Share this comment
One way the members of the NIH COVIS guidelines committee were able to hide their financial conflicts of interest was that they were only asked to disclose conflicts occurring within the prior 11 months. When Shark Attkisson looked at their financial conflicts over the past several years she found 16 total members had financial conflicts with Gilead
┬й 2025 A Midwestern Doctor
Substack is the home for great culture
One way the members of the NIH COVIS guidelines committee were able to hide their financial conflicts of interest was that they were only asked to disclose conflicts occurring within the prior 11 months. When Shark Attkisson looked at their financial conflicts over the past several years she found 16 total members had financial conflicts with Gilead
Thank you very much for your reply and all the work you have done over the years to help the Gulf War veterans and those with COVID-19. I will update this article with your commentary.
Fascinating how the software respelled Sharyl and COVID
Yup. What was your for the 16? When I looked I found this:
тАЭWe found that of 11 members reporting links to a drug company, nine of them named relationships to remdesivirтАЩs maker Gilead. Seven more, including two of the committeeтАЩs leaders, have ties to Gilead beyond the 11 months they had to disclose. Two were on GileadтАЩs advisory board. Others were paid consultants or received research support and honoraria. Nobody reported ties to hydroxychloroquine which is now made by numerous generic manufacturers and is so cheap, analysts say even a spike in sales would not be a financial driver for the companies.тАЭ
https://simplyamerica.net/sharyl-attkisson-hydroxychloroquine-politics-money-medicine/
I collected information on three evolving lists of members of the guidelines committee. It seemed to me that after Cheryl showed that half of them approximately were tied to Gilead, and a number of others to Merck, the committee expanded with additional members lacking Gilead ties. I have not looked at the list for the past year or so
How the committee chose not to endorse ivermectin is another issue that has been covered by trial site news. One researcher sued to find out if there was an actual vote on the topic. One woman member of the guidelines committee who was on the ivermectin subcommittee got a big grant For about $50 million and whether this was a payoff for her committee work was in question. I have not done any of this exploration myself
That makes sense. I was wondering if that happened since the committee had significantly more people than it did at the time the original article I linked to was published.
On a completely different topic, I had a question I would greatly appreciate your thoughts on if you could share it (if you can't competely understand).
Do you think there is any basis to Garth Nicholson's theory about mycoplasma fermentans in the Anthrax vaccines, and do you believe squalene or something else was the primary issue with them? I've been looking into this question a lot over the past month and would appreciate the thoughts of someone who had direct experience working with these patients.
ЁЯШЕ I thought it was intentional and spot on!
You can edit and correct your own comments if you want.