In 2005, an explosive Associated Press (AP) scoop showed large numbers of agency scientists — at the NIH’s explicit instruction — were routinely failing to disclose royalty payments, either to taxpayers or to participants in taxpayer-funded clinical trials who were obligingly testing out the NIH’s royalty-generating experimental treatments.
As AP pointed out, “Such research helps bring the treatment closer to possible commercial use, which could in turn bring the researchers and NIH higher royalties.”
….royalty-hungry scientists are not interested in “tried-and-true, classical … repurposing [of] drugs and strategies that have already been shown to work.” They prefer, in the words of Columbia University’s Dr. Ian Lipkin, novel treatments that are “sexy and new and patentable.” In short, off-patent drugs like ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, and cheap supplements like vitamin C and vitamin D — often preventive as well as therapeutic — don’t generate royalties. Nor do they mesh with the global control agenda the NIH’s new DARPA-like agency promises to facilitate. It is up to the public to reassert, strongly, that people and freedom come first.‘Recipes for Regulatory Corruption’: How CDC, NIH Pull in Millions From Licensing Deals, Including COVID-Related Technologies • Children’s Health Defense