[peyton]

He’s a former government official who openly changes his messaging based on polling data, not scientific evidence. It’s not unreasonable to discount his public statements.

> “When polls said only about half of all Americans would take a vaccine, I was saying herd immunity would take 70 to 75 percent,” Dr. Fauci said. “Then, when newer surveys said 60 percent or more would take it, I thought, ‘I can nudge this up a bit,’ so I went to 80, 85.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/24/health/herd-immunity-covi...

[cmh89]

>He’s a former government official who openly changes his messaging based on polling data, not scientific evidence. It’s not unreasonable to discount his public statements.

What nonsense. OP and you either have actual useful information that contradicts what OP specifically called out as inaccurate or you don;t.

You don't which is why you fixate on something else.

[monkeydreams]

Which is what public officials do because perfect is the enemy of good, but better is still better.

Ideally he probably wanted 100% compliance. And if he could get 70% rather than 60%, so much the better.

[ftxbro]

Maybe he had the same attitude on covid origins. The origin doesn't matter for mitigating the pandemic and it's better for NIH and international relations if it comes from only a bat and not any lab. This is what public officials do because perfect is the enemy of good. Ideally he probably wanted 100% truth but if he could get 70% truth and everyone is on the same page, so much the better.