Gates Package — page 268
of 1375 pages
← p.267 p.269 → · this page in the original PDF · package
always end with a slide showing the PAVE being a part of the Global Vaccine Enterprise. If people are confused, they either
are not listening or they do not want to hear. Please take a look at these slides and see if they do not indicate what I have
said to you several times and above in this e-mail.
Again, I am very sorry that this has upset you. I hope that we can straighten this out. I would be happy to speak
with you at your convenience. I will be at a meeting in Wye River on Saturday AM and early afternoon, but I will be either in
the office or home for the rest of the weekend.
Best regards,
Tony
<< File: AIDS Vaccine Enterprise-PAVE.ppt >>
-----Original Message-----
From:
Rick Klausner
@gatesfoundation.org]
Sent:
Friday, October 24, 2003 3:49 PM
To:
Anthony Fauci (E-mail)
Subject:
PAVE - please clarify
I just came back from speaking at the HVTN and there, as anywhere I go and HIV vaccines are discussed, I am asked
about PAVE. Particularly now that PAVE seems to be setting up the same committees the Enterprise agreed to set up
and asking some of the same people. I don't know what to tell people, especially since, in marked contrast to the
Enterprise, the Gates Foundation has never been talked to about this (none of us). So I talk about how well we are
working together, etc etc but everyone I speak to (I never bring it up) seems confused. I am sure that PAVE pre-dated
our meetings in the Spring of 2002 about an enterprise approach but we really need to know how to respond about
this.
You can hear my frustration in this email. Am I mis-reading this? I have not run into anyone who is not "confused".
This is our OCR of the page, with running headers and footers removed. The
Committee's PDF
is authoritative; quote from it. Machine-readable, including the uncleaned
text: /api/page/gates/268
Records on this page
| Record | Date | Type | Pages |
|---|---|---|---|
| PAVE - please clarify | 2003-10-24 | 268 | |
| RE: PAVE - please clarify | 2003-10-24 | 267–268 |