Here are two updates from lawyers involved in the Truvada litigation involving 2,625 plaintiffs in California. From About Lawsuits:
Gilead Settlement Resolves 2,625 HIV Drug Lawsuits Pending in Federal Courts for $40M
The pull quote states: “HIV drug settlement does not resolve the Truvada lawsuits, Atripla lawsuits, Stribild lawsits, Viread lawsuits and Complera lawsuits pending in California state court, where tens of thousands of additional claims are filed.” This $40 million settlement is only intended to compensate 2,625 of the over 26,000 plaintiffs in various lawsuits, including a class action lawsuit on behalf of over 20,000 plaintiffs. As always, emphasis is mine throughout.
Following the settlement, Gilead will continue to face an estimated 24,000 lawsuits that are currently centralized in the California state court system, where individual cases may soon start to go before juries.
Gilead previously sought to have those lawsuits dismissed, arguing that plaintiffs must prove the drugs were defective to pursue negligence claims, and that the company should not be held liable for delaying development of a newer version. After a lower court rejected Gilead’s arguments, the manufacturer appealed the ruling to the Court of Appeals for the State of California, which cleared the HIV drug lawsuits to move forward in a decision in January 2024.
Recall that AIDS Healthcare Foundation (AHF) called upon Gilead to set up a $10 billion fund in anticipation of massive settlements in the class action lawsuit. This lawsuit has the potential to rival the OxyContin scandal should the payout eventuate.
The following is a statement from the law firms of Grant & Eisenhofer, Jenner Law, Burg Simpson, and The Lawrence Law Firm:
This statement is certainly not letting Gilead off the hook whatsoever:
In a recent press release (reported in The San Francisco Chronicle on June 4th), California pharma giant Gilead touts a $40 million settlement to resolve the lawsuits of approximately 2,625 plaintiffs. At the same time, it brushes off its culpability for delaying potentially life-saving treatments that should have been made available to patients living with HIV/AIDS but for Gilead’s greed. Despite its assertations that the settlement was simply effected to avoid “distraction,” the internal documents unearthed during a parallel litigation (Gilead Tenofovir Cases (Judicial Council Coordination Proceeding (JCCP) No. 5043) in California state court, which have been made public by The New York Times, reveal a disturbing truth: Gilead knowingly prioritized profits over the well-being of millions of individuals living with HIV.
I love the turn of phrase—Gilead is settling to avoid “distraction.” Distraction from what—the fact that the drugs don’t work, aren’t specific to “HIV,” and absolutely ought not to be prescribed to people who are “HIV” negative as PrEP?
Their words are pretty harsh, and I’m here for it:
Gilead’s self-serving claim that it has always worked to improve the lives of HIV patients is contradicted by its decision to pause the development of tenofovir alafenamide (TAF), a life-saving drug with few side effects, in favor of maintaining sales of its existing drug, tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), which Gilead itself acknowledges causes serious kidney and bone damage. This decision wasn’t driven by concerns over efficacy or safety; it was purely motivated by financial gain. In fact, at an internal April 17, 2003 meeting (see attached), Gilead’s Development Committee, the group that decides which drugs to develop, decided to stop TAF’s development “due to the likelihood that [it] would ultimately cannibalize Viread [TDF] regardless of its efficacy and safety profile. One reason for continuing/restarting development would be to obtain patent extension.”
I’ll let you click through and read the statement in its entirety yourself; however, I will conclude with the following quote:
Gilead’s attempt to downplay its well-documented misconduct is insulting to the HIV community and all those affected by the company’s actions. The settlement touted by Gilead should be viewed against the backdrop of the billions in profits Gilead has reaped by exploiting its monopoly over HIV treatments. Gilead’s TAF-delay strategy also proved to be immensely profitable for its top executives as well. Gilead’s former CFO, (and later CEO), who was a key player in the decision to delay TAF, amassed over $700 million in sales of Gilead stock.
My question to all the people that are newly aware of the shady behavior of the public health establishment and the bureaucrats that represent it because the Covid fiasco made it impossible not to become aware, but that for some reason cannot bring themselves to touch the “third rail” of doubting the HIV AIDS story is this:
Given the clearly self-serving, money-grabbing behavior of pharmaceutical giants like Gilead, and their obvious disregard for the lives and health of their customers; and given that we now know we’ve been lied to by the public health and regulatory agents, why would HIV AIDS be the one shining example of them getting it right, and being honest and transparent about their “discoveries?”
Much more to come on Gilead and Truvada—stay tuned.
"Gilead’s attempt to downplay its well-documented misconduct is insulting to the HIV community and all those affected by the company’s actions."
The truth of course is that ALL 'anti-HIV' drugs are toxic. This 'misconduct' isn't misconduct because it's a feature and not a bug, as we say in the computer industry. It's also part of the foundation of the HIV lie, that anything they do to fiddle with biomarkers interpreted as HIV are going to f-up the body. It's the nature of the beast.
Good question, Rebecca. I'm really mystified why we haven't seen large waves of doctors and scientists who courageously confronted and called out the covid scam, draw the obvious conclusions and raise their voices about the HIV scam, too. It still seems to be somewhat of a third rail, not to be touched, even for otherwise brave dissidents.