by Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D., Childrens Health Defense:
The widow of a man who died after being treated for COVID-19 with remdesivir, and a man who alleges he was injured by the drug, last week sued the drug’s manufacturer, Gilead Sciences.
The plaintiffs allege Giliead engaged in false advertising and deceptive promotion and failed to warn about the possible side effects.
The complaint cited a myriad of documents, public statements and press releases, as evidence that Gilead demonstrated “a pattern of downplaying or omitting altogether the clinical dangers experienced by patients from remdesivir use, instead emphasizing its supposed benefits, safety, and efficacy.”
TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/
Gilead’s marketing of remdesivir “misrepresented and/or omitted the true content and nature of the drug,” the lawsuit states, adding:
“Defendant’s advertising that remdesivir is a safe and effective treatment for COVID-19 is false and misleading to a reasonable consumer, including plaintiffs, because defendant in fact knew or should have known, based upon prior studies and data on remdesivir, that it was unsafe and posed a high risk of severe adverse effects and death to plaintiffs and the class.”
The lawsuit also alleges Gilead did not disclose the risk of kidney injuries posed by the drug. According to The Epoch Times, “a website for the drug, also known as Veklury, makes no mention of kidney problems. A handout given to patients also does not mention the issues.”
By not disclosing this risk, Gilead may have violated California laws against using deceptive practices and making untrue or misleading statements, The Epoch Times reported. One such law is the California Legal Remedies Act (CLRA).
Attorney Bradford Geyer, who works for the FormerFedsGroup Freedom Foundation (FFFF), which advocates on behalf of COVID-19 hospital protocol victims, told The Defender the lawsuit is “very significant” because the victims, “one egregiously injured and one widow of someone who was killed,” proactively reached out to the organization.
“As a rule, those who have been egregiously injured or have lost loved ones want their oppressors to be exposed,” he said.
Remdesivir is “a terrible drug,” Geyer told The Epoch Times, adding that FFFF “has thousands of members who have the hospital records, and you can see there’s a big difference in the creatinine levels” in blood and kidney readings after patients receive remdesivir.
Lawsuit ‘appears to skillfully skirt the boundaries of the PREP Act’
In an interview with The Defender last month, FFFF Media Director and Task Force Coordinator Carolyn “CC” Blakeman said they were working on a class action suit that the attorneys believed “found a way around the PREP Act” using a false advertisement claim because Gilead was advertising that “remdesivir did something that it didn’t.”
The PREP Act — the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act — shields manufacturers, distributors and others from any liability for injuries caused by a covered countermeasure, except in cases of “willful misconduct.” For COVID-19 countermeasures, PREP Act protections are in place until at least Dec. 31, 2024.
Blakeman told The Defender that the plaintiffs filed the suit in California because the state has strict product protection statutes and because Gilead, and the plaintiffs, are based there.
Geyer said, “We view the PREP Act as unconstitutional and violative of international law as well, as it’s applied to COVID-19 hospital protocols.”
Ray Flores, senior counsel to Children’s Health Defense, said, “This case is well thought out and appears to skillfully skirt the boundaries of the PREP Act, since the suit doesn’t claim ‘loss caused by, arising out of, relating to, or resulting from the administration to or the use by an individual of a covered countermeasure‘ such as remdesivir.”
Read More @ ChildrensHealthDefense.org
