a full and unconditional federal pardon covering any offenses arising from his official service between January 1, 2014, and January 19, 2025.
The pardon proves nothing by itself. Proof and trust, however, are not the same thing.
I would be hard-pressed to entrust Gracie’s care to a physician protected by a pardon reaching back six years before I had ever heard his name.
Americans have the right to notice the contrast.
Others will now have to rebuild the public’s trust in public health. That work will require humility, candor, and a willingness to answer questions without treating the questioner as an enemy.
Anthony Fauci mistook bright lights for stature. They never made him larger. They only magnified his shadow until it fell across the noble calling he had been entrusted to serve.
Anthony fauci, Covid, Epidemiology, Intensive care, Medical authority, Misinformation, Osha, Public health, Supreme court, Opinion & analysis
