Stanford medical professor Jay Bhattacharya is set to face his first confirmation hearing as the new head of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) next week. But the man he’s replacing—Francis Collins, the longest-serving NIH director—remains at the center of a firestorm, with allegations that could land him in legal trouble.
Collins, who once dismissed Bhattacharya as a “fringe epidemiologist” for challenging COVID-19 lockdowns, is now accused of misrepresenting scientific findings on masks. His legal team has pushed back against claims made in the final report of the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic, which found that the federal government lacked solid evidence to justify widespread mask mandates. But a new bombshell report suggests Collins himself misled Congress in a letter summarizing a crucial 2023 mask study.
According to investigative journalist Paul Thacker, a former Senate investigator, Collins “inverted the meaning” of a systematic review of mask effectiveness published by the respected Cochrane research network. Thacker alleges Collins deliberately omitted the study’s final conclusion, which reaffirmed that masks “probably make little to no difference” in preventing COVID or influenza. Now, some lawmakers are questioning whether Collins could be prosecuted for misleading Congress.
Oxford epidemiologist Tom Jefferson, lead author of the Cochrane mask study, also blasted Collins for “misleading” statements in a December 13 letter to the subcommittee. Jefferson insists Collins’ version of events “requires correction.” So far, Collins has remained silent, declining to respond to inquiries from Just the News.
The controversy comes as former top public health officials face growing scrutiny over their COVID-era decisions. Congressional Republicans have floated criminal referrals against Anthony Fauci, ex-director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, for allegedly lying about funding gain-of-function research in China—the research some suspect may have triggered the pandemic. Fauci has denied wrongdoing but lost his taxpayer-funded security detail and a museum exhibit upon former President Trump’s return to office.
Meanwhile, the notorious revolving door between government and the pharmaceutical industry is spinning once again. Patrizia Cavazzoni, who led the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research during the pandemic, has just landed at Pfizer as its new chief medical officer. The move comes just weeks after she stepped down from her government role, reportedly to spend more time with family. Critics argue her swift transition is part of an ongoing pattern of public health officials securing lucrative positions in the industries they once regulated.
This trend is nothing new. Former FDA commissioners Robert Califf, Scott Gottlieb, and Stephen Hahn all found roles in regulated companies after leaving public office. Gottlieb still sits on Pfizer’s board, a company that benefited massively from FDA emergency approvals during the pandemic.
Adding to the chaos, the FDA and CDC recently made an unexpected move—canceling key vaccine advisory meetings without explanation. These meetings were meant to discuss upcoming flu shots and the latest guidance for new vaccines, including Moderna’s mRNA jab. The Department of Health and Human Services also abruptly suspended a contract with Vaxart for an oral COVID vaccine, a decision that has sparked fresh debate over the Biden administration’s oversight of pandemic-era policies.
As questions about Collins, Fauci, and other high-ranking officials mount, the House Judiciary Committee, led by Rep. Jim Jordan, could be the next to weigh in. Jordan has already subpoenaed tech giants like Google, Meta, and X over their role in censoring discussions on COVID policies. Now, some are speculating whether his committee might push for legal action against Collins for allegedly misleading Congress.
While the COVID policy debate rages on, one thing is clear—many of the officials who shaped the pandemic response are now under intense scrutiny. And with Bhattacharya’s confirmation hearing on the horizon, the battle over public health narratives is far from over.
