Eight years prior to the onset of COVID-19, a journalist warned that precarious viral research could lead to potential catastrophe, affecting the reputation of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). In response, Anthony Fauci expressed his frustration in an email to an aide, instructing them to delete the conversation completely, as uncovered by documents obtained by the Daily Caller News Foundation.
These documents contribute to a growing body of evidence suggesting that Fauci destroyed public records, contradicting his previous assertions under oath that he had not. It’s important to note that deleting government records breaches federal law.
Fauci has yet to reply to a request for comments.
In 2011, the emergence of gain-of-function research — which involves manipulating viruses to make them more infectious or lethal — sparked significant controversy. Funded by Fauci’s NIH, Dutch virologist Ron Fouchier created a strain of bird flu capable of airborne transmission, which he referred to as “probably one of the most dangerous viruses you can make,” and it had a projected 50% fatality rate.
Fauci and New York Times science journalist Phil Boffey engaged in a back-and-forth in the opinion sections about this research. Fauci, in a December 2011 editorial for the Washington Post, maintained that such manmade pandemic viruses represented a “risk worth taking,” suggesting they could assist drug manufacturers and public health officials in preparing for potential outbreaks in nature. The op-ed was co-authored by NIH Director Francis Collins and Gary Nabel from the NIH’s Vaccine Research Center.
In January 2012, the New York Times published an op-ed, seemingly written by Boffey, which raised alarms about what he termed an “engineered doomsday” scenario that could result in the deaths of “hundreds of millions.” The recently revealed emails identified the anonymous author of this op-ed for the first time.
Boffey expressed concern about the catastrophic consequences if the virus were to escape, referencing the title of Fauci’s earlier piece.
He followed this with another piece in March 2012, questioning the research with an op-ed titled “The Truth About the Doomsday Virus?” Amid increasing media scrutiny, Fouchier had started to retract his earlier claims on the virus’s lethality. Fauci, on the other hand, advocated for publishing the details of the Fouchier experiment, despite biosecurity experts warning that this information could be seized by bioterrorists.
Indicating his skepticism, Boffey noted that experts had pointed out the airborne virus remained as lethal as the natural variant, as per Fouchier’s original claims.
A particular line troubled Fauci: “Now, this country’s National Institutes of Health, which financed the research and has its own reputation on the line, is asking the [NSABB] to reconsider its call to redact details before publication.”
Fauci expressed to Collins in a March 4, 2012 email, “Phil Boffey is really off base here,” remarking that Boffey was acting “like a mischievous guy.”
In a more candid correspondence the following morning, Fauci reflected, “Clearly, people are getting to Phil Boffey and he is swallowing it.”
Fauci was staunchly against a recommendation from NIH’s biosecurity advisers that called for not publishing sensitive details about Fouchier’s work. He asserted that failure to revise that recommendation would signify a significant issue for influenza research.
In what appeared to be an infringement of federal record-keeping laws, Fauci requested, “Please delete this e-mail and then delete from the deleted file.”
Kentucky Senator Rand Paul pointed out two other occasions from 2020 indicating Fauci’s attempts to destroy public records, in contradiction to his later testimony in 2024 claiming he had not done so.
Fauci ultimately managed to persuade NIH’s biosecurity advisers to allow the full publication of the Fouchier experiment.
Neither Boffey nor Fouchier has responded to requests for comments.
Fouchier And COVID’s Origins
When the COVID-19 pandemic began, Fouchier collaborated with Fauci and other virologists to downplay the theory that the virus had originated in a lab. He reportedly helped draft a crucial argument in “The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2,” a paper that dismissed the lab leak theory. Fauci often referred to this paper and its authors over the years without disclosing his behind-the-scenes collaboration with them.
However, the authors of the paper privately considered Fouchier as “unbelievably conflicted,” with one stating that he would not want it to be perceived as a “gain-of-function escape.”
Fouchier expressed reluctance to publicly address the lab leak possibility in the “Proximal Origin” paper, citing concerns about potential backlash for science relating to biosafety discussions.
He suggested that the manuscript would be stronger if it concentrated on the most likely scenarios instead of focusing on intentional or accidental release, which could spark unnecessary debates about safety that may hinder future virus research and diagnostic efforts.
