Francis Collins Caught Sending False and Misleading Information to Congress

Another prominent federal researcher breaks the law and lies to Congress about scientific evidence.

6 minute read

I can’t tell you exactly what is going on, whether politics has so blinded Francis Collins and other researchers to the law, or whether scientists now feel comfortable and relaxed about behaving like criminals and lying to Congress. But something is definitely wrong. When I was a Senate investigator 15 years back, researchers were careful to not lie to Congress.

But since both Tony Fauci and Scripps Kristian Andersen have been caught lying to Congress without facing consequences, this has apparently emboldened Francis Collins to also lie. Collins remains employed at the NIH so I contacted him at his government email, asking him to explain the false information filed with Congress.

Collins did not respond to explain himself.

Collins sent a letter to the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic filled with ticky-tacky complaints about their final report that concluded the National Institutes of Health, through Tony Fauci, funded gain-of-function virus research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology—the same lab the CIA believes likely started the pandemic.

Filing material misrepresentations with Congress is illegal and actionable under the law so I can’t explain why Collins sent this letter filled with falsehoods. Normally when Congress releases a report people named in that report just hide, hoping nobody notices they were named.

But I’m guessing Collins sees himself as clever and thinks he is creating a paper trail that he can cite as “proof” that Congress is wrong and he was right about several documented mistakes he made handling the pandemic.

Here's how Collins’ lawyers frame the intent of this ridiculous letter they sent to Congress:

We do so to highlight some of the Final Report’s material misrepresentations regarding the public health mitigation strategies employed during the pandemic and its mischaracterizations of Dr. Collins’ actions and motivations during the pandemic.

Sending this letter was ill-advised, because the letter itself contains “material misrepresentations regarding the public health mitigation strategies employed during the pandemic”—the very issue that Collins pretends to address. Tony Fauci actually had two referrals sent to the Justice Department because he got caught lying to Congress.

Here’s the paragraph filled with numerous misleading statements in Collins’ letter:

The Final Report also fly-specks studies to support its broad conclusion that face masks do not work at all to mitigate COVID-19 transmission. See, e.g., Final Report, p. 204. To support this conclusions [sic], the Select Subcommittee’s Final Report relies heavily on a review by the Cochrane Collection, published in January 2023. Despite the authors cautioning that “[t]he high risk of bias in the trials, variation in outcome measurement, and relatively low adherence with the interventions during the studies hampers drawing firm conclusions,” that is precisely what the Final Report does. The Editor-in-Chief of the Cochrane Library, Dr. Karla Sores- Weiser, has herself provided clarifications about that study that correct the types of misinterpretations in the Final Report.4 Specifically, Dr. Soares-Weiser noted that while “[m]any commentators have claimed that a recently-updated Cochrane Review shows that ‘masks don’t work’” such statement is “an inaccurate and misleading interpretation.”5 Dr. Sores-Weiser went so far as issuing an apology for the wording of the Report which was “open to misinterpretation.”6 The Final Report compounds this misinterpretation by ignoring the weight of evidence regarding masking. A systematic review of mask-related studies reveals that: (1) more studies determined that masks and mask mandates reduced infection, and (2) wearing masks generally reduced COVID-19 transmission.7

Several false and misleading statements stray from reality. Let’s examine.

COLLINS: ….the Cochrane Collection, published in January 2023. Despite the authors cautioning that “[t]he high risk of bias in the trials, variation in outcome measurement, and relatively low adherence with the interventions during the studies hampers drawing firm conclusions,” that is precisely what the Final Report does.

REALITY: The Cochrane Review examined whether masks stopped viruses and did conclude that it was difficult to draw “firm conclusions.” But Collins’ inverts the meaning of this finding and deceptively implies this means “go ahead use masks.” This is false and misleading.

For example, if a systematic review finds no “firm conclusions” that a drug stops heart attacks, that finding doesn’t mean “keep giving people the drug.” That finding means “stop giving the drug, because there’s no evidence that the drug stops heart attacks.”

Because every drug has unforeseen side effects, and if it’s not benefitting it could actually be harmful.

This is the same with masks. The Cochrane finding of no “firm conclusions” masks stop viruses means stop using masks to stop viruses. In fact, we know they can be harmful to child development and the CDC concluded years ago that wearing masks can cause harm in other ways.

COLLINS: The Editor-in-Chief of the Cochrane Library, Dr. Karla Sores- Weiser, has herself provided clarifications about that study that correct the types of misinterpretations in the Final Report.4 Specifically, Dr. Soares-Weiser noted that while “[m]any commentators have claimed that a recently-updated Cochrane Review shows that ‘masks don’t work’” such statement is “an inaccurate and misleading interpretation.”5 Dr. Sores-Weiser went so far as issuing an apology for the wording of the Report which was “open to misinterpretation.”6

REALITY: Again, more misleading statements about Cochrane.

Dr. Karla Soares-Weiser did issue a statement about the Cochrane mask review, but emails show she did this only because she was facing pressure from columnist Zeynep Tufekci, a film studies major now pretending to be a pandemic expert for the New York Times. Furthermore, Soares-Weiser’s statement was also misleading, and this pissed off scientists inside Cochrane.

The editor of the Cochrane mask review even sent an email to Cochrane officials pointing out that the review was scientifically sound and changes that Soares-Weiser suggested were only being considered because of media pressure from people like Tufekci. Here's his email:

Collins also failed to tell the Committee something else about the Cochrane mask review. Earlier this year, Soares-Weiser backtracked, issuing a second statement that confirmed there would be no changes to the mask review.

So why did Collins fail to give a complete and honest explanation of the Cochrane mask review? Why did he mislead the Committee? I can’t answer that. And Collins refuses to explain.

However, Cochrane’s lead author on the mask review sent a letter to the Committee, appraising them of several misleading statements in Collins’ letter and walking them through Collins’ falsehoods. “Therefore, I consider the statement on the public record by lawyers acting on behalf of Dr. Francis S. Collins regarding our Cochrane review is misleading and requires correction,” wrote Dr. Tom Jefferson to the Committee.

I sent Jefferson’s letter to both lawyers at Arnold and Porter —Catherine A. Brandon and John N. Nassikas—asking them about the false and misleading information they had filed with Congress. “As I'm sure you're both aware,” I wrote, “misleading statements are actionable under 1001.”

But neither lawyer responded.

It’s strange that Collins would send a letter to committee filled with lies. And it makes no sense because it doesn’t do anything but create more potential headaches if the Department of Justice decides to take action. But maybe scientists feel so confident after getting away with lies during the pandemic, they now see no other path in front of them that is not littered with other lies as well?

However, Trump officials may feel it’s time to put an end to these lies and start prosecuting people for misleading Congress.