During today's House Select Committee on the Coronavirus hearing, the House GOP Majority's attorney questioned Dr. Anthony Fauci about a range of COVID-19 policies and decisions.
Fuel your success with Forbes. Gain unlimited access to premium journalism, including breaking news, groundbreaking in-depth reported stories, daily digests and more. Plus, members get a front-row seat at members-only events with leading thinkers and doers, access to premium video that can help you get ahead, an ad-light experience, early access to select products including NFT drops and more:
https://account.forbes.com/membership/?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=display&utm_campaign=growth_non-sub_paid_subscribe_ytdescript
Stay Connected
Forbes on Facebook: http://fb.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Instagram: http://instagram.com/forbes
More From Forbes: http://forbes.com
Fuel your success with Forbes. Gain unlimited access to premium journalism, including breaking news, groundbreaking in-depth reported stories, daily digests and more. Plus, members get a front-row seat at members-only events with leading thinkers and doers, access to premium video that can help you get ahead, an ad-light experience, early access to select products including NFT drops and more:
https://account.forbes.com/membership/?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=display&utm_campaign=growth_non-sub_paid_subscribe_ytdescript
Stay Connected
Forbes on Facebook: http://fb.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Instagram: http://instagram.com/forbes
More From Forbes: http://forbes.com
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00Mind throughout the entire process. All right, I yield back. I
00:04Now recognize the majority staff for no longer than 30 minutes of questions
00:12Dr. Fauci, it's good to see you again. I want to ask a couple questions about
00:16Some of the members questions and then get into some follow-ups
00:20the issue of the
00:22CIA trip was brought up that was brought to us by a whistleblower. That was not an allegation made by the committee
00:27It was an allegation made by the whistleblower
00:29You testified at a transcribed interview back in early January. Do you recall me asking you about that allegation?
00:37About the going to the CIA. Yes
00:40And do you recall and you denied it then as well and you denied it here today?
00:45Do you recall the subcommittee publishing that you denied it? I
00:51Don't recall
00:52We did. Yeah, okay. We put it out in a press release afterwards that you denied the whistleblowers allegation
00:58And then today during the course of the last couple hours
01:01Have any members on the majority side of the dais asked you about a trip to the CIA? Yeah
01:07They have yeah, I'm sorry Mitch. I'm not here. So
01:11Miss I have a point of order. Mr. Chairman
01:17What's the gentleman's point of order I have have an inquiry about
01:21Whether or not I'm hearing things whether or not you just yielded 30 minutes of committee time
01:27to staff
01:30That is correct both sides and
01:34The question that the gentleman just raised was the question that I raised so apparently he was not listening when I was questioning
01:41Dr. Fauci. Thank you for your point of order. You may continue
01:45What I asked was we asked you about this in a transcribed interview
01:50You testified that you did not go to the CIA
01:52We published that you refuted that allegation and then today
01:56No members of the Republican side of the dais have asked you that question. Is that accurate? Thank you
02:03You've been asked a number of times about
02:06your former senior advisor, dr. Moran's
02:10And have said and I want to make sure I characterize it correctly because it goes a little back and forth
02:16That you didn't conduct official business over a over a personal email with dr. Moran's has dr
02:22Moran's emailed your personal email before on non-official purposes
02:29As I mentioned we wrote
02:31Scientific papers together. So he very well may have used that course. That's the email I use
02:37when I write a scientific paper, right and that's because NIAID policy allows you to write you on
02:45Semi-official time right papers, but you just have to put a disclaimer that this is not the no
02:50In other words, if you're doing something as official business, you shouldn't use your emails that are the official business
02:56So in order to be compliant with the regulations, you would use a personal email. I appreciate it
03:03I want to ask about some of the public health policies enacted during the pandemic
03:09Dr. Francis Collins the former NIH director
03:12Recently said in an interview and I'm quoting
03:16You attach an infinite value to stopping the disease and saving a life
03:20You attach a zero value to whether this actually totally disrupts people's lives
03:25Ruins the economy and has kept many kids out of school in a way that they never quite recovered
03:31Understanding the COVID task force had a lot of voices at the table
03:34Is that an accurate description of the public health advisors and then you could fit in other advisors along the way?
03:40We are you know Mitch what I believe that dr. Collins was saying was that
03:47We give a advice based on pure public health issues. It's very very clear now
03:53retrospectively looking at the potential
03:56collateral
03:57Negative effects of things like mandating it would be important for us now
04:03Since the purpose of I believe why we're here is to how we can do better next time
04:09Is to consider the balance I think things that we did in the beginning
04:15were in the context of
04:18horrible situation of four to five thousand deaths per day
04:21But that doesn't mean that you don't go back and look and say did everything we do at that point and the duration
04:28For which we did it was that appropriate and do we need to re-examine it? I believe that's what dr
04:34Collins was referring to and I agree with him on that and you got to my next question that we are here trying to
04:40Figure out how to do better next time lose your lives next time
04:45Would that be a better thought process going forward of thinking about the possible unintended consequences of public health measures? Absolutely
04:54and
04:56You've heard from both sides of the dais today first weeks months novel virus. Nobody knew what was going on
05:02Called for some drastic measures
05:06Understanding or once there was a better understanding of who the most affected demographics were
05:12Do you think it would be important to more narrowly track craft public health measures to?
05:18specifically favor those demographics
05:22The answer is yes, but you have to be careful because if you have a
05:28Certain group that is being predominantly
05:32Afflicted if you're really really clear that
05:36Another group is really quite protected then you should fashion it demographically related
05:42but what often happens with outbreaks is that they're a moving target and
05:47You only hear about other vulnerables as you get further into the outbreak
05:52So the answer to your question is you're partially correct that you need to do that
05:57but you've got to be careful when you're dealing with a moving target and
06:01We can appreciate that didn't you've been asked a little bit again about the theories of natural immunity and herd immunity
06:08Those are both real scientific theories and infectious disease. Is that correct? Yes and
06:13between a
06:15Infection acquired immunity and vaccinated acquired immunity did the United States hit herd immunity?
06:21The answer is no
06:23And I've written a paper on that is that when you're dealing and just let me take 30 seconds
06:29I don't want to run out the clock on you
06:31But I think it's important to make this point when you talk about herd immunity
06:36It's predicated on two principles that you're dealing with a pathogen. That's not changing and number two that when you either get
06:45infected or
06:46Vaccinated the duration of the immunity is measured in decades
06:50If not a lifetime so that if you have a pathogen that stays the same like measles doesn't change
06:57So I was infected with meagles measles when I was a child
07:01It's the same measles that's infecting people in certain countries in the developing world
07:06number two when you get either infected or
07:10vaccinated with measles you have
07:13Immunity that's durable
07:15Minimally in decades and possibly for life
07:18so if you get the same pathogen and you get a large percentage of the people who have either been infected or
07:26Vaccinated then you have herd immunity. We did not ever have that with kovat
07:33And you've also been asked a number of times about the vaccine and vaccine mandates
07:37Were you the one that recommended to the president to mandate vaccines for certain individuals? No, do you know who did?
07:44no, it was it was more of a
07:47It was a combination of a group and just saying that you know certain
07:52Agencies like the Labor Department or what-have-you would feel that this would to be done
07:57But it was not like I one day said hey, we should mandate vaccines that did not happen
08:03And I want to echo the comments of the chairman that we agreed the vaccine saved hundreds of thousands of lives
08:09And we talked about this a little bit in January and I think you touched on it a little bit today
08:14could
08:15issuing these mandates and removing the
08:19notion of informed consent from some
08:21Certain sects of the citizenry lead to vaccine hesitancy
08:26Yeah, I mentioned this and I believe in the TI that as a matter of fact
08:32That's something that I think we need to go back now when we do and and after the event
08:38Evaluation about whether or not given the psyche of the country and the pushback that you get from those types of things
08:46We need to re-evaluate
08:47the cost-benefit ratio of those types of things
08:52And then I won't belabor the point, but we talked about the six-foot distance an awful lot today
08:58Do you recall if it was ever suggested to be ten feet?
09:01You know, I don't recall Mitch if it was ever suggested
09:04It was ten feet, but I when I made my explanation of what it was
09:08I was saying that there was no trial that looked at ten versus six versus three versus not even worrying about it at all
09:16And you said today that there were discussions at the White House about the six-foot rule. You don't recall if it was
09:22Discussions about whether or not it should be three or should be ten or you know, I I don't recall Mitch
09:29What the exact discussion was but as I've said in response to multiple questions
09:34What we had it was it came the CDC was said that on on the basis of their evaluation
09:40Which was based on the droplet approach that six foot would be to go and since there was no
09:47Clinical trials going one way or the other that's why it was accepted by the group
09:52And then it hasn't been a large topic today and we've talked about kind of
09:58Again, the the many unknowns in early 2020 schools were closed through the semester
10:03Some schools reopened in the in the for the fall semester. Some remained closed going through into 2021
10:10Looking back were there are there current academic ramifications of remote schooling or kids not being in school?
10:18I think there have been a number of stuff not I think I know
10:21That there have been a number of studies to show that there are lasting effects at least up to this point
10:28I mean they tend to attenuate over time
10:30But there have been substantial negative effects on learning and on children when you keep them out of school for a prolonged period of time
10:39have
10:40Have you seen any studies suggesting physical health ramifications? I haven't seen physical health ramifications
10:48mental health
10:49I
10:50Believe that there are some that show psychological issues that relate to keeping kids out of the environment of the social environment of the school
11:00I'm and I apologize for bouncing around. We don't have 14 hours with you today. I've got 30 minutes. So I'm gonna
11:06Sorry about that. I'm gonna move quickly
11:11Again across the dais both sides the aisle a lot of questions on the origins of kovat and finding out the origins and
11:17How that could better lead to both protecting against spillover and wildlife trade, but also increased biosafety standards
11:25As you sit here today, is it possible that kovat 19 was the result of a laboratory related accident?
11:30Oh, absolutely. And I keep like I mentioned multiple times. I keep an open mind
11:35I feel based on the data that I have seen that the more likely not definitive
11:41But the more likely explanation is a natural spillover from an animal reservoir
11:46but since there has not been definitive proof one way or the other we have to keep an open mind that it could be either and
11:53I'm based on that answer. I think is the hypothesis that kovat 19 accidentally leaked from a lab a conspiracy theory
12:01No, I mentioned that several times conceptually the concept of it is not a conspiracy theory
12:08We've talked a little bit about the proximal origin of SARS CoV-2 the paper authored by dr. Anderson
12:14It came to two primary conclusions and I'm quoting
12:18our analysis clearly show that SARS CoV-2 is not a laboratory construct or a purposefully manipulated virus and
12:25We do not believe that any type of laboratory based scenario is plausible
12:30Do you disagree with those conclusions? I think Mitch if I'm not mistaken, I don't have the paper in front of me
12:35I think they also said the possibility of if you
12:40Passaged it and you could have done that and they and that and if you passage it it's in a lab
12:45So it is I mean that could be and they they dispelled that at the end with the we do not believe that any type
12:52Of laboratory based scenario is plausible
12:55So I'm just I'll ask again as a laboratory based scenario plausible
13:00Well, I mean again, I'm not I don't want to speak for what they meant in that paper
13:05But I have said multiple times I keep an open mind that it could be either a laboratory leak
13:10or it could be what I think the data is leaning towards mostly which is a
13:16natural occurrence from an animal reservoir and
13:20This email was brought up to on April 16th 2020. Dr
13:24Collins wrote to you and said wondering if there's something NIH can do to help put down this very
13:29Destructive conspiracy referencing the lab leak
13:32I hope the nature medicine article on the genomic sequence of SARS Co V2 would settle this but probably didn't get much visibility
13:39Anything more we can do the next day
13:42You were at a White House press conference and cited proximal origin and said that proximal origin established that kovat
13:4919 quote is totally consistent with a jump of a species right from an animal to human
13:55Did anyone tell you to cite proximal origin from the White House podium? No, it was in response
13:59I believe to a question that might have been asked by a reporter, but I wasn't
14:04Stimulated to say that at all. I was responding to a question at that time back in April of 2020
14:11Was it also your belief that a lab leak was possible?
14:14Yeah, I've always had an open mind about it. And then I want to correct the record again a little bit on
14:22The
14:23Drafting and publication of the proximal origin paper. Did dr. Anderson send you drafts to review?
14:29He sent drafts
14:31But I'm gonna jump ahead of you if I might dribble around I did not edit it
14:36That was mentioned by a few of the it was congressman
14:39I did not edit the paper and I appreciate that. I just wanted to get on the record
14:44I
14:46Want to talk about dr
14:48Moran's and what you wrote in your opening testimony in some of the answers that you gave today and
14:53Just for clarity you were in addition to being unaware of his use of personal email and potentially intentionally deleting federal records
15:02Were you also unaware of his actions to assist? Dr. Daszak and EcoHealth? I
15:07Am I was aware of his friendship?
15:10I was not aware of his attempts to assist him to respond to an NIH inquiry
15:17So not aware of the editing of press releases or editing of letters. I was not on
15:24November 11th 2021. Dr. Moran's wrote in an email to dr
15:28Daszak that he attempted to discuss the EcoHealth grant with you and
15:32You quote got upset and told him to have no more communications with Peter. Why did you tell dr?
15:39Moran's to no longer communicate with dr. Daszak. I think it's inappropriate
15:43To do what he did. I mean and your committee has called him out very
15:48Definitively about that and it was inappropriate to do that. This is back in 2021. What did you know about?
15:55What he was doing then?
15:58I didn't know exactly what he was doing
16:00But I don't think it's inappropriate for people to be communicating and helping a grantee in a response
16:05I didn't know exactly what he was doing, but I didn't think it was appropriate
16:09When did you you testified to Chairman Griffith or excuse me, Chairman Comer
16:16That you knew about the compliance issues later on with EcoHealth. When did you first become aware?
16:22I became aware during briefings by my staff in preparation for congressional hearings
16:28Well after the fact where the compliance issues actually happened
16:33I mean, I didn't know as I've mentioned to you in the TI
16:36Bitch, I didn't even know the grant existed before the outbreak and then finally when there was this issue about
16:44Congressional hearings I needed to know what is this grant? What are we doing with it? And are there any issues?
16:50That's when they said there was a compliance problem of the fourth year versus the fifth year
16:56progress report
16:57Some of the other emails from dr. Moran's
16:59Some of the other emails from dr. Moran's I just want to read into the record and ask you if his recollection is accurate on
17:06April 27th 2020 dr. Moran's wrote I am sure privately
17:10He would love to see Peter and EcoHealth fully restored
17:13Although he did once make the comment to me that Peter had screwed himself with the late report
17:18I already told him that all that crap wasn't true. The late report was true. Despite what dr. Moran said on
17:24April 21st 2021 dr. Moran's wrote that he was sure you would do anything
17:29You could to restore the funds to EcoHealth on June 5th 2021
17:34Dr. Moran's wrote that you were working behind the scenes to undo the damage to EcoHealth on October 21st
17:402021 dr. Moran's wrote Peter. I had my regular meeting with Tony this morning
17:45He immediately inquired about you and several times asked how you were doing
17:49He used a lot of colorful language about the situation with attacks on EcoHealth on October 25th 2021
17:56Dr. Moran's wrote that you were trying to protect EcoHealth on March 22nd 2021. Dr. Moran's wrote
18:03The most important is within NIH to get the decision reversed and the grant refunded
18:08I believe Tony would like to do this and on February 24th
18:132022 dr. Moran's wrote it will be a small consolation to hear the following
18:17But in my face-to-face meeting with Tony this morning, he once again brought up as he usually does your plight Peter
18:24Did you ever have any discussions with dr. Moran's about protecting EcoHealth or helping restore funding not at all
18:30I don't know what I to be honest with the mission. I just don't know what dr
18:34Moran's is talking about with that. Maybe he's trying to win as he said cheer up
18:40He said that in front of this committee cheer up. Dr. Dasik
18:43But to say that I'm getting involved in trying to help him or protect him not so
18:49Did you ever have any conversations with dr. Moran's about what dr. Dasik was facing or about the termination of the grant
18:57You know, I may he may have mentioned to me something like dr. Dasik is going through a terrible times
19:04But I don't recall it is conceivable that he would have mentioned that to me because as he mentioned to you that dr
19:11Dasik and he are very good friends. So it would not be surprising if sometime he had mentioned to me boy dr
19:17Dasik's going through some really tough times fine. That doesn't mean that I say you should help him
19:22No, absolutely doesn't so that's why we want to ask the questions and get get get the answers
19:28During your transcribed interview with us
19:31You were asked about whether or not dr. Dasik had a conflict of interest in reviewing the origins of kovat 19 and you testified
19:37You know, I hesitate to speculate about someone else should what someone else should do
19:42The only people that I am involved with is my own staff who we've mentioned many times in this discussion
19:47Who don't have a conflict of interest with the benefit of hindsight and the work of this committee?
19:53Do you believe dr. Moran's had a conflict of interest regarding eco health? Well from what we know now
19:58he definitely had a conflict because he was
20:01Communicating with a grantee of helping him in response to an NIH issue
20:07Which is a conflict of interest I did not know that at the time when I made your statement and I appreciate that it's yeah
20:16Sticking with eco health
20:18in April 2020 NIH terminated and then subsequently
20:23Reinstated and then suspended the eco health grant that had the Wuhan Institute as a sub grantee. Do you recall that decision?
20:30Yes, were you involved at all in that decision? No
20:33You previously testified to house energy and commerce that you were in essence told to cancel the grant do you recall who told you
20:41We got it from a number of now retrospectively
20:45We found out how it was it was the White House told the department to tell the NIH to cancel the grant
20:53Did you agree with the cancellation
20:56What
20:58Is that do we need to listen to that? Okay, he was he was escorted out. Yeah. Okay good
21:04I'm sorry. Repeat the question. Did you agree with the cancellation?
21:08You know, I it wasn't a question of agreeing or disagreeing. It was like can we really do that?
21:13I don't think that you can do that. And as it turned out I was right
21:18Because the General Counsel of HHS said by the way, you can't do that
21:23You've got to restore the grant and that's why they restored it and then suspended it pending the compliance review exactly
21:31Not to keep reading. Dr. Moran's emails, but on June 24th 2020. Dr. Moran's wrote an email
21:38He referencing you made some additional comments to the effect that this came from the White House and he was totally opposed to it
21:46You weren't totally opposed to it
21:48Well, see that's his you know, he's doing a lot of interpretation Mitch his interpretation I was totally opposed to it
21:55It was more of can we really legally do that? And the answer turned out I was right. No, you can't
22:02Do you recall the did the department ask?
22:06You first or dr. Collins first to turn I think it went directly to building 10
22:10I see me building one the directors. Is that the NIH directors? Yes. Yeah
22:15I think it went from the department to NIH to us. Okay
22:21Were you priority retirement in December of 2022? Were you involved in any of the compliance actions NIH took against EcoHealth? I
22:28Don't believe so. I think the actual and again, I'm a little unclear about the time
22:34but I think most of the disciplinary actions actually occurred after I left if I'm not mistaken the
22:40Yes, the actual suspension and debarment occurred after you left
22:44But there were a number of letters requesting lab notebooks or further information. Yeah
22:50What happened Mitch and it's important to point this out once it was clear that there was compliance issues
22:59While I was still there
23:01We were told that NIAID
23:03Stay out of it
23:05Compliance is going to be handled by building one ie the NIH director and Mike Lauer
23:11So the compliance was said don't touch it. Don't go near it. Just we'll take care of it and
23:17you just brought this up since the
23:21Original termination then
23:23suspension and I each found numerous major violations of grant policies has since debarred the Wuhan Institute of urology and
23:30Suspended and proposed for debarment both EcoHealth as an institution and dr. Daszak individually. Are you aware of those? Yes, I am
23:39During previous TI's and hearings when asked if they supported every one of these actions and supported the suspension and debarment
23:47Both dr. Collins and dr. Tabak said yes sitting here today. Do you support the suspension and debarment of EcoHealth? Yes, I
23:56Want to move on to the kind of like known unknowns of kovat origins to quote, dr
24:04Lipkin's paper from early 2020
24:06on October 20th 2021. Dr. Tabak sent a letter to
24:12Then ranking member. Mr. Comer that said the bat
24:16Coronaviruses studied under the EcoHealth Alliance grant could not have been the source of SARS CoV 2 and the kovat 19 pandemic
24:23You've testified similarly both back in January and today
24:27Some of the things that I believe chairman Griffith brought up was just kind of that
24:33Statement results on some things rests on some things that we just can't know
24:39In your experience, dr. Fauci do researchers publish every virus that they sequence
24:47No, I mean I
24:49Think researchers don't always publish every single thing they do. Do they routinely publish every experiment that they conduct?
24:59I'm sure there are people who don't
25:02Publish every single experiment that they do and then is there a lag time between the sampling the analysis and the publication?
25:12Yeah, I mean publications often take months before they come out is it
25:18Possible if not plausible that EcoHealth and the Wuhan Institute of Virology have samples from between
25:242020 when they originally published a paper or excuse me 2015
25:28When they originally published a paper with all of their samples and now that are unpublished
25:34Sure, it's possible. But Mitch I'm I might just throw in there
25:40You can't get away from the fact that the viruses that were studied that we
25:46That the NIH gave them a grant to study
25:50Don't pull back on the fact that no matter what you did with those viruses. They were phylogenetically so different
25:57They could not possibly be the precursor of SARS-CoV-2 and and I agree with that
26:02I guess my only point is that you don't know all the viruses they were working with
26:08Yeah, and let's make that clear because the Griffith
26:12Congressman Griffith asked it and I answered you quite honestly
26:15That none of us can know everything that's going on in China or in Wuhan or what-have-you
26:23and that's the reason why I
26:25Say today and I've said at the TI I keep an open mind as to what the origin is
26:32The last thing last topic I want to touch on is gain of function. We touched on in January
26:37You touched on a little bit today. I know
26:40The
26:41Pandemic has resulted as I'm sure you're aware with a rather large debate and including with the NSA BB updating their
26:48Dangerous research policies surrounding gain-of-function p3 co and dual-use research of concern
26:55at the
26:56prior to October of 2021 the NIH website listed gain-of-function as a type of research that
27:03Modifies a biological agent so that it confers new or enhanced activity to that agent
27:08and the p3 co framework the u.s.
27:12Government uses to further regulate a sub sub part of that research. That is more dangerous
27:19Specifically that could cause widespread and uncontrolled death or disease in humans
27:25Putting aside what's what's regulatory I agree with you the p3 co definition is regulatory
27:31Are there types of research that could fall under the broad definition, but not the p3 co definition?
27:37Well, I believe members on the minority side I've mentioned that
27:42influenza is a
27:44Gain of function to a virus to make it grow better in eggs
27:48making an E. Coli
27:51Manufacture insulin is telling the E. Coli to do something. It wasn't able to do before by mutations. Of course, that's the case
27:59So in kind of the Venn diagram of this research something could fall under
28:04Gain-of-function without falling under further regulation. I
28:10Know where you're going and you're not going to get there, but go ahead
28:15According to EcoHealth year five progress report
28:18They facilitated an experiment in Wuhan that had seven mice infected with Wuhan Institute of Virology one is the backbone five survived
28:26Then eight mice were infected with a chimera of with one and the spike from another virus and two survived
28:33In EcoHealth's own words, these results suggest that the pathogenicity of that full-length chimera is higher than others
28:43You're asked today and
28:46It was read back to you a little bit, but on May 16th
28:49Just a few weeks ago. Miss Lesko asked. Dr.
28:52Tabak did NIH fund gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology through EcoHealth and
28:58Dr. Tabak answered if you're speaking about the generic term, yes, we did right on May 11th
29:04you were asked a similar question and you answered the NIH has not ever and does not now fund gain-of-function research at the
29:11Wuhan Institute of Virology
29:16I'm gonna ask it and you can answer it
29:18How you how you want to answer it according to the broad definition of gain-of-function research and the definition. Dr
29:24Tabak was testifying pursuant to
29:27Did NIAID fund gain-of-function research via EcoHealth in Wuhan
29:31the broad the broad definition of gain-of-function in my mind is not applicable here and does nothing but
29:39confuse the situation and that is the reason why
29:44after three years of deliberation
29:47by the bodies including the NSA BB as well as the National Academies
29:52It was decided to make an operative and regulatory definition
29:57If you harken back to the original broad definition
30:02It does nothing but confuse people and that's the why every time I have mentioned gain-of-function
30:08at the Senate hearing with Senator Paul and the TI and
30:13Today the definition that I use is not my personal definition. It's a codified
30:20Regulatory and operative definition made by a body that has nothing to do with me
30:26Thank you. Mr. Chairman. I yield back. I
30:30Now recognize the minority staff for not longer than 30 minutes
30:35Dr. Fauci nice to see you. We've covered many different topics today
30:40We just want to make sure that you have the opportunity to provide your full perspective on any and all of them
30:45Is there anything you'd like to add?
30:48Clarify or say about any of the topics we've discussed here today
30:58We've covered just about everything but if you come up with
31:03Something you want to ask me I'd be happy to try to fill it in but I think we've been rather
31:08Rather extensive today. I think that's great. And I think we agree. And so with that we'll yield back the remainder of our time
31:15I
31:17Would like to yield to the ranking member Ruiz for a closing statement if he would like one
31:22Dr. Fauci, I'd like to thank you for your testimony today
31:25And I would like to thank you for your decades of service to our nation