Dear Friends and Patriots,

I've heard a lot about Remdesivir for the past two years. The NIH treatment protocol for COVID seems to require it if a patient is hospitalized with a particular set of COVID symptoms. The literature on the drug simply states it's indicated for use if the patient is hospitalized with a COVID diagnosis. It doesn't mention any symptom at all. Evidently, symptoms don't matter. Isn't that curious?

I first became interested in the selection of Remdesivir (or Veklury, its registered trade name) when I learned it had never been subjected to drug trials. It is an experimental drug, and when you read the literature (found at: https://www.gilead.com/-/media/files/pdfs/medicines/covid-19/veklury/veklury_pi.pdf – look on page 29), that fact is clearly evident. There is a table that describes the drug trials claimed by the developer, and they're all related to treatments of people who were hospitalized with COVID since March of 2020.

People in hospitals are being used as the only test subjects. There were and are no animal trials. There is no longitudinal safety data related to Remdesivir. Perhaps that's why the claims by Health Freedom advocates that it kills as many people as COVID itself aren't challenged in courts.

Everything about COVID is curious. Dr. Fauci is a prominent figure in the development of both the SARS-2 MRNA vaccines as well as the creation of patented mutations of the coronavirus that was eventually designated as COVID 19. When you pull that thread, it leads to huge financial incentives for many at NIH and the CDC to promote the use of the vaccines and boosters. The use of Remdesivir itself is curious. It was created by Gilead Sciences, first as a treatment for hepatitis C, which did not pan out. It was then tried as a treatment for Ebola, which also didn't pan out. It was most recently tried as a treatment for the Marburg virus, a hemorrhagic fever similar to Ebola. Again, it just didn't seem to work. Why was it tried for COVID? Was it a need to recoup investment costs?

My interests lead me down odd paths. I looked to see who the major investors are in Gilead Sciences. What did I find? The top four investors are: The Vanguard Group, with 8.1%, Blackrock Investments, with 6.5%, SSgA Funds Management, with 4.6%, and Capital Research & Mgt., with 4.5%. That means almost 25% of Gilead is owned by those four investment houses. When I looked a bit more, I found all of the top ten investors in Gilead to be investment houses, and that the total ownership by investment houses was 85%. (Currently available data. The actual investor roster changes daily.) Do you perceive an issue there? Is Gilead that good a financial bet?

In March 2020, Gilead applied for "orphan drug" status for Remdesivir. An "orphan drug" designation is supposed to indicate a drug's potential annual "patient base" is less than 200,000 people. Approval by the FDA allowed the company to secure 20-year patent rights in many countries, instead of the usual seven. In a strange twist of corporate fate, since getting those 20-year patent rights, Remdesivir was almost immediately incorporated into the NIH's approved COVID treatment protocol and is now administered to millions. It's also now Gilead's most profitable product. A strange twist indeed! I just wonder—how could that have happened?

Doesn't it interest you that a drug that didn't seem to work for any of the diseases it was supposedly designed for went from "orphan" status to the top selling product in Gilead's line in only one year? It interests me!

Both Vanguard and Blackrock are major players with the World Economic Forum. Connections between those organizations are highly interwoven. Is it logical to assume the WEF has something to do with Gilead's success?

I looked for links between the WEF and Gilead Sciences. I found Harald Nusser, a principal member of the WEF, shown as Gilead's current Head of Global Patient Solutions. Then, I found John Milligan, also a WEF principal member, who joined Gilead in 1990 and has been its CEO since 2016. I also found a Sep. 2021 page of the WEF website that had this statement: To date, Gilead Sciences Inc's intravenous drug remdesivir is the only approved antiviral treatment for COVID-19 in the US.

Who and what do you trust? How much trust are you willing to invest when it's proven to you there's a nexus between major investment firms and a pharmaceutical developer/manufacturer? How much trust are you willing to invest when it's proven the same pharmaceutical developer/manufacturer has been given an amazing level of preferential treatment by the government medical establishment? How much trust are you willing to invest when you know the same pharmaceutical developer/manufacturer is bound in lock step to the overlord organization promoting The Great Reset, Agenda 2030, and the Fourth Industrial Revolution? How much trust are you willing to invest when you know if you are admitted to a hospital with a COVID diagnosis you're very likely to be given Remdesivir, an experimental drug that's never proved to work for any of the diseases it was actually designed for? Do you want to be a Gilead lab rat?

I'll take my chances with hydroxychloroquine, Zinc, and Ivermectin. After doing just an hour of research on Remdesivir, I'm quite certain I want no part of it, just as I want no part of any of the so-called vaccines being administered for COVID. Of course, that means no hospital will touch me. I'm on my own. Somehow, I feel safer just knowing that.

I'll be fine. I hope you will be, too.

In Liberty,

Steve