"Now the fun begins": 2020 Records Shows Gates Foundation Vax Teams Involved in HCQ Trials
Why were Gates Foundation vaccine development team members seeking 'closed and confidential' relationships with clinical trial researchers around the country?
In the film “Epidemic of Fraud” we learned that a representative from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation contacted Dr. Sabine Hazan just before her clinical trial into Hydroxychloroquine began. According to an email Dr. Hazan received, the Gates Foundation was “helping WHO to track and monitor clinical trials evaluating pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) of health care workers. We are especially interested in those studies using either chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine.”
The Gates Foundation was allegedly helping WHO monitor many of the 82 different trials of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine around the world.
Dr. Hazan contacted the Gates Foundation representative and never heard back from them. Soon her study began to have difficulties getting through the FDA, it was targeted by StatNews, and people employed by UCSF and Oxford openly attacked it on Twitter.
Both UCSF and Oxford have received hundreds of millions from the Gates Foundation.
Public Records Requested
We decided to submit a records request seeking all emails between Dr David Boulware, a physician at the University of Minnesota, and the Gates Foundation. Boulware conducted a clinical trial featured in ‘Epidemic of Fraud’. What we found was somewhat surprising. The Gates Foundation had nearly 100 pages of communications with Boulware regarding his study.
University of MN | David Boulware HCQ Study Section from “Epidemic of Fraud”
What we found was that very very early into Dr. Boulware’s study, Gates Foundation was already contacting him seeking a ‘closed and confidential relationship’ between Boulware’s study Data Monitoring team and the World Health Organization. Since Gates Foundation was facilitating the relationship, it’s assumable that the Foundation would stay involved as well.
Note: Peter Dull doesn’t work on Malaria drug research for Gates Foundation. He’s a vaccine guy.
There were several interesting emails of note. Lots of players in the public space were involved in emails between and among David Boulware while he was conducting his study.
A conclusive answer?
On June 3, 2020, as the faked Surgisphere study fraud was being retracted after claiming HCQ was deadly, David Boulware shared a personal note about the results of his study to members of other research teams, the FDA, Gates Foundation members, and people from the WHO.
Read this line again.
The major limitation of our trial is it is a remote trial on a limited budget, and we did not do PCR testing ourselves. Only ~20% had PCR proven disease (no difference by arm) with the majority being considered “Probable COVID-19” based on cases of symptomatic illness compatible with COVID-19. We provide the case details in the appendix, for transparency.
This study was conducted at the end of flu season in northern climates. Only 20% of the patients who came down with ‘covid’ were confirmed covid cases via PCR testing, a method of testing that also has issues with false positives.
This means that they have no idea if 4 out of 5 people they said had covid, had covid.
So why is it that Dr. Boulware said this in the press release that he forwarded in the same email?
“Our objective was to answer the question of whether hydroxychloroquine worked to prevent disease or did not work,” Boulware said. “While we are disappointed that this did not prevent COVID-19, we are pleased that we were able to provide a conclusive answer. Our objective was to find an answer.”
How is guessing if 80% of your patients had COVID a “conclusive answer” to anything? At this point in 2020, COVID had an incredibly wide variety of symptoms, including no symptoms at all.
Here’s the official press release.
Now the fun begins
The strangest email of the bunch is Peter Dull’s response to David Boulware’s email.
Now the fun begins? People were blocked from work, subjected to draconian lockdowns, bleeding taxpayer funds and businesses were dying…who was having fun here?
Vaccine developers. Those people had LOTS of fun.
Not long after the Boulware study came out, the WHO’s Ana Maria Henao-Restrepo who is part of the ‘vaccine congress’, officially announced the removal of HCQ from consideration on 6/17/2020. She seems like she’s having lots of fun.
To be fair, on June 4, Gates Foundation’s Scott Miller expressed frustration with the effects of the Surgisphere fraud on future HCQ studies.
Failure to disclose the relationship
In April 2020, not long after Boulware and Gates began collaborating, the Gates Foundation gave Boulware’s employer University of Minnesota $3.2m for future COVID-19 treatment research.
Nothing in Dr. Boulware’s disclosures indicates his university received $3.2 Million from the Gates Foundation when his study began, or that he even had a relationship with a large benefactor that was heavily invested in vaccine development. His ‘data' sharing statement’ also does not reference the Gates Foundation or WHO.
Of note, all total the Gates Foundation gave the University of Minnesota and the three other universities involved in the Boulware study over $412m in the last 25 years, with an additional $52 Million distributed to these universities in just the last year alone.
According to the Association of Clinical Research Professionals Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct, researchers should:
Recognize when they may have a conflict of interest, disclose such conflict as soon as the potential conflict is recognized and be transparent in how the conflict will be managed.
Publicly disclose relationships and potential conflicts of interest in publications, speaking engagements, Advisory Boards and any other venue or activity, including any ACRP chapter or other meetings in which the Member or Certificant is perceived as providing subject matter expertise or other authority
Avoid dual relationships that could impair professional judgment or increase the risk of harm to others.
While the Gates Foundation was spending $100 million on COVID research, its investment in vaccine research was over $9 billion.
Bill Gates has spent a significant amount of time running a PR campaign in the last year. He was on The View today, a Netflix series last year, and spreading his funds around just about everywhere.
As Tim Schwaub stated in an article about Bill Gates yesterday:
On the flipside, his philanthropic foundation shamelessly gives out hundreds of millions of dollars to the news media — The Telegraph, The Guardian, BBC and dozens of other outlets around the world — which creates strong incentives to praise Gates. Though the news media occasionally does put a critical lens to Gates, most journalists, even those not directly funded by the foundation, tend to treat him differently — and better — than other billionaires. To be sure, most news outlets appear to love Gates’s new memoir. The New York Times‘s recent, glowing review of Gates’s memoir was headlined: “Bill Gates isn’t like those other tech billionaires.”
A similar story can be found in the billions of dollars the Gates Foundation donates to universities, which has led to what academic researchers call the “Bill chill” — the chilling effect that makes them reluctant to criticise the man who so many look to for funding.
What is Bill Gates afraid of? The mask is finally coming off - Tim Schwab, UnHerd
What effect does a large medical donor have on a small clinical trial with ambiguous results? Why wasn’t this relationship disclosed?
Questions and requests for statements to Dr. David Boulware and Gates Foundation were unanswered.
Download and view all Gates Foundation emails between and among David Boulware below.
NEW UPDATE JUST POSTED
A new updated to our award-winning documentary “Epidemic of Fraud” was recently posted. Learn how the people who helped bring fentanyl to the market tried to convince the American people that a drug similar to tonic water was deadly. With new updates, statistics and retractions sprinkled throughout, it’s a movie anyone concerned with medicine and policy should see.
Watch now.
Thank you for bringing this back to the forefront, it's so important given the importance of Hydroxychloroquine (or other DMARDs and steroids) in the management of early COVID, in order to prevent the progression to pneumonia that is more likely in the presence of untreated pneumonitis.
The reason they wanted those trials in hospital only is that by the time the patient is in hospital they have bacterial pneumonia (day 7+) which HCQ does NOT treat. That's why you needed antibiotics - which patients were denied, and died in up to 25% in the RECOVERY trial - a criminal level of treatment failure.
The Boulware study did in fact show a benefit of HCQ over placebo but that benefit was suppressed in the write-up and the use of the folate "placebo" was intended to make the study fail, because it was an active placebo. That is why not a single patient on the study died of the supposedly fatal novel respiratory disease.
Good work