Question Gilead / Remdesivir / Veklury and CDC / NIH Covid-19 conflicts of interests - how important is this ?


Jul 2, 2020
Visit site
Serious Gilead / Remdesivir / Veklury and CDC conflicts of interests within the CDC/NIH Panel providing Covid-19 treatment guidance need more disclosure and investigation - why isnt it happening ?

Reported CDC / Gilead financial conflicts are set out in time limited CDC financial disclosure filings - link at the end

This conflict seems to extend to the top level of the CDC / NIH and is detailed and expanded in the docu video interview linked below by 5 times Emmy Award winning journalist

Gilead Conflicts

2 of the CDC / NIH Covid-19 Panels 3 co-chairs have long term links to Gilead which are not declared.

The third co-chair is Dr Clifford Lane who co-authored a postive study on Remdesivir as a Covid-19 treatment

However Dr Lane does not need to declare any indirect connections to Gilead or Remdesivir / Veklury on his CDC disclosures such as co-authoring papers finding in favor of Remdesivir

Further Dr Fauci and Dr Lane published a joint paper which was generally in favor of remdesivir and against hydroxychloroquine

Why is this important ?

The 3 co-chairs select the panel members who set out the Covid-19 treatment guidelines for the USA

8 members of the panel have currently declared financial links to Gilead the maker of Remsedivir - one treatment the CDC has promoted for use against Covid-19 (though some trials have been stopped and limited benefits shown)

In March 2020 - 9 Covid-19 panel memebers declared financial connections to Gilead.

2 more Covid-19 panel members are said to be or have been on Gilead advisory bodies with financial connections which they are now not required to declare if there is no financial connection to the advisory aboard

For example in Dec 2018 a CDC financial link was declared to the Gilead Advisory Board by

Judith Aberg
Gilead (Advisory Board, Research Support)

This Advisory Board link is no longer required to be reported as it is over 11 months old and has no financial link associated with it despite reporting other Gilead financial links

CDC - Dec 2018 Gilead Advisory Board

From the above CDC finacial disclosure it can clearly be seen that the Covid-19 co-chairs are on other important treatment panels working closely with many Gilead financially linked board advisors and researchers. While this may be understandable it shows how deeply Gilead and others have potential to influence within the CDC and NIH

Other members of the Covid panel are also said to have longer term connections with Gilead that they are not required to declare

Gilead was the Pharma Company with the most conflicts declared by Covid-19 Panel members - by a huge margin

For further details about the above Gilead conflicts see the link to docu video below by 5 times Emmy Award winning journalist - from around 7 minutes 50 seconds into the video


Are safe, and possibily effective and cheap medicines being pushed to one side in favor of expensive solutions that have not been shown to be effective.


The CDCs relationship with big pharma is too close particularly at the level of reserchers and decision makers and the revolving door of jobs between the CDC and big pharma. CDC researchers and others own CDC funded patents

Further info at the end of this post about these conflicts

Dr Fauci owns 8 CDC funded patents and Dr Clifford Lane owns 4 and both receive annual payments from these patents.

After licensing the commercial rights to these Fauci/Lane patent treatments to drug maker Chiron Corp., (later bought by Norvartis) Fauci’s CDC division subsequently spent $36 million in taxpayer money testing the treatment on patients in one experiment alone.

Dr Clifford Lane is one of the 3 key co-chairs of the CDC Covid-19 Guidance Panel.

National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director Anthony Fauci and NIAID Deputy Director H. Clifford Lane since 1997 received royalties of $45,072.82 each for the development of interleukin-2, an AIDS treatment they invented with NIH physician Joseph Kovacs.

Other Countries

Similar Gilead conflicts have been highlighted and reported in France amongst leading French Drs - see link to paper submitted for peer review below

The paper sets out a review of payments made by Gilead to 98 leading French Drs correlated with how they did not support the use of Hydroxychloroquine in France - which is seen as an alternative to Remdesivir.

Note only 13 of these 98 French Drs did not declare a financial connection with Gilead.

A. the 13 Drs who received the biggest financial payments from Gilead were publically most strongly against the use of Hydroxychloroquine in France - high correlation

B. the 13 Drs who received no payments from Gilead most were strongly in favor of the use of Hydroxychloroquine in France - high correlation

See links below

Emmy Award Winning Journalist Interviews


CDC Official Financial Conflict Disclosure with Gilead

French Gilead Financial Conflict Paper

Further Info on CDC Funded Patents and Conflicts

Over many years Congress, the Inspector General of Health and Human Services, Whistleblowers and Journalists have reported huge failings in transparency and conflicts of interest at the CDC. Little seems to have changed over the years as confirmed by whistleblower disclosures etc.

Its long overdue to have full transparency with disclosure of all historic payments and relationships made (not time limited) - the pharma company should have these records

One physician who voted to recommend the rotavirus vaccine on the FDA’s advisory committee received $255,000 per year in research funds from the maker of the vaccine, Wyeth Lederle. She received a waiver from the FDA to vote on the issue because her research for Wyeth focused on other vaccines.

One member of the CDC’s advisory committee who was not allowed to vote on the rotavirus vaccine because of a conflict was allowed to participate in closed-door working group meetings that drafted the committee’s recommendations for the vaccine. He was also allowed to make an impassioned plea for approval of the vaccine at the full committee meeting.

Another member of the CDC’s advisory committee held a lucrative patent on a rival rotavirus vaccine under development by Merck. Despite this conflict, the doctor voted three times on recommendations regarding Wyeth’s vaccine. It was not until the committee voted to rescind its recommendation of the rotashield that he recused himself because of a “perception of conflict.”

CDC members own numerous patents associated with vaccinations and regularly receive funding for their research work from the very same pharmaceutical companies who manufacturer vaccinations which are ultimately sold to the public. This situation creates an obvious conflict of interest, as members of the ACIP committee benefit financially every time a new vaccination is released to the market.

CDC members also own other medical patents paid for by CDC funds and then used or bought by big pharma . In 2005 387 then current members of the CDC were receiving royalty payments for work funded by the CDC and 51 were doing research on patients involving patents they had developed. Another 500 + ex CDC memebers were also receiving royalty payments.

Last edited:


Jul 2, 2020
Visit site
See link below about Gilead drug GS-441524

GS-441524 could compete with Gileads other Covid-19 drug Remdesivir as a cheaper and possibly better treatment for Coronavirus and Covid-19 - but probably much less profitable for Gilead

Some researchers thus argue GS-441524 could have been sidelined for commercial reasons.

A recent open letter written to Gilead and the FDA asks why there has been no research encouraged on a potentially promising Covid-19 treatment, which had in animal testing a 96% cure for an otherwise fatal cat coronavirus FIP plus was shown to be effective against MERS and SARS. Some say research has been blocked as Gilead refused to allow the drug to be made as a treatment of cats despite it being a life saving cure.

The FDA response is set out in the link below. There is also other background info and published research on GS-441524, this research has been available for many years.

The FDA now says GS-441524 will be studied as a Covid-19 treatment as the letter and the existing research have merit.

Gilead was not clear on what they will do and has to date not co-operated with the Texas University researchers who have for months tried to move the public research forward and asked for all Gileads research to be made available to medical researchers.

Last edited:


Jul 2, 2020
Visit site
Please review the previous post and the link above on Gileads sideline Coronavirus drug GS-441524 may be better than remdesivir

Below is data on Gileads lobbying spending in 1st Q of 2020 which has reached record levels - posted below

Gilead Sciences, the drugmaker behind the experimental COVID-19 treatment remdesivir, spent more on lobbying Congress and the administration in the first quarter of 2020 than it ever has before, according to federal filings.

The pharmaceutical company spent $2.45 million on lobbying in the first three months of the year, a 32% increase over the $1.86 million it spent in the first quarter of 2019.

The first quarter is also when Congress drafted and passed the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act, which contained numerous provisions affecting the pharmaceutical industry, including funding for the development of vaccines and treatments in response to the pandemic.

Early drafts of the legislation included a provision stipulating that COVID-19 vaccines, drugs and tests be affordable if they were developed with taxpayer funds. But the final bill included additional language that undercut that requirement.

The lobbying spike also coincided with Gilead's ramping up clinical testing of remdesivir, an antiviral drug that has become the most closely watched COVID-19 treatment under development.

the Food and Drug Administration authorized the emergency use of remdesivir for patients hospitalized with severe cases of COVID-19.

The agency's decision came two days after results from two significant remdesivir trials became public.

"The data shows that remdisivir has a clear-cut, significant, positive effect in diminishing the time to recovery'' from COVID-19, said Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases, about a study his institute sponsored. He said the drug would become "the standard of care."

The same day, however, a study by Chinese researchers published in The Lancet found remdesivir didn't do better than a placebo when treating seriously ill COVID-19 patients on such measures as survival and time to clinical improvement.

Last edited:

Latest posts