“Investing in global health organisations aimed at increasing access to vaccines created a 20-to-1 return in economic benefit.” – Bill Gates

“Over the past two decades, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has donated ‘a bit more than $10 billion’ into mainly three groups: the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization, the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, and the Global Polio Eradication Initiative.” – The Davos Agenda, CNBC, 23 January 2019.

A US$10 billion “donation” would earn Bill Gates US$200 billion, by his own estimates.  This rate of return is worth bearing in mind as we read through the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation’s (“BMGF”) investments in the vaccine industry below.

Globally, the BMGF has committed or spent US$71 with US$44 billion, 61% of the total, used to fund institutions based in the United States (“US”).  The top 11 institutions have received a combined US$14 billion, just over a third of the country’s total.

Below we briefly mention the first five from the list above and then we have selected two, GAVI and the Clinton Foundation, to highlight some points. 

PATH, formerly known as Program for Appropriate Technology in Health, is a “global team of innovators working to accelerate health equity so all people and communities can thrive.”  Note the use of the word “equity” rather than “equality.”  These two words have very different meanings and one of them – equity – creates divisions in societies.

A diagram of key elements of PATH’s network as it relates to BMGF can be seen on slide 51 of the Network Analysis Corona Complex made available online by Nachdenk Seiten.

Funding to the University of Washington is divided between the University, US$282 million, and the University of Washington Foundation, US$1,4 billion with US$618 million being committed in 2016.  Included in the 2016 commitments are two particularly large amounts: US$211 million “to support a capital campaign” for “community engagement grant-making” and, a month later, US$312 million for the communication and delivery of solutions/tools “to expand and consistently update … evidence base to improve population health.”

In 1999, US$1,3 billion was committed to United Negro College Fund to set up the Gates Millennium Scholars Program and a further US$58 million, in 2006, was committed for the Program, specifically for graduate scholarships in Public Health.

In 2007, the BMGF committed US$1,3 billion to The Rotary Foundation of Rotary International in Illinois to support global polio eradication.

Also committed to polio was US$1 billion to UNICEF.  Surprisingly, as a philanthropic organisation, BMGF has only committed US$20 million to UNICEF for water, sanitation and hygiene in Africa and Asia.  The first of the water etc commitments was only in 2011 and of the total, in 2018, US$1,4 million was committed “to establish the necessary structure to ensure a successful joint partnership between UNICEF and BMGF.”  We can probably assume none of the US$1,4 million reached those in need.

After the billions of dollars spent, has polio been eradicated?

Indian doctors blamed Bill Gates, the top sponsor of polio vaccines, for a devastating non-polio acute flaccid paralysis (“NPAFP”) epidemic that paralyzed 490,000 children between 2000 and 2017. In 2017, the Indian government cut back Gates’ vaccine regimen and asked Gates and his vaccine policies to leave India – NPAFP rates dropped dramatically.  In that same year there were over 31,500 cases of NPAFP from just 18 countries in Africa. Additionally, there were outbreaks in numerous countries of vaccine-derived polioviruses.

In 2017 the World Health Organization reluctantly admitted that the global explosion in polio was predominantly vaccine-derived. In fact, by 2018, 70% of global cases were vaccine-derived poliovirus and in 2019 a CDC virologist confessed, “We have now created more new emergences of the virus than we have stopped.”

At this point we should remember the 20-1 return on investment.  By Gates’ estimates for every US$1 billion he invests he earns US$20 billion in return.

Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization (“GAVI”)

There seems to be a proliferation of organisations using both of the words “Global” and “Alliance” in their name. And between the years 1999 and 2021 (incl.) the BMGF has funded US$7 billion to ten “Global Alliances” located in three countries.

The image below is the same information shown by year in which the funds were committed.

Looking at the commitment history over the decades it seems there is a pattern of reducing funds to TB Alliance and GAIN and increasing funds to GALVmed and GAVI.

For example, from 1999 to 2011 there was a pattern to commit a large sum to GAVI every sixth year.  Then, starting in 2012 the pattern seems to be to commit a larger sum every fifth year. 

Commitments to TB Alliance are a little less rigid but there is a rough pattern of a large commitment every fourth to sixth year. However, the commitments from 2016 were drastically reduced.  For GAIN there is no periodic pattern but it seems the value of the commitments has been reducing while GALVmed’s are increasing.

These trends may have no significance but it is also possible that it is an indication BMGF is consolidating their funds, from four, into two “Global Alliances.”  We will need to wait and see what happens during the remainder of 2021 and into 2022.

Ultimately, it may not be relevant which route funds enter the system as these organisations are interconnected. To give an indication of the network these NGOs form, we’ve done some research and mapped a few of the connections between the first four organisations in the list: GAVI; TB Alliance; GAIN; and, GALVmed (E&OE).  The connections are more extensive than shown in our image as we have limited them to common, or related, connections.

A few connections between GAVI, TB Alliance, GAIN and GALVmed

Clinton Health Access Initiative, Inc(“CHAI”)

CHAI was founded in 2002 and is a significant part of the Clinton Foundation.  It has been plagued by corruption and conflict from early on.  CHAI’s financial mismanagement almost led to the end of the organisation in 2008.

Between 2005 and 2017 (incl,) the BMGF funded: CHAI US$284 million; the Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation US$36 million; and, the Clinton Global Initiative Inc. US$2 million.  A total of US$321 million over the 12 years.

In November 2017, then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions directed John Huber, the U.S. attorney for Utah, and other senior prosecutors to evaluate “certain issues” involving the sale of Uranium One, and other dealings related to the Clinton Foundation.

In December 2018 a House Oversight Subcommittee held a hearing with a focus on the Clinton Foundation.  The Subcommittee heard testimony regarding the conversion of funds for private use by the Clintons and a criminal investigation which had been opened by the FBI.  John Moynihan testified: “The [CHAI] funds were essentially used as a piggy bank.  The senior operators of this Fund treated this as personal business, Foundation business, for travel and personal expense.”

In July 2021, a judge ordered Ghislaine Maxwell to turn over documents, including financial records revealing the “funding received from the Clinton Global Initiative and the Clinton Foundation.”

Despite the controversies and investigations into the Clintons Foundations’ activities, between 2018 and 2021 (incl.) the BMGF funded or committed CHAI a further US$265 million with US$31 million being committed in August and September 2021. 

Last week, Fox News reported that aspects of Huber’s investigation into the Clinton Foundation have been assumed by U.S. Attorney John Durham as part of his review into the origins of the Russia probe.





“We can’t guarantee equity of outcome”


No comments:

Post a Comment