Take a photo of a barcode or cover
63 reviews for:
The Real Anthony Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health
Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
3.93 AVERAGE
63 reviews for:
The Real Anthony Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health
Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
3.93 AVERAGE
I did not finish because RFK is not a scientist and knows nothing. Not even worth writing a book. He should resign and spend the rest of his life in a remote cabin never speaking to anyone else
slow-paced
challenging
dark
informative
slow-paced
The first third or so of this book is eye opening and almost hard to read with Mr Kennedy exposing Dr. Fauci's hypocrisy at almost every turn from the good Doctor admitting that masks only make people feel better (2) to as a Canadian Doctor and vaccine researcher said, "the incessant lies and propaganda will have successfully instilled in the masses that the only hope for staying alive is via injection, pill-popping, so in sum, no natural immunity (7). It was disturbing to read about how doctors and scientists were shut down if they disagreed with Fauci and relegated to the tin foil hat crazies - only those who fell in line with Fauci got the money they needed for their research. It was disheartening to read that there were other possible solutions to the covid outbreak but Fauci quickly snuffed those out in favor of the vaccines/medicine that he had invested taxpayer money in & that personally benefited him (as someone observed to Mr. Kennedy, "Science costs money and he who dispenses the money can control the science" 220). It was disheartening to read how easily journalists/media fell into line about not questioning anything.
Having said that, once the book traversed into the outbreak of HIV/AIDS and Dr. Fauci, it almost felt like a hit piece with the author cherrypicking sources/quotes/data from the late 80s and early 90's to enforce his opinion with with no current science to help his case. After that, the book rambled on about Bill Gates/Dr Fauci using Africa as their testing ground in some kind of modern day medical colonization.
So, first third of the book - interesting, insightful and disheartening, middle third hit piece with cherrypicked evidence and last third the theory (might I say conspiracy theory ?) that big pharma is using poorer nations as their testing grounds....left the reader with a foul taste in their mouths for many reasons.
However, the theme of the book was stated in the introduction when Mr. Kennedy quoted Fauci as saying, "Attacks on me, quite frankly are attacks on science," to which the author then added, "the sentiment [Fauci] expressed reminds us that blind faith in authority is a function of religion, not science. Science, like democracy, flourishes on skepticism toward official orthodoxies" (xvii).
Having said that, once the book traversed into the outbreak of HIV/AIDS and Dr. Fauci, it almost felt like a hit piece with the author cherrypicking sources/quotes/data from the late 80s and early 90's to enforce his opinion with with no current science to help his case. After that, the book rambled on about Bill Gates/Dr Fauci using Africa as their testing ground in some kind of modern day medical colonization.
So, first third of the book - interesting, insightful and disheartening, middle third hit piece with cherrypicked evidence and last third the theory (might I say conspiracy theory ?) that big pharma is using poorer nations as their testing grounds....left the reader with a foul taste in their mouths for many reasons.
However, the theme of the book was stated in the introduction when Mr. Kennedy quoted Fauci as saying, "Attacks on me, quite frankly are attacks on science," to which the author then added, "the sentiment [Fauci] expressed reminds us that blind faith in authority is a function of religion, not science. Science, like democracy, flourishes on skepticism toward official orthodoxies" (xvii).
Disclaimer: This review is not about the assemblage of facts/data as presented by the author. Rather this is a review of the writing and argument without regard to any underlying truth.
TLDR: The bottom line is this book is terribly written and poorly argued. Even in the introduction I was tempted to put the book down. While I encourage everyone to read and consider arguments that may differ from their own, please spare your brain this book.
Usually in a book that's trying to present an argument, I would expect the introduction to lay out why the argument is important, important to the author, or some broader context. While that was present in parts most of what I got was something to the effect of "even though I'm a democrat even I'm shocked by the extent of this corruption". That didn't endear me to the author at all, mostly because it's completely tangential to the argument. I don't care who you are unless you are making an argument on the basis of your expertise or experience. This author didn't appeal to those so we really don't need them here. These little interludes keep popping up in the book and don't add anything.
The word choice in this book is also common at best. That's surprising given that it's coming from a lawyer. For example
As for the argument itself, it's a terrible mishmash of an analytical argument and historical argument. I say it's terrible because these areas are almost treated separately and don't build on each other. Either a critical biography/history of Dr. Fauci and his work, or a colder argument about institutions violating their mission/ethics appropriate study protocols, would have made a more consistent book. Despite practicing the law, many of the arguments in the book where sophomoric regardless of and underlying facts or data. For example
I wanted to read a well argued book that pushes back on the common narrative. What I received in this one was a cash grab.
TLDR: The bottom line is this book is terribly written and poorly argued. Even in the introduction I was tempted to put the book down. While I encourage everyone to read and consider arguments that may differ from their own, please spare your brain this book.
Usually in a book that's trying to present an argument, I would expect the introduction to lay out why the argument is important, important to the author, or some broader context. While that was present in parts most of what I got was something to the effect of "even though I'm a democrat even I'm shocked by the extent of this corruption". That didn't endear me to the author at all, mostly because it's completely tangential to the argument. I don't care who you are unless you are making an argument on the basis of your expertise or experience. This author didn't appeal to those so we really don't need them here. These little interludes keep popping up in the book and don't add anything.
The word choice in this book is also common at best. That's surprising given that it's coming from a lawyer. For example
"Dr. Fauci’s calm, authoritative, and avuncular manner was Prozac for Americans besieged by two existential crises:"
. Existential... there's a word writers should really stay away from unless they know what it means. Or this little chestnut"This book will show you that Tony Fauci does not do public health;"
. Do?! The best word here is "do"? I think you can select a word that more definitely reflects your thoughts here.As for the argument itself, it's a terrible mishmash of an analytical argument and historical argument. I say it's terrible because these areas are almost treated separately and don't build on each other. Either a critical biography/history of Dr. Fauci and his work, or a colder argument about institutions violating their mission/ethics appropriate study protocols, would have made a more consistent book. Despite practicing the law, many of the arguments in the book where sophomoric regardless of and underlying facts or data. For example
"The groaning shelves that commercial pharmacies devote to zinc-based cold remedies attest to its extraordinary efficacy."
I was stunned to read that from somebody that has purportedly graduated from college. The availability of a thing has nothing to do with the efficacy of the thing. Reductio ad absurdum, my grocery store has two massive aisles to sell beer, because these aisles are bigger than the totality of the zinc stuff sold at the same store, alcohol must treat more things than zinc right? I'd go through more faulty reasoning but the above alone can stand as ample warning of what lies in these pages.I wanted to read a well argued book that pushes back on the common narrative. What I received in this one was a cash grab.
slow-paced
challenging
informative
slow-paced
Reads like a really long legal brief but incredible informative, eye-opening and horrifying.
I think this is a book every person should read, especially every American, these men have brought more death than relief, and they need to held accountable for the actions they have committed, promoted and allowed.
The corruption of Big Gov, Big Tech, and Big Pharma goes deeper than most people realize. This book has over 2,000 footnotes to back up its assertions. If you are not cynical, you will be after reading this book.
Even if you don't agree, the entire book is true. The possibility that it should have you thinking. I see so many reviews just talking about the first chapter and where the book talks about Covid, but the fact that there's kids and people from other countries being experimented on should be questioned as well.
dark
informative
sad
tense
slow-paced