Survey Finds Epoch Times Readers Favor Greater Oversight Following Fauci Disclosures

Dr. Anthony Fauci has returned to the national spotlight following the release of his diary by the Department of Health and Human Services and the congressional hearing where he refused to answer more than 100 questions by pleading the Fifth in late July.

According to an Epoch Times poll, readers overwhelmingly believe that there should be more oversight and monitoring of research into viruses, such as COVID-19.

In total, 99 percent of the respondents believe that foreign institutions receiving U.S. funding should remain subject to periodic U.S. monitoring, and 90 percent disagree that President Joe Biden’s pardon of Fauci was justified to protect him from politically motivated prosecution.

On US Sponsored Research

One of the main hypotheses on the origins of the COVID-19 strain that crippled the world is that it came from a lab in Wuhan, China, and that the research was largely funded by the United States.

As such, readers believe that if this kind of research is going to continue, it needs to be seen as a danger to society.

In total, 96 percent of those polled agree that research that makes animal viruses capable of infecting humans should be treated as bioweapons research.

Additionally, 78 percent disagree with the idea that the possible medical benefits of such research can justify its national-security risks.

A whopping 97 percent agree that U.S. funding of this research in China left dangerous capabilities under the control of the Chinese Communist Party. In the same vein, 95 percent agree that the engineering of pandemic-capable viruses creates a permanent danger that cannot be undone.

The vast majority of readers (94 percent) believe that the United States shouldn’t be involved at all, saying taxpayer dollars should never fund pandemic-capable virus research in foreign countries.

“Creation of pandemic-type viruses should be banned permanently and considered treasonous against humankind,” said one reader.

“End U.S. funding of ALL research abroad,” said another reader. “Don’t export the money and we won’t need to worry about oversight or transparency.”

However, readers were divided about whether some pandemic-capable virus research should be conducted to prepare for future outbreaks, with 34 percent agreeing, 34 percent saying they are neutral on the subject, while 32 percent disagreed with the idea that some research is necessary.

Government Response

Epoch Times readers weighed in on what the government’s role should be in research related to pandemics, with 80 percent in agreement that a public official’s duty to explain taxpayer-funded decisions should outweigh the official’s personal right to remain silent.

Most of those polled (92 percent) agreed that officials who approved research should bear primary responsibility for that decision, regardless of its outcome, and 91 percent said they believe that government agencies remain responsible for research funded through grant recipients.

Almost all respondents (97 percent) agree that dividing decisions among many institutions should not reduce accountability, and the same percentage agree that all U.S.-funded biological research abroad should require a national-security review.

Ninety-six percent say they believe that scientific agencies approved high-risk virus research with too little external scrutiny.

The question of whether officials should be identified when approving research with potential mass impact resonated with readers, with 89 percent agreeing.

“Create a new government agency whose only purpose is to monitor guardrails 24/7 and blow the whistle when they identify a problem,” one reader suggested, while another said, “If you work for or accept public funds you should be required to disclose everything related to how they were used. All should be made available to any official inquiry.”

Additionally, about 72 percent of those polled agreed that U.S.-funded virus sequences should remain confidential to prevent misuse by hostile actors.

Fauci’s Pardon

While the gravity of the COVID-19 pandemic left the United States, and many other nations, scrambling for how to respond, Fauci’s part in the public health response has generated controversies, including his recent exercise of Fifth Amendment rights when under the scrutiny of Congress.

Seventy-nine percent of readers agreed that a full pardon should remove the right to invoke the Fifth over the conduct it covers.

Only 29 percent agreed the Fifth Amendment should be fully observed, even in investigations involving catastrophic loss of life, with just over half of respondents (51 percent) polled disagreeing, and another 20 percent who were neutral or didn’t know.

One reader said that everyone responsible for harm during the COVID-19 pandemic should be prosecuted “to the fullest extent of the law.”

Meanwhile, 92 percent believe that Fauci’s choice to invoke the Fifth even on harmless questions showed contempt for congressional oversight.

When asked which safeguard is most important for the United States going forward, nearly 31 percent said it was crucial to ban pandemic-capable virus engineering.

Twenty-four percent said it was most important to end U.S. funding of this type of research abroad and require international monitoring and inspections, and another 20 percent said the United States should hold approving officials personally accountable in this type of situation.

The Epoch Times conducted this reader survey on Aug. 5–6, 2026, by email and social media, generating 3,106 responses.