The Data That Shows How Fauci Broke Bad

Data Analyst Describes Early COVID-19 Tracking Efforts and Reporting Limitations

In the initial weeks of the COVID-19 outbreak in the United States, limited daily national data prompted volunteer initiatives to compile state-level figures. One such effort was the COVID Tracking Project, launched in March 2020 after observers noted that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention issued data on a weekly or monthly basis rather than daily. The project collected and published numbers from state health departments until its conclusion in 2021 and served as a reference for media outlets and some officials during that period.

Matthias Shapiro, who contributed to the project while living near Seattle, discussed his observations in an interview. Shapiro stated that the first confirmed U.S. case occurred in the Seattle area and that an early outbreak took place in a nearby long-term care facility in late February 2020. He described local school closures and restrictions on outdoor activities that began around that time. Hospitals in the region canceled elective procedures, though some physicians reported low patient volumes in the following weeks, according to Shapiro.

Shapiro noted that the project recruited volunteers to extract daily case and testing data directly from state dashboards because centralized daily reporting was not available from federal sources. For several weeks he compiled figures for Washington state after the state’s online dashboard experienced outages, pulling county-level counts manually. The group operated as a private data-collection effort focused on aggregation rather than policy interpretation.

Shapiro observed instances in which news reports cited 100 percent test-positivity rates. He attributed these figures to incomplete submissions that omitted negative results from certain jurisdictions on particular days. He also described regional patterns visible when states were grouped geographically: increases appeared to move from the Southeast northward and then into the Northeast in successive waves. Shapiro said these patterns crossed state political boundaries and did not align with narratives that emphasized differences between individual states.

The interview addressed the gap between collected data and public statements by federal health officials. Shapiro distinguished between the volunteer data collectors, whom he described as focused on numerical accuracy regardless of political affiliation, and higher-level academics or public-health spokespeople who, in his view, sometimes emphasized certain interpretations. He cited the example of Georgia’s decision to ease restrictions in late April 2020. According to Shapiro’s review of the data at the time, no immediate sharp rise in cases followed that policy change in the state-level numbers he examined.

Shapiro recounted that New York City recorded a high number of deaths in April 2020, while Seattle experienced an earlier but smaller outbreak. He stated that, at the time, he initially attributed the difference to earlier detection and stricter measures in Washington, though he later reconsidered that assessment. He noted that after several weeks of restrictions, questions arose about the expected duration of such measures and the observable effects of reopening steps.

The COVID Tracking Project operated until March 2021, at which point federal data systems had expanded daily reporting. Project organizers stated that its purpose was to supply timely figures while official systems developed that capacity. Shapiro’s subsequent public commentary focused on presenting regional data summaries and questioning specific statistical claims that appeared in coverage.

Shapiro has continued to post data-related observations on social media under the handle @politicalmath and on a Substack publication. The interview did not include direct statements from Anthony Fauci or other named federal officials.