This article was previously published on September 16, 2020 and has been updated with new information.
At the beginning of 2020, a global pandemic spurred the world to action, especially in the scientific community. Researchers have begun looking to discover how the COVID-19 virus works and find the best methods for testing, treating, and immunizing. One of the interventions that the biomedical community is pursuing is the use of antiviral drugs, including remdesivir.
The drug was initially analyzed during the Ebola outbreak a few years ago but was never approved. Its development is the result of a collaboration between Gilead Sciences, the CDC, and the US Army’s Institute of Infectious Diseases.
Testing has also been done on SARS and MERS, both of which are zoonotic coronaviruses, as well as two human coronaviruses that commonly cause the common cold. The drug was developed with a $99 million grant from the US government.first A 2017 report noted that the Department of Defense “…is sharing costs with Gilead biosciences to further develop this product.”2
At the time, it was labeled GS-5734.3 The early studies that Gilead used to prove the effectiveness of the drugs had problems with the way they were designed and changes made during the study that would negate the results.
Del Bigtree from Highwire, who serves as CEO of the Informed Consent Action Network, detailed the problems with the studies. However, just one of many technology platforms that censor or remove accounts that don’t share the company’s views, YouTube has terminated Bigtree’s entire accounts.
Cutting out information from public view has led some to refer to YouTube as a “set of information,” as it assumes that only YouTube/Google knows what’s right and what’s wrong, according to user posts. .4
Remdesivir prolongs hospital stay for some people
As described in a study published in The Lancet, scientists conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled investigation in 10 hospitals in China.5 from February 6, 2020 to March 12, 2020.
Two hundred thirty-seven people were enrolled and randomly assigned to a treatment group or a placebo group. Results showed that remdesivir was not associated with statistically significant clinical benefits, and had to be discontinued early because of the presumed adverse effects.
Despite the lack of solid evidence that the drug is beneficial, it is being used globally. In a highly cited study of the drug, it was predicted that it could shorten hospital stays by 31%, from 15 days to 11 days.6
Dr. George Ralls with Orlando Health reports that they are seeing positive benefits with remdesivir.7 However, he also prescribed a longer hospital stay than the time needed to complete a course of remdesivir treatment. Interestingly, he also said the drug worked to keep people on longer than if they didn’t:
“Once they start taking this drug… they need it for five days, so they’re in the hospital longer than usual. So that’s probably why the inpatient numbers are in there. Ours went up a little bit.”
Therefore, it does not appear that the drug is shortening the length of hospital stay.
Alternative solutions are available, but ignored
In an article by Dr. Harvey Risch of the Yale School of Public Health, published in the American Journal of Epidemiology, the use of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin is thought to be necessary to help contain the pandemic.
The combination of inexpensive drugs is highly effective in the early stages of infection, before hospitalization. This does not compete with the intravenous drug remdesivir, which is used only after a person is hospitalized. Risch notes:8
“Remdesivir has shown mild efficacy in hospitalized inpatients, but no trials have been registered in outpatients. Hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin has been widely misrepresented in both clinical reports and media. mass media, and outpatient trial results are not expected until September. Initial outpatients are very different from those with later hospitalizations and different treatments.
Five studies, including two controlled clinical trials, demonstrated significant primary outpatient efficacy. Hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin has been used as a standard of care in more than 300,000 older adults with multiple medical conditions… These drugs need to be widely available and advertised immediately for doctors to prescribe. “
According to Global Research, the same protocol is showing significant success in China, India, Senegal and Brazil.9
As I also wrote, French microbiologist and infectious disease specialist Didier Raoult, director of a research unit at the Institut Hospitalo-Universitaire in France, reported that the combined use of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin, used immediately after diagnosis in 1,061 people, led to recovery and “viral cure” in 91.7% of patients.ten
It is also important to note that unlike remdesivir – which had adverse effects severe enough to discontinue clinical trials – the hydroxychloroquine/azithromycin combination did not show cardiotoxicity, cardiac arrhythmia events, or sudden death in the data. whether the patient.
$3,120 5 Day Remdesivir: A ‘Spectacular Good Value’
The long-awaited price for remdesivir was announced on June 29, 2020, by Gilead Sciences. As NPR reports, there have been “months of speculation as the company tries to find a balance between profitability and public health needs in the midst of a pandemic.”11 Daniel O’Day, president and chief executive officer of Gilead Sciences, published an open letter in which he said:twelfth
“Remdesivir, our investigational treatment, is the first antiretroviral to demonstrate patient improvement in clinical trials for COVID-19 and there is no guidebook on how to price it. a new drug during the pandemic.”
While the drug has only demonstrated questionable benefits, O’Day is correct in saying that there are no guidelines for pricing a new drug during the pandemic. However, he believes Gilead has struck a balance between corporate profits and public health as they settle for $520 per vial, which equates to $3,120 for the recommended 5-day course of treatment (on day one). first, a double dose is injected).
The Institute for Clinical and Economic Research (ICER) released calculated total manufacturing, packaging, and profit margins on May 1, 2020. Costs are rounded to $10 per vial. .13
The same group notes that the company can charge much more depending on how effective it is, with Dave Whitrap from ICER confirming that claim by saying, “If the drug doesn’t affect mortality and just shortening the recovery time, we calculate a course of treatment worth about $310.”14 Gilead is currently charging an extra $2,810 for a drug that has been shown to not reduce mortality.15
O’Day wrote that under “normal circumstances” a drug would be priced “for the value it provides.”16 In this case, they estimate that early discharge would save about $12,000 per patient.
They believe the $3,120 price tag doesn’t hinder anyone from getting treatment, while it balances their responsibility to continue working on remdesivir and antiviral research.
Profiteering due to high-level Coronavirus
When the drug’s price was announced, an analyst with SVB Leerink, an investment bank, described the price as a “spectacularly good value.” The analyst, Geoffrey Porges, added that pricing the drug below the medical costs it saves is “unprecedented.” He believes remdesivir has the potential to save $40,000 per patient by preventing someone from entering the ICU.
He also believes that there is more value that Gilead has not created in their price. In other words, a drug that taxpayers poured $99 million into in development, and for which Gilead pays $10 per vial ($60 per treatment), is somehow undervalued. lower at $3,120 for a course of treatment.17
Using this same logic, a florist could charge a dozen red commissions based on how much money they save a couple by suppressing the cost of a divorce. However, in the same way that the florist didn’t know if the flower was to celebrate or to apologize, Gilead priced remdesivir assuming that the patient would be hospitalized for four days less, although Ralls found that that His patient is on medication. actually stay in the hospital longer.
This is not the first time Gilead has taken advantage of exorbitant profits on their products. Sovaldi is touted as a “breakthrough” drug to treat hepatitis C, for which Gilead charges $84,000 per course.18 While some consider the price of remdesivir to be reasonable, it is important to remember that manufacturing the drugs is virtually risk-free for Big Pharma as they are often subsidized by the government.19
US Representative Lloyd Doggett, D-Texas, has been outspoken about the profits that the pharmaceutical and other industries are making during the pandemic, saying, “The strength of the industry combined with fear is driving spending. extraordinary pepper. pharmaceutical industry.”20
Big Pharma is ready to make big profits
Profiteering has begun for Gilead, which has a market capitalization of $90 billion21 and develop their antiviral with the help of your tax dollars. The day after the price was announced, the US government bought 500,000 doses. Later, press secretary Kayleigh McEnany said this was so that patients would not be charged the actual cost of the drug.
On the surface, this means that individuals won’t be charged, but all Americans are paying with their tax dollars. Emergency vaccine spending bills were recently passed, allocating $6 billion for production and distribution and $20 billion for development.
As Doggett pointed out, “The public will pay for a lot of research and manufacturing. Only profits will be privatized. We’re in the extraordinary position of spending billions of dollars on vaccines before we even do. know if they work or not.”22
Rolling Stone reports that several major pharmaceutical companies have made commitments on the cost of future vaccines, including Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca. The CEO of Astra Zeneca, Pascal Soriot, stated, “We will do it for no profit.”23
However, when Doggett and his staff contacted the pharmaceutical companies to clarify what their claims meant, they received no answers, nor a definition of “cost.” included. Gestures like these can be good on the news but only time will tell if they keep their promises.
Without announcing an end date and knowing that many public health experts will push for a vaccine for years, it is highly unlikely that any pharmaceutical company will provide a low-cost drug. more than a short time to meet the initial demand.
Healthy choices make a difference
Some public health officials and the media are wringing their hands over the number of new cases diagnosed each day. Using these numbers to create fear and anxiety, they encourage people to stay put and wait for vaccinations.
However, I recommend being proactive in supporting your immune system. With each passing week it becomes more and more clear that optimizing your vitamin D levels may be the easiest, least expensive, and most beneficial strategy you can use to reduce your risks.
The best time to start addressing your vitamin D levels is now, before you feel sick. You’ll find more information about the importance of vitamin D and how the body uses it to fight coronavirus and other infectious diseases in a journal article I co-wrote, “Evidence for vitamin D and risk of contracting COVID-19 and its severity.”
I hope you use this resource to spread the word about the importance of vitamin D to your friends and family.
