The Real Anthony Fauci
By Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
CHAPTER 2
PHARMA PROFITS OVER PUBLIC HEALTH
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its
victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under
robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber
baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point
be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment
us without end for they do so with the approval of their own
conscience.”
—C. S. Lewis
For five decades, Dr. Anthony Fauci has wielded
formidable power to fortify the pharmaceutical
industry’s explosive growth and its corrosive influence over
our government regulatory agencies and public health
policy. During his fifty-year career, Dr. Fauci has nurtured a
complex web of financial entanglements among
pharmaceutical companies and the National Institute of
Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and its employees
that has transformed NIAID into a seamless subsidiary of
the pharmaceutical industry. Dr. Fauci unabashedly
promotes his sweetheart relationship with Pharma as a
“public-private partnership.”1
From his perch at NIAID, Dr. Fauci has used his $6
billion annual budget 2 to achieve dominance and control
over a long list of agencies and governing bodies, including
the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the
Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Health and Human
Services (HHS) agencies, the National Institutes of Health
(NIH), the Pentagon, the White House, the World Health
Organization (WHO), the United Nations (UN)
organizations, and into the deep pockets of the Clinton and
Gates Foundations, and Britain’s The Wellcome Trust.
A leviathan yearly grant budget gives Dr. Fauci power to
make and break careers, enrich—or punish—university
research centers, manipulate scientific journals, and to
dictate not just the subject matter and study protocols, but
also the outcome of scientific research across the globe.
Since 2005, the Defense Advanced Research Projects
Agency (DARPA) has funneled an additional $1.7 billion 3
into Dr. Fauci’s annual discretionary budget to launder
sketchy funding for biological weapons research, often of
dubious legality. This Pentagon funding brings the annual
total of grants that Dr. Fauci dispenses to an astonishing
$7.7 billion—almost twice the annual donations of the Bill
& Melinda Gates Foundation.[ Who elected this pos to have 7.7 billion to give away d.c]
Working in close
collaboration with pharmaceutical companies and other
large grant makers, including Bill Gates—the biggest
funder of vaccines in the world—Dr. Fauci has consistently
used his awesome power to defund, bully, silence, delicense, and ruin scientists whose research threatens the
pharmaceutical paradigm, and to reward those scientists
who support him. Dr. Fauci rewards loyalty with prestigious
sinecures on key HHS committees when they continue to
advance his interests. When the so-called “independent”
expert panels license and recommend new
pharmaceuticals, Dr. Fauci’s control over these panels
gives him the power to fast-track his pet drugs and
vaccines through the regulatory hurdles, often skipping key
milestones like animal testing or functional human safety
studies.
Dr. Fauci’s funding strategies evince a bias for
developing and promoting patented medicines and
vaccines, and for sabotaging and discrediting off-patent
therapeutic drugs, nutrition, vitamins, and natural,
functional, and integrative medicines. Under his watch,
drug companies engineered the opioid crisis and made
American citizens the globe’s most over-medicated
population.4 During his half-century as America’s Health
Czar, Dr. Fauci has played a central role in crafting a world
where Americans pay the highest prices for medicine 5 and
suffer worse health outcomes compared to other wealthy
countries.6 Adverse drug reactions are among the nation’s
top four leading causes of death, after cancer and heart
attacks.7,8 Dr. Fauci’s impressive longevity at NIAID is
largely due to his enthusiasm for promoting this Pharmacentre agenda. [ I am seriously concerned about my B.P. so I look with caution when I wonder why the government created the NIAD in the first place, because I know they ain't doing that s*#t anymore d.c ]
NIAID: A Pharma Subsidiary
Under Dr. Fauci’s management, NIAID has become the
center of a web of corrupting financial ties with the
pharmaceutical industry. Dr. Fauci’s NIAID looks much
more like a drug company than any sort of agency to
advance science.
“I’ve been interviewing scientists for a long time in this
country, and let me tell you something. There are two
kinds: Those who are serfs of Anthony Fauci and those who
are genuine scientists. The serf class will refract whatever
the latest Lysenkoism is from Fauci and NIAID. They are
protecting their grants,” says Celia Farber, whose 2006
Harper’s article, “Out of Control: AIDS and the Destruction
of Medical Science,” laid bare the culture of squalor,
corruption, and violence at the vendetta-driven Division of
AIDS (DAIDS). “The latter [genuine scientists] are the
minority. They look, sound, and behave like scientists. And
to varying degrees, they all live in a climate of both
economic and reputational persecution. Peter Duesberg is
one very famous example but there are others. Fauci’s
vendetta system has many ways of crushing the natural
scientific impulse—to question and to demand proof.
Breathtakingly, because of Fauci’s impact since 1984, this
tradition has been all but snuffed out in the US. ‘Everybody
is afraid.’ How many times have I heard that line?”
By all accounts, Anthony Fauci has implemented a
system of dysfunctional conflicts and a transactional
culture that have made NIAID a seamless appendage of Big
Pharma. There is simply no daylight between NIAID and
the drugmakers. It’s impossible to say where Pharma ends
and NIAID begins. “It’s like Ozark,” says Farber.
Researchers in NIAID’s labs supplement their income
with honoraria they earn by attending Pharma seminars
and briefing pharmaceutical company personnel with inside
information about research progress on new drugs in
NIAID’s pipeline.9 Dr. Fauci’s underlings routinely perform
private projects for drug companies in their NIAID labs and
take contract work running clinical trials for Pharma’s new
drugs. Journalist and author Bruce Nussbaum reports that
it is standard practice for Dr. Fauci’s employees to pocket
enough gravy from the deal flow to add 10–20 percent to
their NIAID salaries from this sort of work. NIAID officials
justify this controversial practice arguing that the influx of
pharmaceutical dollars strengthens NIAID’s labs and allows
the agency to retain talented staff. NIAID also deducts 40,
50, or 60 percent off the top of these contracts for
“overhead,” cementing the agency’s partnership with the
industry.
10 [there is NO justification for NONE of this...it is spelled CORRUPTION!!! dc]
It’s no surprise that a 2004 Office of
Government Ethics investigation chided Dr. Fauci for failing
to control the corrupting entanglements between his
staffers and pharmaceutical companies.11,12 That report
cited NIAID for failing to review and resolve possible
ethical conflicts affecting two-thirds of NIAID’s workers
who were moonlighting in private industry. [ chided? wtf are we going to get 18 years later, for the hell of the last two years, only a politician could throw that word out there d.c ]
The investigators also found13 that NIAID had failed to
obtain approval for a full 66 percent of “outside activities”
the institute had undertaken over the review period.
Outside activities, according to the NIH,
14 are
undertakings that “generally involve providing a service
to or a function for an outside organization, with or without
pay or other compensation.” That could include generating
income from a pharmaceutical patent from a drug company,
consulting for industry, obtaining silent or equity
involvement with biotech firms, or conducting paid lectures
and seminars. Dr. Fauci’s management style thrives on
creating many such opportunities for his agency and its
employees to participate in profitable ventures with
pharmaceutical companies. [ In reality that amounts to NO REGULATION of outside activities, I hate these bureaucrats dc]
Dr. Fauci’s drug development enterprise is rife with
other corrupting conflicts. Most Americans would be
surprised to learn, for example, that pharmaceutical
companies routinely pay extravagant royalties to Dr. Fauci
and his employees and to NIAID itself. Here’s how the
royalty system works: Instead of researching the causes of
the mushrooming epidemics of allergic and autoimmune
diseases—the function for which US taxpayers pay his
salary—Dr. Fauci funnels the bulk of his $6 billion budget to
the research and development of new drugs. He often
begins the process by funding initial mechanistic studies of
promising molecules in NIAID’s own laboratories before
farming the clinical trials out to an old boys’ network of
some 1,300 academic “principal investigators” (PIs) who
conduct human trials at university-affiliated research
centers and training hospitals, as well as foreign research
sites.
After these NIAID-funded researchers develop a
potential new drug, NIAID transfers some or all of its share
of the intellectual property to private pharmaceutical
companies, through HHS’s Office of Technology Transfer.
The University and its PIs can also claim their share of
patent and royalty rights, cementing the loyalty of
academic medicine to Dr. Fauci.
Once the product gets to market, the pharmaceutical
company pays royalties—a form of legalized kickbacks—
through an informal scheme that allows Pharma to funnel
its profits from drug sales to NIAID and to the NIAID
officials who worked on the product. Under a secretive,
unpromulgated HHS policy, Dr. Fauci and his NIAID
underlings may personally pocket up to $150,000 annually
from drugs they helped develop at taxpayers’
expense.15,16,17 [ so if we are funding this drug research, what does big pharma do, other then ring the cash register, this is some f*#Ked up S*#t people dc ]
The United States Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS) is the named owner of at least 4,400
patents. On October 22, 2020, the United States
Government Accountability Office (GAO) published a report
titled: BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH: NIH Should Publicly
Report More Information about the Licensing of Its
Intellectual Property. In this document, the authors
reported that the NIH has received, “up to $2 billion in
royalty revenue for NIH since 1991, when FDA approved
the first of these drugs. Three licenses generated more
than $100 million each for the agency.”18 [ I found that report, I'm going to help them announce it, because I do not think they took that advice d.c ]
However, Dr. David Martin has reported that the NIH
Office of Technology Transfer licensing records 19 suggest
that NIH was less than transparent with the GAO
investigators. Conspicuously absent from the GAO report
are over 130 NIH patents associated with active
compounds generating billions of dollars in revenue.
NIAID grants have resulted in 2,655 patents and patent
applications, of which only 95 include an assignment to the
Department of Health and Human Services as an owner.
20
Dr. Fauci assigned most of these patents to universities,
thereby making the ultimate commercial beneficiaries
entirely opaque while binding the invaluable loyalty of
American medical schools and the nation’s most influential
physicians to Dr. Fauci and his policies.
Somewhat fishily, one of the largest holders of NIAID generated patents is SIGA Technologies (NASDAQ:
SIGA).21 SIGA publicly acknowledges a close affiliation with
NIAID, but the GAO omits all mention of SIGA in its report.
SIGA’s CEO, Dr. Phillip L. Gomez, spent nine years working
for Dr. Fauci at NIAID developing Dr. Fauci’s signature
vaccine programs for HIV, SARS, Ebola, West Nile Virus,
and Influenza before exiting to commercial ventures. While
NIAID clearly developed SIGA’s technology, the company
reports revenue from NIAID but no royalty or commercial
payments to NIH or any of its programs.
Eight US patents list Dr. Anthony Fauci as an inventor.
However, NIAID, NIH, and GAO do not list any of them in
their reports of active licensing despite the fact that Dr.
Fauci has acknowledged collecting patent royalties on his
interleukin-2 “invention.”22
Furthermore, GAO reported none of NIAID’s patents
despite clear evidence that Gilead Sciences and Janssen
Pharmaceuticals (a division of Johnson & Johnson) have
generated over $2 billion annually from sales directly
resulting from NIAID-funded technologies.23 Missing from
the GAO report are two patents for Janssen’s Velcade® that
have generated sales in excess of $2.18 billion annually for
many years. The GAO report also omits any mention of the
patents for Yescarta®, Lumoxiti®, or Kepivance® in
violation of 37 USC §410.10 and 35 USC §202(a). At least
thirteen of the twenty-one patents in the GAO report,
including Dr. Fauci’s Moderna vaccine, illegally fail to
disclose government interest despite their indisputable
NIH pedigrees.
How big is Dr. Fauci’s drug development enterprise?
Since Dr. Fauci arrived at NIH, the agency has spent
approximately $856.90 billion.24,25 Between 2010 and
2016, every single drug that won approval from the FDA—
210 different pharmaceuticals— originated, at least in part,
from research funded by the NIH.26
Following drug approval, Dr. Fauci continues to
collaborate with his pharmaceutical partners on promoting
and pricing and profiting from their new product. Over the
decades since Dr. Fauci took over NIAID, the agency has
formalized an elaborate process of negotiating against US
taxpayers to allow Pharma to extract maximum profits back
from NIAID’s germinated drugs. With NIAID’s help, the
lucky pharmaceutical company walks the new drug through
accelerated FDA approval. The CDC then sets obscene
retail prices for these collaborative products in secretive
negotiations. Such sweetheart deals—at taxpayer and
consumer expense—and accelerated approvals can yield
direct financial benefits to NIAID, to Dr. Fauci’s favored
employees, and even to Dr. Fauci himself.
27
Dr. Fauci launched his career by allowing Burroughs
Wellcome (now GlaxoSmith-Kline) to charge $10,000
annually 28 for azidothymidine (AZT), an antiretroviral
medication developed exclusively by NIH and tested and
approved by Dr. Fauci himself. Dr. Fauci knew that the
product cost Burroughs Wellcome a mere $5/dose to
manufacture.29 Higher profit for industry “partners” often
means more extravagant royalty payments for his NIAID
and NIH cronies.
Another antiviral drug developed by Dr. Fauci’s shop,
remdesivir, provides a recent example of a similar Pharma
money-making scheme facilitated by NIAID/NIH. While
remdesivir proved worthless against COVID, Dr. Fauci
altered the study protocols to give his pet drug the illusion
of efficacy.
30, 31 Despite opposition from FDA and WHO, Dr.
Fauci declared from the White House that remdesivir “will
be the standard of care” for COVID, guaranteeing the
company a massive global market. Dr. Fauci then
overlooked Gilead’s price gouging; the company sold
remdesivir for $3,300–$5,000 per dose, during the COVID
pandemic. The raw materials to make remdesivir cost
Gilead under $10. Medicaid must, by law, cover all FDA approved drugs, so taxpayers again foot the bill. Through
these boondoggles, Anthony Fauci has made himself the
leading angel investor of the pharmaceutical industry.
The disparate treatment of patented versus less
expensive off-patent COVID-19 drug treatments by federal
health agencies clearly exposes Dr. Fauci’s historic bias for
high-ticket patent medicines that favor extravagant
pharmaceutical industry profits over public health.32
A 2017 study in the Emory Corporate Governance and
Accountability Review summarizes how compromised
federal public health officials like Dr. Fauci have
transformed NIAID, NIH, CDC, and FDA into
pharmaceutical marketing machines.33 The Emory
researchers paint drug and vaccine makers as “thick as
thieves,” with HHS officials acting not as regulators, but as
“enablers, or perhaps worse still, [they are] complicit in
questionable or ethically unsound activity as a result of
being driven by self-serving motives . . .” According to Dr.
Michael Carome, a former HHS official and a director of
the advocacy group Public Citizen, “Instead of a regulator
and a regulated industry, we now have a partnership. . . .
That relationship has tilted the agency [HHS] away from a
public health perspective to an industry friendly
perspective.”34 Dr. Fauci is the human face of this corrupt
dynamic.
Under Dr. Fauci’s leadership, the commercial features of
this partnership have eclipsed his agency’s mission to
advance science. At NIAID, the Pharma tail now wags the
public health dog. Dr. Fauci has done almost nothing to
advance NIAID’s core obligation of researching the causes
of the devastating explosions in epidemics of chronic
allergic and autoimmune diseases that, under his tenure,
have mushroomed to afflict 54 percent of children,35 up
from 12.8 percent when he took charge of NIAID in 1984.36
While ignoring the explosion of allergic conditions, Dr.
Fauci has instead reshaped NIAID into the leading
incubator for new pharmaceutical products, many of which,
ironically, profit from the cascading chronic disease
pandemic.
Over the last fifty years at NIH, Dr. Fauci has played a
leading role in Big Pharma’s engineered demolition of
American health and democracy, working hand in glove
with pharmaceutical companies to overcome federal
regulatory obstacles and transform the NIH and NIAID into
a single-minded vehicle for development, promotion, and
marketing of patented pharmaceutical products, including
vaccines and vaccine-like products.
Most of us would like “America’s Doctor” to properly
diagnose our illnesses using the best science, and then
instruct us on how to get healthy. What if, instead of
spending their entire budgets developing profitable
pharmaceutical products, Dr. Fauci and the heads of other
NIH institutes deployed researchers to explore the links
between glyphosate in food and the explosion of gluten
allergies, the link between pesticide residues and the
epidemic of neurological diseases and cancers, the causal
connections between aluminum and Alzheimer’s disease,
between mercury from coal plants and escalating autism
rates, and the association of airborne particulates with the
asthma epidemic? What if NIH financed research to explore
the association between childhood vaccines and the
explosion of juvenile diabetes, asthma, and rheumatoid
arthritis, and the links between aluminum vaccine
adjuvants and the epidemics of food allergies and allergic
rhinitis? What if they studied the impacts of sugar and soft
drinks on obesity and diabetes, and the association
between endocrine disruptors, processed foods, factory
farms, and GMOs on the dramatic decline in public health?
What would Americans look like if, for fifty years, we had a
public health advocate running one of our top health
agencies—instead of a Pharma shill? What would have
happened if we’d spent that hundreds of billions dollars on
real science, instead of drug development? Dr. Fauci seems
willing only to give us diagnoses and cures that benefit Big
Pharma—instead of public health—and to cover his trail
with artifice.
His critics have compared Dr. Fauci to a similarly long lived federal agency bureaucrat, J. Edgar Hoover, who used
his five-decade dictatorial control of the FBI to transform
the agency into a vehicle for shielding organized crime,
fortifying his corrupt political partners, oppressing Black
Americans, surveilling his political enemies, suppressing free speech and dissent, and as a platform for building a
cult of personality around his own inflated ego. More
recently, Dr. Fauci’s perennial biographer, Charles Ortleb,
analogized Dr. Fauci’s career and pathological mendacity to
the sociopathic con men Bernie Madoff and Charles
Ponzi.37 Another critic, author J. B. Handley, labeled Dr.
Fauci “a snake oil salesman” and a “bigger medical
charlatan than Rasputin.”38 Economist and author Peter
Navarro, former Director of Trade and Manufacturing
Policy, observed during a national network television
interview in April 2021 that “Fauci is a sociopath and a
liar.”39
His white lab coat, his official title, and his groaning
bookshelves crowded with awards from his medical cartel
collaborators allow Dr. Fauci to masquerade as a neutral,
disinterested scientist and selfless public servant driven by
a relentless commitment to public health. But Dr. Fauci
doesn’t really do public health. By every metric, his fifty year regime has been a catastrophe for American health.
But as a businessman, his success has been boundless.
In 2010, Dr. Fauci told adoring New Yorker writer
Michael Specter that his go-to political playbook is Mario
Puzo’s novel The Godfather.
40 He spontaneously recited his
favorite line from Puzo’s epic: “It’s nothing personal, it’s
strictly business.”
CHAPTER 3
THE HIV PANDEMIC TEMPLATE
FOR
PHARMA PROFITEERING
“Guys like Fauci get up there and start talking and you know he
doesn’t know anything really about anything, and I’d say that to his
face. Nothing. The man thinks you can take a blood sample and stick
it in an electron microscope and if it’s got a virus in there, you’ll
know it… He doesn’t understand electron microscopy and he doesn’t
understand medicine. And he should not be in the position like he’s
in. Most of those guys up there on the top are just total
administrative people and they don’t know anything about what’s
going on at the bottom. Those guys have got an agenda, which is not
what we’d like them to have, being that we pay them to take care of
our health in some way. They’ve got a personal kind of agenda. They
make up their own rules as they go, they change them when they
want to, and they smugly, like Tony Fauci, do not mind going on
television, in front of the people that pay his salary, and lie directly
into the camera.”
—Dr. Kary Mullis, winner of the
1993 Nobel Prize for Chemistry
for
his invention of the Polymerase
Chain Reaction (PCR) technique,
from interview with Gary Null, 1993.
“Of course! I will always give you truth. Just ask the question and I’ll
give you the truth. At least to the extent, that I think it is, right
[laughs].”
—Dr. Fauci, Der Spiegel,
September 2020
“Scientifically,” he [Harvey Bialy] says, “cancer is still an interesting
question. AIDS has not been an interesting question for fifteen
years.”
“Why do you say that?”
“Because it’s been a closed book for fifteen years. It has been clear
for fifteen years that this is a non-infectious condition that has its
cause in a whole variety of chemicals.”
His voice rises. “Doesn’t the book demonstrate very clearly that
scientifically, nothing happened between 1994 and 2003? Zero.
Absolutely nothing except one wrong epidemiological prediction
after another, one failed poisonous drug after another. 0.000.000
cured. No vaccine, or even a fake vaccine. It’s a total failure. We’ve
turned virology inside out and upside down to accommodate this
bullshit hypothesis for seventeen years now. It’s enough.”
—From Serious Adverse Events:
An Uncensored History of AIDS, by
Celia Farber
Prior to 1987, Peter Duesberg never had a single grant proposal
rejected by the NIH. Since 1987, he has written a total of thirty
research proposals; every single one has been rejected. He has
submitted several proposals on aneuploidy, as recently as last year—
they too have been rejected.
“They just took him out,” says Richard Strohman, a retired UC
Berkeley biologist. “Took him right out.”
“The system works,” says Dave Rasnick. “It’s as good as a bullet to
the head.”
—From Serious Adverse Events:
An Uncensored History of AIDS, by
Celia Farber
Beginnings
Anthony Stephen Fauci was born in Brooklyn’s Dyker
Heights neighborhood on December 4, 1940. Three of his
grandparents were native Italians; his maternal grandfather was born in the Italian-speaking region of
Switzerland. All four came to the United States at the end
of the nineteenth century. Both his parents were born in
New York City. His father, Stephen Fauci, graduated from
the College of Pharmacy, Columbia University. His mother,
Eugenia, went to Brooklyn College and Hunter College.
They married at eighteen years old. It’s tempting to link his
emergence as the modern champion of the pharmaceutical
paradigm to the fact that Dr. Fauci’s parents owned a
drugstore. His father, a pharmacist, filled prescriptions; his
mother worked the cash register, and young Tony
apprenticed on his Schwinn bicycle for a lifelong career
delivering drugs.
Anthony attended Our Lady of Guadeloupe Grammar
School in Brooklyn and Regis High School, an elite Jesuit
academy, where his tenacity distinguished him in the
classroom and on the basketball court. Regis heavily
weighted its curriculum toward the classics: “We took four
years of Greek, four years of Latin, three years of French,
ancient history, theology, etc.,” he told an NIH oral
historian in 1989. He was a good athlete in a borough of
stickball aces. An early Yankees fan, he preferred the
reliable champions to the hometown heroes and describes
himself as “somewhat of a sports outcast among my
friends, who were all Brooklyn Dodgers fans.”1 The
underdog Dodgers lost eight of eleven World Series
encounters against the Bronx Bombers. Tony’s idols were
Joe DiMaggio, Mickey Mantle, and Mets/Dodgers/Giants
great Duke Snider. His appetite for total victory and
domination made him a ferocious contender. Despite his
diminutive size—he is 5´7˝—he played basketball and
football and was a star point guard and captain of Regis’s
1958 basketball squad. Tony scored an impressive ten
points per game, according to his yearbook. It wasn’t
enough; the Raiders ended the season with a dismaying 2-
16 record. A teammate, Bob Burns, recalls that “he was
ready to drive through whoever was in his way.” Another
classmate, John Zeman, told Wall Street Journal reporter
Ben Cohen, “He was just a ball of fire. He would literally
dribble through a brick wall.”2
Dr. Fauci went to Holy Cross College in 1958, studying
philosophy, French, Greek, and Latin and graduating in
1962 with a BA. “I still am very interested in the classics,”
he said in a 1989 interview with Dr. Victoria Harden,
director of the NIH Historical Office.3 Dr. Fauci grew up
Roman Catholic: “I credit very much the Jesuit training in
precision of thought and economy of expression in solving
and expressing a problem and the presentation of a
solution in a very succinct, accurate way. This has had a
major, positive influence on the fact that I enjoy very much
and am fairly good at being able to communicate scientific
principles or principles of basic and clinical research
without getting very profuse and off on tangents.”4 Perhaps
reason became the enemy of his faith—or, perhaps, Jesuit
discipline robbed the catechisms of their fun. Today, Dr.
Fauci brushes off queries about his Catholicism, describing
himself as a humanist.5
Dr. Fauci never doubted that he wanted to be a doctor,
commenting that in high school, “[T]here really was no
question that I was going to be a physician. I think there
was subliminal stimulation from my mother, who, right
from the very beginning when I was born, wanted me to be
a physician.”6
Dr. Fauci earned his medical degree from Cornell in
1966, graduating first in his class. Like his wife,
immunologist and NIH’s Bioethics Department Director Dr.
Christine Grady, Dr. Fauci is a lifelong germaphobe, but he
confesses that he went into virology and immunology not so
much to kill bugs as to avoid combat service in Vietnam: “I
left Cornell and went into my internship and residency in
1966. That was at the exponential phase of the Vietnam
War, and every single physician went into military service. I
can remember very clearly when we were gathered in the
auditorium at Cornell early in our fourth year of medical
school. The recruiter from the Armed Forces came there
and said, ‘Believe it or not, when you graduate from
medical school at the end of the year, except for the two
women, everyone in this room is going to be either in the
Army, the Air Force, the Navy, or the Public Health Service.
So, you’re going to have to take your choice. Sign up and
give your preferences.’ So I put down Public Health Service
as my first choice and then the Navy. Essentially, I came
down to the NIH because I didn’t have any choice.”7
The US Public Health Service was a heavily militarized
public health agency led by its uniformed officer corps,
including the surgeon general, which had grown out of
military hospitals operated by the early Navy. NIH was its
research arm created during World War II to support
soldiers’ health during the war. As infectious disease
mortalities in the US declined precipitously in the mid1950's, NIH maintained its relevance by declaring war on
cancer.
8,9
“I was very lucky because I knew that it was a
phenomenal scientific opportunity. I wanted to learn some
basic cellular immunology with the ultimate aim of going
into what has been my theme for the past twenty-one years
—human immunobiology and the regulation of the human
immune system.”10
After completing his residency at Cornell Medical
Center, Dr. Fauci joined NIH in 1968 as a clinical associate
at the NIAID, one of two dozen of NIH’s sub-agencies. In
1977, he became deputy clinical director of NIAID. Oddly,
his specialty was applied research in immune-mediated
illness—a subject of increasingly grave national concern.
He would spend the next fifty years largely ignoring the
exploding incidence 11 of autoimmunity and allergic
diseases, except to the extent they created profitable
markets for new pharmaceuticals. Dr. Fauci became
NIAID’s director on November 2, 1984, just as the AIDS
crisis was spiraling out of control.
NIAID: A Sleepy, Irrelevant Agency
When Dr. Fauci assumed leadership of NIAID, the agency
was a backwater. Allergic and autoimmune disorders were
hardly a factor in American life. Peanut allergies, asthma,
and autoimmune diseases (e.g., diabetes and rheumatoid
arthritis) were still so rare that their occasional
occurrences in schoolchildren were novelties. Most
Americans had never seen a child with autism; only a tiny
handful would recognize the term until the 1988 film Rain
Man introduced it into the vernacular. Cancer was the
disease Americans increasingly feared, with nearly all the
attention at NIH and the bulk of federal health funding
going to the National Cancer Institute (NCI).
Worst of all, by the era of Dr. Fauci’s ascendance as an
ambitious bureaucrat at NIAID, infectious diseases were no
longer a significant cause of death in America. Dramatic
improvements in nutrition, sanitation, and hygiene had
largely abolished the frightening mortalities from mumps,
diphtheria, smallpox, cholera, rubella, measles, pertussis,
puerperal fever, influenza, tuberculosis, and scarlet fever.
12
The devastating lethality from these former scourges that
decimated earlier generations of Americans had dwindled.
From 1900, when one-third of all deaths were linked to
infectious diseases (e.g., pneumonia, tuberculosis, and
diarrhea and enteritis), through 1950, infectious disease
mortality decreased dramatically (except for the 1918
Spanish flu), leveling off in the 1950s to what we see today,
about 5 percent of all US deaths.13
Annual deaths from communicable disease dropped in
the 1980s to around 50 per hundred thousand population,
from 800 per hundred thousand in 1900.14 By the twentieth
century, more people were dying of old age and heart
attacks than from contagious illnesses.15
At NIAID and at its sister agency, CDC, the bug hunters
were sliding into irrelevance. NIAID’s heyday was a distant
memory; it had served at the forefront of the war against
deadly pestilence. NIH had mobilized scientists to track the
epidemics of cholera, Rocky Mountain spotted fever, and
the 1918 Spanish flu contagion that infected and killed
millions globally.
Today CDC and NIAID promote the popular orthodoxy:
that intrepid public health regulators, armed with
innovative vaccines, played the key role in abolishing
mortalities from these contagious illnesses. Both science
and history dismiss this self-serving mythology as baseless.
As it turns out, the pills, potions, powders, surgeries, and
syringes of modern medicine played only a minor role in
the historic abolition of infectious disease mortalities.
An exhaustive 2000 study by CDC and Johns Hopkins
scientists published in Pediatrics, the official journal of the
American Academy of Pediatrics, concluded, “Thus
vaccination does not account for the impressive declines in
[infectious disease] mortality seen in the first half of the
[20th] century . . . nearly 90 percent of the decline in
infectious disease mortality among US children occurred
before 1940, when few antibiotics or vaccines were
available.”16
Similarly, a comprehensive 1977 study by McKinlay and
McKinlay, formerly required reading in almost all American
medical schools, found that all medical interventions,
including vaccines, surgeries, and antibiotics, contributed
only about 1 percent of the decline and at most 3.5
percent.17 Both CDC and the McKinlays attributed the
disappearance of infectious disease mortalities not to
doctors and health officials, but to improved nutrition and
sanitation—the latter credited to strict regulation of food
preparation, electric refrigerators, sewage treatment, and
chlorinated water. The McKinlays joined Harvard’s iconic
infectious disease pioneer, Edward Kass, in warning that a
self-serving medical cartel would one day try to claim credit
for these public health improvements as a pretense for
imposing unwarranted medical interventions (e.g.,
vaccines) on the American public.
As the McKinlays and Kass18 had predicted,
vaccinologists successfully hijacked the astonishing success
story—the dramatic 74 percent decline in infectious disease
mortalities of the first half of the twentieth century—and
deployed it to claim for themselves, and particularly for
vaccines, a revered and sanctified—and scientifically
undeserving—prestige beyond criticism, questioning, or
debate.
An Agency Without a Mission
In 1955, as deaths from epidemic disease declined, NIAID’s
forerunner organization at NIH, the National
Microbiological Institute (NMI), became part of the
NIAID,
19 to reflect the diminished national significance of
infectious diseases and the unexplained increases in
allergic and immune system diseases. Congress ordered
NIAID to support “innovative scientific approaches to
address the causes of these diseases and find better ways
to prevent and treat them.”
Food allergies and asthma were still rare enough to be
considered remarkable. Eczema was practically unknown,
as were most autoimmune diseases, including diabetes,
rheumatoid arthritis, lupus, Graves’ disease, Crohn’s
disease, and myelitis.20,21
As early as 1949, Congressional bills to abolish CDC
because of the remarkable decline in infectious disease
mortalities twice won by impressive majorities.22 From the
mid-1970s, CDC was seeking to justify its existence by
assisting state health departments to track down small
outbreaks of rabies and a mouse disease called hantavirus,
and by linking itself to the military’s bioweapons projects.
Looking back from 1994, Red Cross officer Paul Cummings
told the San Francisco Chronicle that “The CDC
increasingly needed a major epidemic” to justify its
existence.23 According to Peter Duesberg, author of
Inventing the AIDS Virus, the HIV/AIDS theory was
salvation for American epidemic authorities.24
James Curran, the Chief of the CDC’s Sexually
Transmitted Diseases unit, described the desperation
among the public health corps in the early 1980s: “There
was double-digit inflation, very high unemployment, a rapid
military buildup and a threat to decrease all domestic
programs, and this led to workforce cuts at the Public
Health Service, and particularly CDC.”25 Nobel Laureate
Kary Mullis similarly recalled the institutional desperation
during the Reagan administration era. He said of the CDC:
“They were hoping for a new plague. Polio was over. There
were memos going around the agency saying, ‘We need to
find the new plague’; ‘We need to find something to scare
the American people so they will give us more money.’”26
NIH scientist Dr. Robert Gallo—who would become Dr.
Fauci’s partner, coconspirator, and confidant—offered a
similar assessment: “The CDC in Atlanta was under threat
for reductions and even theoretically for closure.”27
Drumming up public fear of periodic pandemics was a
natural way for NIAID and CDC bureaucrats to keep their
agencies relevant. Dr. Fauci’s immediate boss and
predecessor as NIAID Director, Richard M. Krause, helped
pioneer this new strategy in 1976, during Dr. Fauci’s first
year at the agency. Krause was a champion of what he
called “The Return of the Microbes” strategy,
28 which
sought to reinstate microbes to their former status as the
feared progenitors of deadly diseases. That year, federal
regulators concocted a fake swine flu epidemic that
temporarily raised hopes around CDC for the resurrection
of its reputation as a life-saving superhero.
29
Even in that idealistic era, regulators were allowing
Pharma to craft public health policy behind closed doors.
Director Krause, whom Dr. Fauci would shortly succeed,
invited Merck executives to sit in on internal planning
meetings as collaborators.30 Working with Merck, NIAID 31
used taxpayer funds to subsidize development and
distribution of vaccines,32 and to rush untested products to
market.33 But the swine flu pandemic was a dud, and
HHS’s response was a global embarrassment. Only one
casualty—a soldier at Fort Dix 34—succumbed to the
“pandemic,” and Merck’s experimental vaccine triggered a
national epidemic of Guillain-Barré syndrome, a
devastating form of paralysis resembling polio, before
regulators recalled the jab.35 The four vaccine
manufacturers—Merck & Co., Merrell, Wyeth, and Parke Davis—had refused to sell the vaccines to the government
unless they were guaranteed profits and indemnity. They
were sued for $19 million within months of the vaccination
campaign. The Department of Justice handled the
lawsuits.36
Prior to 1997, the FDA forbade pharmaceutical
advertising on television, and the drug companies had not
yet transformed television reporters into pharmaceutical
reps. Journalists, in short, were still permitted to do
journalism. Sixty Minutes aired a scathing segment in
which Mike Wallace mercilessly exposed the corruption,
incompetence, and cover-ups at HHS that led to the phony
swine flu pandemic and the wave of casualties from NIH’s
experimental vaccine.37 The scandal forced the resignation
of CDC Director David Sencer for his role in concocting the
phony pandemic and pushing the dangerous vaccine.38
NIAID chief Richard Krause quietly resigned in 1984,
deeding his seat to his faithful deputy, Tony Fauci.39
In a poignant emblem of the ascending power of the
pharmaceutical paradigm under Dr. Fauci’s stewardship,
the Sixty Minutes report on the 1976 pandemic scandal is
now largely scrubbed from the Internet. You can still view
it on the Children’s Health Defense website.
HIV/AIDS
Despite those catastrophic outcomes, Dr. Fauci’s takeaway
from the 1976 swine flu crisis seems to have been the
revelation that pandemics were opportunities of
convenience for expanding agency power and visibility, and
for cementing advantageous partnerships with
pharmaceutical behemoths and for career advancement.
Four years later, the AIDS pandemic proved a redemptive
juncture for NIAID and the launch pad for Dr. Fauci’s
stellar rise. The lessons he learned from orchestrating
regulatory responses to the AIDS crisis would become
familiar templates for managing subsequent pandemics.
Tony Fauci spent the next half-century crafting public
responses to a series of real and concocted viral
outbreaks 40,41—HIV/AIDS 42 in 1983; SARS 43 in 2003;
MERS 44,45,46 in 2014; bird flu 47,48 in 2005; swine flu (“novel
H1N1”)49 in 2009; dengue 50,51 in 2012; Ebola 52 in 2014–
2016; Zika 53 in 2015–2016; and COVID-19 54 in 2020. When
authentic epidemics failed to materialize, Dr. Fauci became
skilled at exaggerating the severity of contagions to scare
the public and further his career.
Even all those years ago, Anthony Fauci had already
perfected his special style of ad-fear-tising, using remote,
unlikely, farfetched and improbable possibilities to frighten
people. Fauci helped terrify millions into wrongly believing
they were at risk of getting AIDS when they were not;
emphasis in his statement is added to highlight the caveats
and conditional language:
The long incubation period of this disease, we may be
starting to see, as we’re seeing virtually, as the months go
by, other groups that can be involved, and seeing it in
children is really quite disturbing. If the close contact of
the child is a household contact, perhaps there will be a
certain number of individuals who are just living with and
in close contact with someone with AIDS or at risk of
AIDS who does not necessarily have to have intimate
sexual contact or share a needle, but just the ordinary close
contact that one sees in normal interpersonal relationships.
Now that may be far fetched in a sense that there have
been no cases recognized as yet in which individuals have
had merely casual contact, close or albeit with an
individual with AIDS who for example have gotten AIDS.
For example, there have been no cases yet reported of
hospital personnel, who have fairly close contact with
patients with AIDS. There have been no case reports of
them getting AIDS; but the jury is still out on that
because the situation is constantly evolving and the
incubation period is so long, as you know. It’s a mean of
about fourteen months, ranging from six to eighteen
months. So what medical researchers and public health
service officials will be—are concerned with is what we
felt were the confines of transmissibility now going to be
loosening up and broadening up so that something
less than truly intimate contact can give transmission of
this disease.
The message people took away from those 250 rambling
and obfuscating words: “Something less than truly intimate
contact can give you this disease.”
Translated into English, however, it’s just twelve words
of truth: There have been zero cases of AIDS spread by
ordinary close contact.
Dr. Fauci’s most vocal critics complain that, from his
earliest days running NIAID, he was neither a competent
manager nor a particularly skilled or devoted scientist. His
gifts were his aptitude for bureaucratic infighting; a fiery
temper; an inclination for flattering and soft-soaping
powerful superiors; a vindictive and domineering nature
toward subordinates and rivals who dissented; his ravenous
appetite for the spotlight; and finally, his silver tongue and
skilled tailor. He won his initial beachhead by wresting
jurisdiction over the AIDS crisis from NIH’s Big Kahuna,
the National Cancer Institute (NCI).55
In 1981, the CDC first recognized the emergence of a
new disease that health officials dubbed Acquired Immune
Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) among about fifty gay men in
Los Angeles, San Francisco, and New York. The AIDS crisis
initially landed at NCI because the condition’s most
pronounced signal was Kaposi’s sarcoma, which was then
considered a deadly skin cancer associated with immune
suppression.
A decade earlier, in 1971, President Nixon had launched
the “War on Cancer.”56 The medical establishment
promised a cancer cure by 1976.57 Instead, Pharma quickly
transformed NCI into its cash cow as captured regulators
funneled hundreds of billions of dollars into single-purpose
patented cancer remedies and wonder-drug production that
the agency developed with pharmaceutical company
partners. The money enriched Pharma, researchers,
doctors, and universities, but yielded little net public health
benefit. Fifty years and $150 billion dollars later,
58,59 soft
tissue and non-smoking cancers have increased
dramatically.
60 NCI, ever-sensitive to offending Big Pharma,
Big Food, Big Ag, and Big Chemical, had spent almost
nothing to address public exposures to carcinogens from
medicines, vaccines, meats, processed foods, sugar, and
chemical-laden agriculture. Mainstream cancer research
suggests that one-third of all cancers could be eliminated
through lifestyle changes. But according to cancer expert
Samuel Epstein, NCI spent “Just 1 million—that is 0.02
percent of its $4.7 billion budget in 2005—on education,
press releases, and public relations to encourage” better
eating habits to prevent cancer.
61
Under NIH’s regulatory rubric, the only exposures that
are permissible targets of criticism and research in that
universal bugaboo are Big Tobacco and the sun, which
doesn’t pay lobbyists. NIH’s unbridled criticism of UV light
has made sunscreen lotions another booming profit center
for Big Pharma.
For Pharma and its NCI regulators and enablers, the
AIDS crisis looked like another ATM machine. But in 1984,
NIH scientist Robert Gallo linked AIDS to his virus, HTLVIII, which in time would be renamed the “human
immunodeficiency virus” (HIV). Dr. Fauci then moved
aggressively to capture that revenue stream for his agency.
In a dramatic confrontation with NCI’s Sam Broder that
year, Dr. Fauci persuasively argued that, since AIDS was an
infectious disease, NIAID must have jurisdiction. His
victory over NCI in that tip-off placed Dr. Fauci in position
to capture the sudden flood of congressional AIDS
appropriations flowing to NIH through the adept lobbying
of a well-organized AIDS community then besieging the
Capitol for resources to study and treat the “gay plague.”
In 1982, congressional AIDS funding was a pitiful
$297,000.62 By 1986, that number jumped to $63 million.63
The following year, it was $146 million.64 By 1990, NIAID’s
annual AIDS budget was $3 billion. But Gallo’s HIV/AIDS
hypothesis proved a PR windfall for Dr. Fauci, as well. “The
most dangerous place in America is between Tony and a
microphone,” recalls Dr. Fauci’s perennial Boswell, Charles
Ortleb, the former publisher of the New York Native, the
gay newspaper that chronicled the early AIDS epidemic.
“Once people recognized that this was caused by a virus,”
recalled CDC’s James Curran, “media attention went from
no news coverage to the most-covered news story in
history. People went from neglecting it, to fear and
panic.”65
The expanded flow of cash spelled opportunity for Dr.
Fauci. “AIDS was his big chance,” wrote historian and
journalist Bruce Nussbaum, who penned the definitive
history of early AIDS research, Good Intentions: How Big
Business and the Medical Establishment are Corrupting the
Fight Against AIDS.
66 “He wasn’t well known as a brilliant
scientist, and he had little background in managing a big
bureaucracy; but Fauci did have ambition and drive to
spare. This lackluster scientist was about to find his true
vocation—empire building.”67
“Teflon Tony”
The AIDS crisis’s best-known activist—and the most vocal
critic of the NIH response—playwright Larry Kramer, may
have been the first to make the cold assessment about Dr.
Fauci’s winning capacity for combining charm and flattery
with evasion, misdirection, and misinformation to bedazzle
the media into suspending skepticism and overlooking his
reliable incompetence. “The main reason that Fauci has
gotten away with so much,” Kramer observed in 1987, “is
that he’s attractive and handsome and dapper and
extremely well spoken and he never answers your
question.”68 Historians Torsten Engelbrecht, author of
Virus Mania, and Konstantin Demeter call Fauci “Dr. Baron
of Lies.”69
Asked to offer thoughts on Fauci, veteran AIDS “war”
reporter Celia Farber pulls back and takes a broad view.
She said:
People understand the Arendt concept of the “banality of
evil.”
You have set yourself the formidable task of
deconstructing him. Why is he “evil”? (Which he is.) It’s not
because he is so “banal,” so bureaucratic, so boring. That’s
the drag costume.
In fact, he is a revolutionary—a very dangerous one,
who slipped behind the gates when nobody understood
what he was bringing in.
What was he bringing in? He was bringing in—as a
trained Jesuit and committed Globalist—a new potion that
would achieve any and all aims for Pharma and the powers
he served. The potion was then known as Political
Correctness—now called “woke.”
Fauci switched the entire linguistic system of American
science, from classical “speak,” to woke “speak.” He
brought in Cancel Culture, essentially, before anybody
could imagine what it was. It was too perverse for genuine
scientists to conceive of such a thing mixing with science,
they could not believe it, or grasp it. Like a rape. It was
incredibly confusing. That’s what I documented, on the
ground, that horror and confusion among real scientists, as
American science changes so radically before their eyes, to
accommodate HIV.
Farber went on:
Let me elaborate a bit. Fauci’s reign begins in 1984, a year of total
change. Everything changes, all of a sudden. Gallo is deployed with
Margaret Heckler to make the declaration by US Government fiat
that the “probable cause of AIDS” had been “found” and that it was
some kind of trans-Atlantic fusion that looked “virus like” on the big
screen, but was really neither a cogent virus nor a pathogen. The
reason it “flew” to use [Nature Bio/Technology founding editor]
Harvey Bialy’s word, was because everything had already changed.
It was understood, without overt commands, that the “gay cancer”
that had everybody in such a panic could not be assessed as complex
toxic illness with a complex cause. The entire US media understood
what to say and not say, and not only because of the allegiance to the
shadow government, but because the era of classical science had
ended. It ended that day. It would henceforth be a crime against
decency to, for example, address anything that could be making gay
men sick other than “the virus.”
That’s not “bad science.” That’s perfectly executed political
correctness. And they are diametrically at odds, in the Biblical sense
of good and evil.
What Fauci did was he made political correctness the new
currency, of his funding empire. Peter Duesberg was not “wrong”
about HIV and AIDS, he was politically incorrect about it and that
was how Fauci banished him—sentenced him to funding and
reputation death, as though he had done something really bad by
dissenting against HIV theory. Stop and think how insane this is. An
elite cancer virologist brought over from Germany’s Max Planck
Institute whose credentials are so outstanding, who was well on his
way to solving cancer’s genetics . . . felled suddenly by a fatwah,
issued by this . . . Mufti? Who was he to issue a fatwah against
America’s top cancer virologist? Well, he did. He blocked every
federal research dollar to Duesberg after 1987, because Duesberg
repudiated the woke ideology Fauci’s HIV empire, in a few
paragraphs of a scientific paper that was about something else. He
sustained the economic and reputational attack/vendetta for the next
3 decades. Without blinking. It’s really an unbelievable story. It
would make Americans’ blood boil if they knew about it—because
almost all have lost somebody in their family to cancer.
Fauci had, by 1987, when Duesberg wrote the Cancer Research
paper that sealed his scientific fate, an apparatus that included mass
media, psychological operations, public health—this octopus that just
straight-up throttled the entire scientific tradition of Western
civilization. Evidence based science and the discourse culture that
goes with it— gone. That’s what he did. It’s no small feat. He
destroyed American science by snuffing out its spirit, the spirit of
open inquiry, proof and standards.
The reason so many outstanding scientists lent their names to
opposing Fauci’s vendetta on Duesberg was not that they cared,
necessarily, about the cause of AIDS; This was, for them, a battle
over the very soul of science. Kary Mullis [PCR inventor] broke down
crying in an interview I did with him in 1994, talking about it—
talking about what Fauci did to Peter Duesberg and what it meant.
The real scientists were horrified. Suddenly a guillotine was
present. A new and strange terror. People were “guilty,” of thoughtcrimes like “HIV denialism.” Fauci had made political correctness the
new revolutionary language, see? And that meant if you were “bad,”
if you didn’t push agenda driven science, everything was taken away
from you. And the media cheered. And anybody who didn’t was
destroyed, vilified, harassed, fired, in a word, canceled.
His gifts for deflection, misdirection, and obfuscation, and
perhaps his boyish charm, give Dr. Fauci a Teflon quality—
which he shared with President Ronald Reagan, under
whom he initially came to power. Something about Dr.
Fauci allows him to escape responsibility for (or even mild
questioning about) his steady parade of sketchy decisions,
his confident claims unsupported by scientific evidence, his
relentless cascade of lies and failed predictions, and his
miserable track record for keeping Americans healthy.
As the nation’s newly appointed AIDS czar, Dr. Fauci was
now a gatekeeper for almost all AIDS research. NCI
already had long experience and robust infrastructure for
conducting clinical trials on new drugs. NIAID had neither.
Nevertheless, parroting NCI’s vows to cure cancer, Dr.
Fauci promised Congress that he would quickly produce
drugs and vaccines to banish AIDS. In his 1990 book,
Nussbaum concludes that Fauci’s triumph over NCI cost
many thousands of Americans their lives during the AIDS
crisis.70 Myriad contemporary critics concurred with that
assessment.
The PIs: The Pharma/Fauci Mercenary
Army
NIAID’s lack of in-house drug development capacity
allowed Dr. Fauci to build his new program by farming out
drug research to a network of so-called “principal
investigators,” or PIs, effectively controlled by
pharmaceutical companies. Today, when people refer to the
“Medical Cartel,” they are principally speaking of
pharmaceutical companies, hospital systems, HMOs and
insurers, the medical journals, and public health
regulators. But the glue that holds all these institutions
together, and allows them to march in lockstep, is the army
of PIs who act as lobbyists, spokespersons, liaisons, and
enforcers. Tony Fauci played a key historic role in elevating
this cohort to dominate public health policy.
PIs are powerful academic physicians and researchers
who use federal grants and pharmaceutical industry
contracts to build feudal empires at universities and
research hospitals that mainly conduct clinical trials—a key
stage in the licensing process— for new pharmaceutical
products. Thanks to NIH’s largesse, and to NIAID in
particular, a relatively tiny network of PIs—a few hundred—
determines the content and direction of virtually all
America’s biomedical research.
In 1987, some $4.6 billion of NIH’s $6.1 billion budget
went to these off-campus researchers.71 By 1992, NIH’s
budget had expanded to $8.9 billion,72 with $5 billion going
to outside scientists at 1,300 universities, laboratories, and
other elite institutions.73,74 Today, Dr. Fauci’s NIAID alone
controls $7.6 billion in annual discretionary expenditures
that he distributes mainly to PIs around the globe.75
PIs are pharmaceutical industry surrogates who play
key roles promoting the pharmaceutical paradigm and
functioning as high priests of all its orthodoxies, which they
proselytize with missionary zeal. They use their seats on
medical boards and chairmanships of university
departments to propagate dogma and root out heresy. They
enforce message discipline, silence criticism, censor
contrary opinions, and punish dissent. They populate the
Data and Safety Monitoring Boards (DSMBs) that influence
the design of clinical trial protocols and guide the
interpretation of clinical trial outcomes and conclusions;
the external advisory FDA panel, Vaccines and Related
Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC), that
guides determination of whether new vaccines are “safe
and effective” and merit licensure (marketing); and the
CDC panel, The Advisory Committee on Immunization
Practices (ACIP), that essentially mandates vaccines to
children. They are the credentialed and trusted medical
experts who prognosticate on television networks—now
helplessly reliant on pharmaceutical ad revenue—to push
out Pharma content. These “experts”—Paul Offit, Peter
Hotez, Stanley Plotkin, Ian Lipkin, William Schaffner,
Kathleen Edwards, Arthur Caplan, Stanley Katz, Greg
Poland, and Andrew Pollard—appear between Pharma ads
on network and cable news shows to promote the annual
flu shots and measles scares, to drum up fears about
COVID, and to rail against “anti-vaxxers.” They write the
steady stream of editorials that appear in local and national
newspapers to reinforce the hackneyed orthodoxies of the
pharmaceutical paradigms—“all vaccines are safe and
effective,” etc. They root out heresy by sitting on the state
medical boards—the “Inquisition” courts—that censure and
de-license dissident doctors. They control the medical
journals and peer-review journal literature to fortify
Pharma’s agenda. They teach on medical school faculties,
populate journal editorial boards, and chair university
departments. They supervise hospitals and chair hospital
departments. They act as expert witnesses for
pharmaceutical companies in civil court and the federal
vaccine court. They present awards to one another.
The 2006 meeting of CDC’s ACIP provides an illustrative
blueprint for how Tony Fauci and his Pharma partners use
their PIs to control the key FDA and CDC panels that
license and “recommend” new vaccines for addition to the
childhood schedule. That 2006 ACIP panel recommended
two new blockbuster Merck shots: the Gardasil HPV
vaccine for all girls ages nine through twenty-six,76 and
three doses of a Merck rotavirus vaccine, Rotateq, for
infants at ages two, four, and six months.77 Both Bill
Gates 78 and Tony Fauci (via NIAID)79 had provided seed
and clinical trial funding for the development of both
Gardasil and the rotavirus vaccine.80,81 Merck maintained
it had not tested either vaccine against an inert placebo in
pre-approval trials, so no one could scientifically predict if
the vaccines would avert more injuries or cancers than they
would cause. Nevertheless, the sister FDA panel, VRBPAC,
approved Gardasil—to prevent cervical cancer—without
requiring proof that the vaccine prevented any sort of
cancer, and despite strong evidence from Merck’s clinical
trial that Gardasil could dramatically raise risks of cancer
and autoimmunity in some girls.82 ACIP, nevertheless,
effectively mandated both jabs. Gardasil would be the most
expensive vaccine in history, costing patients $420 for the
three-jab series and generating revenues of over $1 billion
annually for Merck.83
That year, nine of the thirteen ACIP panel members and
their institutions collectively received over $1.6 billion of
grant money from NIH and NIAID.
Systemic Conflicts of Interest
Pharma and Dr. Fauci similarly rig virtually all the critical
drug approval panels using this strategy of populating them
with PIs who, bound by financial fealty to Pharma and
NIAID funders, reliably approve virtually every new drug
upon which they deliberate—with or without safety studies.
From 1999 to 2000, Government Oversight Committee
(GOC) Chairman Republican Congressman Dan Burton
investigated the systemic corruption of these panels during
two years of intense investigations and hearings. According
to Burton, “CDC routinely allows scientists with blatant
conflicts of interest to serve on influential advisory
committees that make recommendations on new vaccines .
. . while these same scientists have financial ties, academic
affiliations and other . . . interests in the products and
companies for which they are supposed to be providing
unbiased oversight.”84, 85
Paul Offit: Voting Himself Rich
The notorious “Television Doctor” Paul Offit was the
codeveloper of the rotavirus vaccine that ACIP approved in
that 2006 session. Offit is one of Dr. Fauci’s most prominent
PIs and an exemplar of the kind of power, influence, and
lucre available to PIs whose entrepreneurial energies are
unobstructed by scruples. Offit is the darling of both
mainstream and social media. He is a perennial guest on
CBS, NBC, ABC, and CNN, on cable shows such as The
Daily Show, and a former guest on The Colbert Report. He
is the New York Times’s guest expert and provides regular
editorials for the Times’s op-ed pages. He is a frequently
quoted expert on evening news broadcasts and a regular
contributor to online media outlets including HuffPost,
Politico, and The Daily Beast.
86
Media platforms uniformly
identify Offit as a “vaccine expert” from the University of
Pennsylvania and the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia
(CHOP). With Offit’s encouragement, they seldom, if ever,
disclose his pervasive financial entanglements with Dr.
Fauci and the pharmaceutical companies. In 2011, for
example, while presenting at NIH for the Great Teachers
Lecture Series, he unabashedly declared, “I’m sorry, I have
no financial conflicts of interest.”87
Given his voluminous
conflicts, the brashness of that claim indicates his
shameless arrogance. Dr. Offit, in fact, is a vaccine
developer who has made millions monetizing his
relationships with vaccine companies. He occupies the
“Hilleman Chair” at CHOP (Children’s Hospital of
Philadelphia), which Merck funded with a $1.5 million
donation and named in honor of the company’s
heavyweight vaccinologist.88
Offit and his university and hospital affiliates have
flourished largely based on hundreds of millions in grant
monies from Dr. Fauci’s agency and from virtually all the
big vaccine companies. In 2006 alone, his institution,
CHOP, received $13 million from NIAID and $80 million
from NIH. Offit’s biennial propaganda books—including
titles like Vaccines: What Every Parent Should Know and
Autism’s False Prophets: Bad Science, Risky Medicine, and
the Search for a Cure—are unabashed paeans to Big
Pharma, and scourges to industry detractors and natural
health. Offit uses these plugola tomes to exalt a wide range
of “miracle” pharma products, to vilify vaccine hesitancy,
and gaslight and bully the mothers of vaccine-injured
children. Merck launders hundreds of thousands of dollars
in personal payments to Offit through bulk purchases of
these propaganda broadsides, which the company then
distributes to pediatricians across the country.
89
Offit is the most visible spokesperson for Pharma, its
allied industries, and the chemical paradigm in general. He
represents himself as an authoritative source of reliable
information, but he is actually a font of wild industry
ballyhoo, prevarication, and outright fraud. He brazenly
claims, against all scientific evidence, that vaccine injuries
are a myth—that all vaccines are safe and effective, that
children can safely receive ten thousand vaccines at
once,90 and that aluminum is safe in vaccines for babies
because it is a “vital nutrient.”91 (There is no scientific
study suggesting that aluminum is safe or that it has any
nutritional value.) Offit says that mercury in vaccines is
harmless and is quickly excreted from the body.
92
(Published science demonstrates decisively that mercury is
a cataclysmically harmful and persistent toxin, and it is
well known that both ethyl and methylmercury
bioaccumulate.)
Dr. Offit vocally supports GMO foods 93 and
chemical pesticides and is an obstreperous foe of vitamins,
nutrition, and integrative medicine.94 He warns against the
fallacy of going “GMO free,” and takes the radical position
that dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT) is harmless. He
bitterly demonizes Rachel Carson for killing millions of
people by hatching the plot against Monsanto’s DDT.
95
Dr. Offit counsels his fellow PIs that lying is part of their
job. He justifies any whopper that maximizes vaccine
uptake. In 2017, Offit coached a group of fellow PIs, “You
can never really say that MMR doesn’t cause autism but
frankly when you get in front of the media you better get
used to saying it because otherwise people hear a door
being left open when a door shouldn’t be left open.”96 In
his 2008 book, Autism’s False Prophets, Offit fabricated a
conversation claiming that a vaccine safety advocate, J. B.
Handley—a prominent Portland, Oregon, businessman with
a severely autistic son—threatened one of Offit’s acolytes.
Handley sued Offit for libel,97 forcing him to retract the
statement, to publicly apologize for the fabrication, and to
make a humiliating $5,000 donation to Jenny McCarthy’s
autism charity.
98
Despite such embarrassments, the
mainstream media treat Offit’s most outlandish statements
as gospel. Physicians rely upon the veracity of his
pronouncements in making treatment decisions. Dr. Offit
serves on the board of various pharma front groups 99 and
astroturf organizations 100 and commands a vast network of
bloggers and trolls, each of them directly or indirectly paid
by the pharmaceutical companies to stifle debate,
propagate lies, bully and intimidate the mothers of
intellectually disabled children, silence scientific and
medical dissent, and root out heresy.
In 1998, Offit sat on the CDC’s ACIP Committee and
participated in the debate that added rotavirus vaccine to
the mandatory schedule for the first time, neither from the
debate nor the vote, despite the fact that he had his own
rotavirus vaccine then in development. He voted that year
to add Wyeth-Ayerst Pharmaceuticals’s rotavirus vaccine,
RotaShield, to the mandatory schedule despite the absence
of functional safety studies. Offit knew that ACIP’s positive
vote on Wyeth’s rotavirus jab would virtually guarantee a
similar approval for his own rotavirus vaccine during an
upcoming ACIP session.101
Before arriving at ACIP, every vaccine must first get
reviewed by FDA’s sister “independent panel” called
VRBPAC (which is also populated with Dr. Fauci’s and Big
Pharma’s PIs), then licensed as “safe and effective” by the
FDA. According to the findings of that 2000 Congressional
investigation,102 four of the five FDA VRBPAC committee
members who voted to license the Wyeth rotavirus vaccine
that year had financial conflicts with the four
pharmaceutical companies, Sanofi, Merck, Wyeth, and
Glaxo, that were developing versions of the vaccine.
Once the FDA committee gave RotaShield its blessing,
the vaccine moved to ACIP to vie for a CDC
“recommendation,” which effectively mandates the vaccine
for 3.8 million school children annually, guaranteeing the
manufacturer a trapped market worth hundreds of millions.
During the 1998 ACIP session, Dr. Offit sat as one of five
full voting members. (There were five additional nonvoting
members.) His Rotateq codeveloper, Stanley Plotkin, also
sat on the committee. The ACIP Committee unanimously
recommended Wyeth’s RotaShield vaccine.
The August 2000 Congressional investigation found that
the majority of ACIP members were conflicted in that
vote.103 That report found that seven out of ten ACIP
working group committee members who voted to approve the rotavirus vaccine in June 1998 had financial ties to the
pharmaceutical companies that were developing different
versions of the vaccine.
According to the Congressional Report:
#The Chairman served on Merck’s Immunization
Advisory Board.
#One member was under contract with the Merck
vaccine division, received funds from various
vaccine manufacturers, including Pasteur (now
Sanofi), and was under contract as a principal
investigator from SmithKline (now GSK).
#Another member (of that same ACIP panel) received
a salary from Merck as well as other payments from
Merck.
#Another member was participating in vaccine
studies with Merck, Wyeth (now Pfizer), and
SmithKline (now GSK).
#Another member received grants from Merck and
SmithKline (now GSK).
#Another member shared a patent on his own
rotavirus vaccine funded by a $350,000 grant for
Merck to develop this vaccine and was a paid
consultant to Merck.
The last of these bullet points referred to Paul “I Have No
Conflicts” Offit. Dr. Fauci’s and Pharma’s corrupt control of
those two panels allowed Wyeth to obtain both an FDA
license and a CDC “recommendation” without having to
genuinely safety test this product, a process that would
have revealed terrible risks. Even the truncated trials of
Wyeth’s RotaShield, conducted with no placebo, revealed
serious side effects in babies, including “failure to thrive,”
fevers high enough to cause brain injury, and a condition
called intussusception, wherein a child’s intestines
telescope into themselves, causing an agonizing blockage
that, in some instances, results in death. The
intussusception figures alone were statistically significant—
cited as one in two thousand of the children who received
the vaccine.104 At this time, there were around 3.8 million
children in the target age group living in the United States;
this translated to around 1,890 statistically likely cases of
intussusception.105
Nevertheless, VRBPAC, under Fauci’s and Pharma’s
tight control, approved the vaccine, and ACIP put it on the
mandatory schedule. Less than a year after Dr. Offit and his
confederates on ACIP voted to mandate RotaShield with no
authentic safety testing, Offit again sat on the ACIP
committee that revoked this earlier recommendation. ACIP
pulled RotaShield from the market in October 1999 due to
the many children who, predictably, suffered
intussusception.106 VAERS, the Vaccine Adverse Event
Reporting System, contains fifty reports of vaccine-related
intussusception for the year 1999.107 Paul Offit’s shrewd
maneuvering through this sequence of events opened an
unobstructed path to approval and enormous riches for his
own rotavirus vaccine, RotaTeq.
Since its approval, Dr. Offit’s rotavirus vaccine has
caused a wave of catastrophic illnesses and agonizing
deaths in babies from intussusception.108
From 1985 to 1991, prior to the introduction of the
rotavirus vaccine, the rotavirus disease caused only 20–60
deaths per year nationwide, mainly due to dehydration
associated with diarrhea.109,110 Since dehydration is easily
treated, virtually all deaths from rotavirus are avoidable
with timely and appropriate medical care.
Reported adverse reactions from Dr. Offit’s RotaTeq
vaccine range from 953 to 1,689 per year. These included
fever, diarrhea, vomiting, irritability, intussusception, SIDS,
severe combined immunodeficiency, otitis media,
nasopharyngitis, bronchospasm, urinary tract infection,
hematochezia, seizures, Kawasaki disease, bronchiolitis,
urticaria, angioedema, gastroenteritis, pneumonia, and
death.111
The best evidence indicates that Dr. Offit’s rotavirus
vaccine causes negative net public health impacts; in other
words, Dr. Offit’s vaccine almost certainly kills and injures
more children in the United States than the rotavirus
disease killed and injured prior to the vaccine’s
introduction.
Finally, in 2010, after its introduction, NIH learned that
Offit’s vaccine, RotaTeq, also contained the porcine
retrovirus that causes an HIV-like syndrome called
“wasting disease” in pigs.112 Neither Dr. Fauci nor any
other agency has ever funded a study to establish the
safety of injecting their dangerous pig retroviruses into
babies. Millions of American children have now been
inoculated with the virus, thanks to Offit.
In 2006, ACIP added Offit’s vaccine to the schedule,
allowing Offit and his business partners to sell his patent
rights for the formulation to Merck for $186 million. Offit
made a declared profit of over $20 million as a result of this
series of transactions. Offit reported, in a gushing 2008
Newsweek story, that the millions he made from his
rotavirus caper was “like winning the lottery.”113 In a less adoring assessment of the scam, UPI journalist Dan
Olmsted and coauthor Mark Blaxill accused Offit of “voting
himself rich.”114
The disturbing saga of Paul Offit and his rotavirus
vaccine illustrates how Tony Fauci’s PIs stuff the sausages
at HHS.
How PIs Control Public Marketing
Dr. Fauci’s choice to transfer virtually all of NIAID’s budget
to pharmaceutical PIs for drug development was an
abdication of the agency’s duty to find the source and
eliminate the explosive epidemics of allergic and
autoimmune disease that began under his watch around
1989.115,116 Refereed science, surveillance data, and
manufacturers’ inserts all implicate the very drugs and
vaccines that Tony Fauci largely helped develop as culprits
in those new epidemics. NIAID money effectively became a
giant subsidy to the blossoming pharmaceutical industry to
incubate a pipeline of profitable new drugs targeted to
treat the symptoms of those very diseases.
While NIH remains a massive funding source for PIs,
rich contracts from big drug companies and royalty
payments from drug products often dwarf their government
funding. Pharma money is the PIs’ bread and butter,
commanding their loyalties and dictating their priorities.
They and their clinics and research institutions are,
effectively, arms of the pharmaceutical industry. Their
empires rely on Pharma for their growth and survival.
Moreover, PIs typically function in quasi-feudal fiefdoms:
loyal to a single pharmaceutical company. Each drug
company—Glaxo, Pfizer, Merck, Sanofi, Johnson & Johnson,
and Gilead—cultivates a cadre of its own reliable PIs whom
it funds to conduct clinical trials and drug research.
Unwritten protocols dictate that a Merck PI will not
customarily perform research for a Merck competitor.
Typically, the drug company contracts with the reliable PI’s
medical school, attending hospital, or research institution
to run clinical trials. The company makes payments ranging
from a few hundred dollars to $10,000 (depending on the
trial phase, complexity, and the company) for each patient
enrolled in the drug trial,117 with the university skimming
one-half to two-thirds of those funds for “academic
overhead.”118
Those payments from the pharmaceutical
company secure long-term loyalty from the institution and
its board. Moreover, both the researcher and the university
customarily share patent interests in any product the PI
helps develop, collecting rich royalties when it hits the
market. Additional money from the Pharma sponsor
supports the PI’s assistants and laboratory costs. The drug
company also pays “legalized bribes” to the PI grantee
through honoraria, expert witness fees, speaking gigs, and
first-class travel to exclusive resorts for conferences. All
these perquisites tend to fortify loyalty and incentivize the
favorable research results necessary to securing FDA drug
approvals. On all sides of these transactions, each
stakeholder understands that positive reviews of the
subject drug promise future work.
According to Nussbaum, “PIs do their own kind of
science and, more often than not, their experiments have
little to do with either health or the public. They test drugs
by private pharmaceutical companies for personal gain, for
money that goes to their universities, and for power.”119
The system allows pharmaceutical companies to
systematically divert federal monies—the initial NIAID
grant—to serve their own private profit priorities.
Naturally, the system is hostile to drugs with expired
patents or those that emerge from companies that are not
paying the PI’s research expenses. This bias explains Dr.
Fauci’s signature animosity toward non-pharmaceutical,
unpatentable, or patent-expired and generic remedies.
In his unpublished history of the HIV era, Down the
Rabbit Hole, author and historian Terry Michael offers a
similar description of Dr. Fauci’s abrogation of his scientific
role to the army of Pharma PIs: “But NIH has other clients,
including thousands of grant-seeking medical science
Ph.D.’s produced by American universities after World War
II. NIAID funds much of the pharmaceutical industry’s
research and clinical trials. In fact, Big Pharma has become
a client of the NIH and especially its NIAID.”120
This powerful army, garrisoned at hospitals and
universities in every large American community, allows
Pharma and Dr. Fauci to control the public health narrative
around the country. Before I understood its structure, I
encountered the pervasive power of the combination.
Between 1990 and 2020, I served as president of an
influential environmental group, Waterkeepers, with 350
affiliates around the county and the globe. Waterkeepers is
the world’s largest water protection group. I published
regularly in the New York Times and all the major papers:
Boston Globe, Houston Chronicle, Chicago Sun-Times, Los
Angeles Times, Miami Herald, and San Francisco
Chronicle; in magazines including Esquire, Rolling Stone,
and The Atlantic; and in online publications, most often in
HuffPost. I delivered over 220 speeches each year,
including sixty paid speaking engagements to large
audiences at universities and corporate events. I earned a
substantial income from those appearances. All that
changed in 2005, after I published an article, “Deadly
Immunity,” about corruption in CDC’s vaccine branch,
simultaneously in Rolling Stone and Salon.
Newspapers thereafter generally refused to publish my
articles on vaccine safety and ultimately banned me from
publishing on any issues. In 2008, without consulting me or
citing a specific reason, Salon retracted and removed my
2005 article. Salon’s founder, David Talbot, faulted Salon
for caving in to Pharma. Rolling Stone finally removed the
article without explanation in February 2021, and HuffPost
purged all half-dozen of my vaccine articles. The editors of
those online journals had thoroughly fact-checked my
pieces prior to publication. They removed them without
notice to me, and without ever explaining their decisions. It
was the beginning of the mass censorship of any vaccine
information that departs from official narratives.
That year,
universities and corporate hosts and municipal speakers’
forums suddenly cancelled my scheduled speeches in
droves. My bookings dropped from sixty paid speeches per
year down to one or two. My speakers’ bureau told me that
floods of telephone calls from powerful members of the
medical community had prompted the cancellations. They
deluged the offices of presidents and board members of the
colleges, businesses, and community groups that were
hosting me, protesting my appearances. The callers were
public health officials and leading doctors from local
hospitals, university medical schools, and influential
research centers in those locales. Using similar language,
they offered dire warnings that I was anti-vaccine, anti-
science, a “baby killer,” and that my appearance would
jeopardize public health and vital funding to university
medical school programs.
The threat to interrupt money flows to the university PIs
invariably trumps the traditions of speech freedom revered
—in theory—by university administrators. Starting in 2019,
PIs at NYU attempted to force the ouster of popular
historian and propaganda expert Professor Mark Crispin
Miller from its faculty roster and law professor Mary
Holland from its law school faculty because they dared
question reigning vaccine orthodoxies.
Terry Michaels summarized how Dr. Fauci exploited the
strategic landscapes of the HIV pandemic to launch his
career on a trajectory toward the unimaginable power that
would allow him to dictate official orthodoxies, control the
press, set international health policies, and even to shut
down the global economy: “Dr. Anthony Fauci seized an
opportunity to create a multi-billion dollar bureaucracy,
distributing thousands of grants to seekers of federally
funded research largesse, with a disproportionate (to other
diseases) number going to HIV-AIDS researchers.”121
Tony Fauci did not create the PI system, but his
inexperience both as a scientist and as an administrator
meant that he relied upon it and was, at first, at its mercy.
Later, he took command of those troops and organized
them into a powerful juggernaut that journalist John
Lauritsen calls “the Medical Industrial Complex.”122
notes
chapter 2
page 318 on the scroll
chapter 3
page 362 on the scroll @
FAIR USE NOTICE
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. As a journalist, I am making such material available in my efforts to advance understanding of artistic, cultural, historic, religious and political issues. I believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. Copyrighted material can be removed on the request of the owner.
No comments:
Post a Comment