You are the one who loves to bring up that I'm a 'scientist' (I am not, I am a being trained as one, but I have far more knowledge of science than you), I'm just pushing back on what you say. You are insecure since you love to bring up my credentials, I suppose it's to cover a lack of yours. Again, this isn't my opinion, it is the work and findings of the experts. Yet you think you and your pseudoscientific worldview knows better. Laughable.
What couldn't Fauci suss about the virus? If you're talking about the masks, there was uncertainty about asymptomatic transmission, and they didn't want a mask shortage for health workers. The quote you love about Fauci not recommending masks is from March, and then the CDC advised masks in April and Fauci followed their advice. The first case of corona was at the end of January in the US, so it didn't take him a 'year to suss the virus'. Dishonesty again.
You can't compare the time it takes for mechanistic understanding of the virus and the symptoms and creating a vaccine. First of all, the vaccine took 10 months. Secondly, it is much easier to sequence a genome of a virus and use it in an mRNA vaccine to trigger an immune response and test the efficacy of that vaccine than it is to test asymptomatic spread (especially during a pandemic). I talk more about asymptomatic transmission lower down. There, owned again.
So again, please tell us a scientific breakdown of the virus and why it is bad, why it may not work on new strains (not less effective, you said it may not work at all), and how the nature of mRNA vaccines doesn't allow for a quick alteration of the vaccine to accommodate new strains which may be vastly different (spoiler alert: they do)? I suppose you'll dodge this again.
Well, despite constantly attacking my academic record which I have proof of, you have yet to state yours. I'll assume you don't have one, which is honestly fine. But you really shouldn't be attacking someone who does have one, if you don't have your own.
I highlighted the changes in Fauci's decision up above, and how the vaccine was made quickly.
https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-fauci-outdated-video-masks-idUSKBN26T2TR
This corroborates what I said.
https://www.statnews.com/2020/04/04...n-coronavirus-masks-and-an-agency-gone-quiet/
Here shows the CDC's rationale about wanting to avoid a shortage of masks for healthcare workers, who have absolutely no choice but to be
very close to covid patients. Non-healthcare workers were at less risk, so there was less priority for the medical masks. They did however, say that cloth coverings were recommended. And it was soon after this briefing that the CDC were advocating for masks, because there were enough masks for healthcare workers then.
http://med.stanford.edu/content/dam/sm/id/documents/COVID/AsymptCOVID_TransmissionShip.pdf
This paper was published on 12th March, after Fauci made his 8th March comments. Even this study shows that it cannot be fully determined what the extent of asymptomatic spread is fully, but that there is supporting evidence that a significant number of transmissions are from asymptomatic people. So things were very uncertain even at March time.
https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/covid-19/latest-evidence/transmission
Even these studies, with the earliest being June 2020 show uncertainty, but supporting evidence of asymptomatic transmission. It is very, very difficult to test for this, but a few of the studies show up to a 28% rate of asymptomatic infection in children. That is not a trivial number. And the CDC and Fauci were advocating for masks before any of these studies came out.
Also, since you seem to think Fauci had an agenda to make things harder for Trump, why don't you address how Trump consistently downplayed the virus, told people to go out, was very outspoken in his anti-mask stance, talked about putting lysol (detol) in the bloodstream, fired the pandemic response team in 2018?
There.