Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- unitaid [2022/03/05 00:20]
pamela
+++ unitaid [2022/03/05 01:40] (current)
liam [Pandemic Corruption]
@@ Line 45: / Line 45: @@
 Del Bigtree sits down for a one-on-one with the former W.H.O. consultant & research scientist, Tess Lawrie MD, PhD, who was a critical part of the [[:Ivermectin]] trials over a year ago with overwhelmingly positive conclusions. See data and recorded personal zoom calls that reveal how a key review was attacked from within, keeping the safe, life-saving drug out of the hands of millions of dying Covid patients for more than a year.
-Tess outlining UNITAID role derailing Ivermectin from 29 min.((https://thehighwire.com/videos/former-w-h-o-consultant-exposes-takedown-of-ivermectin/))
+Tess outlining UNITAID role derailing Ivermectin from 29 min. andconversations with Andrew Hill((https://thehighwire.com/videos/former-w-h-o-consultant-exposes-takedown-of-ivermectin/))
+=== Andrew Hill's Ivermectin Problem ===
+Researcher Andrew Hill’s conflict: A $40 million Gates Foundation grant vs a half million human lives
+Investigative Editor December 9, 2021
+by WorldTribune Staff, December 9, 2021
+In a stunning admission, virologist Dr. Andrew Hill acknowledged in a zoom call that publication of his study could lead to the deaths of at least a half million people.
+In defending his reversal on the effectiveness of ivermectin as a treatment for COVID-19, he discussed his “difficult situation” and said, “I’ve got this role where I’m supposed to produce this paper and we’re in a very difficult, delicate balance.”
+The incident is recounted in Robert Kennedy Jr’s New York Times Bestseller, The Real Anthony Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the global war on Democracy and Public Health.
+Andrew Hill, PhD, is a senior visiting Research Fellow in Pharmacology at Liverpool University. He is also an advisor for the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Clinton Foundation. As a researcher for the WHO evaluating ivermectin, Hill wielded enormous influence over international guidance for the drug’s use.
+Hill had previously authored a analysis of ivermectin as a treatment for COVID-19 that found the drug overwhelmingly effective.
+On Jan. 6 of 2021, Hill testified enthusiastically before the NIH COVID-19 Treatment Guidlelines Panel in support of ivermectin’s use. Within a month, however, Hill found himself in what he describes as a “tricky situation.” Under pressure from his funding sponsors, Hill then published an unfavorable study. Ironically, he used the same sources as in the original study. Only the conclusions had changed.
+Shortly before he published, Dr. [[Tess Lawrie]], Director of the Evidence-based Medicine Consultancy in Bath, England, and one of the world’s leading medical research analysts, contacted Hill via Zoom and recorded the call (transcript below). Lawrie had learned of his new position and reached out to try to rectify the situation.
+In a remarkable exchange, a transcript of which appears on pages 137 – 143 in Kennedy’s book, Hill admitted his manipulated study would likely delay the uptake of ivermectin in the UK and United States, but said he hoped his doing so would only set the lifesaving drug’s acceptance back by about “six weeks,” after which he was willing to give his support for its use.((https://www.worldtribune.com/researcher-andrew-hills-conflict-a-40-million-gates-foundation-grant-vs-a-half-million-human-lives/))((https://web.archive.org/web/20211211075929/https://www.worldtribune.com/researcher-andrew-hills-conflict-a-40-million-gates-foundation-grant-vs-a-half-million-human-lives/))