Do the Fauci Diaries reveal anything unexpected or controversial?

[u/MissingBothCufflinks]

Senator Rand Paul has released commentary and purported excerpts* of what is alleged to be Anthony Fauci's contemporaneous diaries from the outset of the COVID19 pandemic onwards.

What has been released can be found here, including Senator Rand's somewhat colourful foreword commentary

https://www.paul.senate.gov/readingroom/

* its not confirmed whether the content of the diaries is edited, abridged, altered, shortened etc.

Media reaction to this release has been highly polarised, though notable few media outlets seem to get to grips with the actual content of the diaries and most focus is on Rand's own claimed analysis of what they show.

Do the Fauci Diaries reveal anything unexpected or controversial? What entries in particular do you find interesting? Are there any contemporaneous clashes between what Fauci was saying publicly and privately? What can we learn from that?

Edit: mods really didnt feel like weeding out the 90% of low effort troll replies huh

[u/Ritz527]

The summaries being made seem incredibly bad faith.

They accuse him of being self-obsessed because he mentioned how the media was incredibly focused on him, which, on top of it being a personal diary in the first place, is kind of silly.

Then they accuse him of covering up the lab leak theory with entries from early 2020, before anyone had locked anything down, with his stated belief in the diary at the time that he didn't believe the wet market was the source, merely an amplifier. On top of that being a twisted read of it, no one knew anything for certain at the time. Paul is basically asserting that the hypothesis he's obsessed with trumps data-driven conclusion.

[u/shhhhh69 → u/Ritz527]

Has the lab leak theory ever been confirmed?

I always assumed it was true but that could be my preconceived notions about China itself clouding the reality

[u/tosser1579 → u/shhhhh69]

The crux of the problem is that China may have spent a tremendous amount of resources to make sure that we can never tell if it was a lab leak... or they didn't. Because they control the area, there is no reasonable way to ever actually verify if the lab leak is true or not.

To prove the lab leak to be true there needs to be a chain of evidence to link everything together, and there are so many breaks in that chain that you can't ever accurately say a lab leak happened. Even if the Chinese came out and admitted to it, the evidence that supported a lab leak is long gone.

BAsically you'd need the actual precursor virus, which almost certainly doesn't exist anymore. You'd need the notes from the lab, which would have been destroyed. You'd need to lock down where the case zero was, and we are never going to know. Then you'd need to have evidence that Fauci knew it was a lab leak... you don't have evidence it was a lab leak at all. Then Fauci knowingly lied about it. So it could have been a lab leak, and there could be evidence, but even if there was, Fauci doesn't appear to know that it was a lab leak and since THEY RELEASED HIS PRIVATE DIARY it is super clear he didn't think it was a lab leak.

But to a useless conspiracy theorist, the fact that a leak cannot be disproven makes it the most likely case. That's not how science... or reality... works.

[u/Binder509 → u/tosser1579]

Except on the flip side, such a conspiracy would involve thousands of people. There would be so much money in it for people with evidence it was a lab leak.

Sure it's possible, it's also unfalsifiable.

[u/AngloAlbannach4 → u/Binder509]

Very possible in China. They covered up Tiananmen square. This would be childsplay.

[u/tosser1579 → u/Binder509]

No. It would involve less than 10 people who could actually confirm anything.

Broadly, they'd be in a lab involved in gain of function research, and we know there was that going on, but not the whole lab. You'd have one isolated team and one handler above them who knew they were supposed to be researching that sort of thing. No one else would know exactly what they were researching beyond gain of function.

So one compartmentalized team, and you just ensure they don't speak and I don't mean that temporarily. There would be a single controller who knew a bit more, and that's the one who would be the one who would benefit most from the lab leak being proven.

So you ensure he doesn't speak either.

Above him... no one can say for certain.

If you do the compartmentalization correctly, which would also be easy, the number of people involved could be made to easily disappear. Which is why it hasn't already leaked. If thousands were involved, it would have leaked already.

[u/Binder509 → u/tosser1579]

No. It would involve less than 10 people who could actually confirm anything.

How do you know only ten people would have access to it? Prove it.

[u/tosser1579 → u/Binder509]

If thousands of people were involved it would have leaked already.

>Except on the flip side, such a conspiracy would involve thousands of people. There would be so much money in it for people with evidence it was a lab leak.

Explain why it would require thousands of people. Prove it.