Last May, Gilead Sciences (GILD) chief executive Daniel O’Day testified before Congress that a revised version of a best-selling HIV pill was a “brand new medicine” and that the company was “absolutely not” aware it was safer than an older version during the early stages of development.
Yet a recently filed lawsuit offers details that purportedly contradict his remarks and, in the process, raises questions about the extent to which Gilead may have deliberately delayed bringing a new treatment to market in order to milk sales of an older, lucrative franchise.
Unlock this article by subscribing to STAT Plus and enjoy your first 30 days free!
GET STARTEDWhat is it?
STAT Plus is STAT's premium subscription service for in-depth biotech, pharma, policy, and life science coverage and analysis. Our award-winning team covers news on Wall Street, policy developments in Washington, early science breakthroughs and clinical trial results, and health care disruption in Silicon Valley and beyond.
What's included?
- Daily reporting and analysis
- The most comprehensive industry coverage from a powerhouse team of reporters
- Subscriber-only newsletters
- Daily newsletters to brief you on the most important industry news of the day
- Online intelligence briefings
- Frequent opportunities to engage with veteran beat reporters and industry experts
- Exclusive industry events
- Premium access to subscriber-only networking events around the country
- The best reporters in the industry
- The most trusted and well-connected newsroom in the health care industry
- And much more
- Exclusive interviews with industry leaders, profiles, and premium tools, like our CRISPR Trackr.
About the Author
I was in a meeting in the early 2000’s in San Francisco when they mentioned TAF. A few years later they did not want to mention it again.
In some better society in a future that we only dream about sick people will not be abused by greedy people.