Science Guardian

Paradigms and power in science and society

I am Nicolaus Copernicus, and I approve of this blog

I am Richard Feynman and I approve of this blogServing the public interest by supporting honest, accomplished, independent minded and often heroic distinguished scientists and other original thinkers and critics of ruling ideas in their right to free speech, publication and funding, and defending them against the overwhelming group prejudice, leadership resistance and internal science politics of the paradigm wars of cancer, AIDS, evolution, global warming, cosmology, particle physics, macroeconomics, health and medicine, diet and nutrition.

Measuring the truth by the professional and scholarly literature in peer reviewed journals (adjusted for incompetence and bias), well researched books, authoritative encyclopedias (Britannica, not Wikipedia) and the investigative reporting and skeptical reviews of well informed original thinkers among academics, philosophers, researchers, scholars, authors, and journalists.
--------------------------------------------------------

HONOR ROLL OF SCIENTIFIC TRUTHSEEKERS

Henry Bauer, Peter Breggin , Harvey Bialy, Giordano Bruno, Erwin Chargaff, Nicolaus Copernicus, Francis Crick, Paul Crutzen, Marie Curie, Rebecca Culshaw, Freeman Dyson, Peter Duesberg, Albert Einstein, Richard Feynman, John Fewster, Galileo Galilei, Alec Gordon, James Hansen, Edward Jenner, Benjamin Jesty, Michio Kaku, Adrian Kent, Ernst Krebs, Thomas Kuhn, Serge Lang, Mark Leggett, Richard Lindzen, Lynn Margulis, Barbara McClintock, George Miklos, Marco Mamone Capria, Peter Medawar, Kary Mullis, Linus Pauling, Eric Penrose, Max Planck, Rainer Plaga, David Rasnick, Sherwood Rowland, Carl Sagan, Otto Rossler, Fred Singer, Alfred Wegener, Edward O. Wilson, James Watson.
--------------------------------------------------------

Many people would die rather than think – in fact, they do so. – Bertrand Russell.

Skepticism is dangerous. That’s exactly its function, in my view. – Carl Sagan

The progress of science is strewn, like an ancient desert trail, with the bleached skeletons of discarded theories which once seemed to possess eternal life. - Arthur Koestler

It is really important to underscore that everything we’re talking about tonight could be utter nonsense. – Brian Greene (NYU panel on Hidden Dimensions June 5 2010, World Science Festival)

No snowflake in a snowstorm ever feels responsible. - Voltaire

One should as a rule respect public opinion in so far as is necessary to avoid starvation and to keep out of prison, but anything that goes beyond this is voluntary submission to an unnecessary tyranny, and is likely to interfere with happiness in all kinds of ways. – Bertrand Russell (Conquest of Happiness (1930) ch. 9)

(Click for more Unusual Quotations on Science and Belief)

I am Albert Einstein, and I heartily approve of this blog, insofar as it seems to believe both in science and the importance of intellectual imagination, uncompromised by out of date emotions such as the impulse toward conventional religious beliefs, national aggression as a part of patriotism, and so on.   As I once remarked, the further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances, the more certain it seems to me that the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through the fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith, but through striving after rational knowledge.   Certainly the application of the impulse toward blind faith in science whereby authority is treated as some kind of church is to be deplored.  As I have also said, the only thing that ever interfered with my learning was my education.My name as you already perceive without a doubt is George Bernard Shaw, and I certainly approve of this blog, in that its guiding spirit appears to be blasphemous in regard to the High Church doctrines of science, and it flouts the censorship of the powers that be, and as I have famously remarked, all great truths begin as blasphemy, and the first duty of the truthteller is to fight censorship, and while I notice that its seriousness of purpose is often alleviated by a satirical irony which sometimes borders on the facetious, this is all to the good, for as I have also famously remarked, if you wish to be a dissenter, make certain that you frame your ideas in jest, otherwise they will seek to kill you.  My own method was always to take the utmost trouble to find the right thing to say, and then to say it with the utmost levity. (Photo by Alfred Eisenstaedt for Life magazine)
IMPORTANT: BEST VIEWED ONLY IN VERY LARGE FONT
Press Cntrl/Cmd + till pics here line up properly in current Safari or Firefox in Mac, and Firefox or Chrome in PC (IE displays all text bold). Display a single post and its comments for PRINTOUT by first clicking on its headline (gets rid of the surplus side bar; printout won't include the captions appended to images which are briefly visible if the cursor is placed over them, repeat if necessary, unless you are using Firefox, when they stay stable).

All posts guaranteed fact checked according to reference level cited, typically the original journal studies.
(Guide to Site Purpose and Layout is the lower blue section at the bottom of any home page.)


H5N1 threatens to paralyze America in a new pandemic, Laurie Garrett confirms

September 16th, 2005

In the aftermath of Bush’s mea culpa speech tonight (Thu Sep 15), ABC is sounding the alarm about Avian flu tonight just to rub it in how badly W has prepared for it – apparently even less effectively than for Katrina.

They draw heavily on two talking heads, Columbia professor and professional disaster preparedness analyst Irwin Redlener and our familiar friend, the leading infectious disease Cassandra in the world, chubby cheeked Lauri Garrett, currently happily ensconced as a senior fellow at the Council of Foreign Relations, where she is active as the chief adviser and report preparer on global health threats.

Seems that Laurie has at least temporarily exhausted her stock of excitement over AIDS as a security threat, the topic of her last report for the Council (could it be that two years work on this topic resulted in a dim awareness of how specious it is? Surely not) and has now moved on to something which has the potential to be a little more immediately dramatic in its consequences. So successful has she been in raising the alarm on this new global threat that the entire current issue of Foreign Affairs seems to be devoted to the topic.

From Ms Garrett and Dr. RedIener, who is director of the National Center for Disaster Preparedness at Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health, we learn the terrifying possibilities inherent in bird flu if it somehow manages to jump from birds to humans in sufficient numbers finally to get going apace in human society and arrive by international flights into the US.


It could kill a billion people worldwide, make ghost towns out of parts of major cities, and there is not enough medicine to fight it. It is called the avian flu.

This week, at the United Nations Summit in New York, both the head of the U.N. World Health Organization and President Bush warned of the virus’ deadly potential.

“We must also remain on the offensive against new threats to public health, such as the Avian influenza,” Bush said in his speech to world leaders. “If left unchallenged, the virus could become the first pandemic of the 21st century.”

According to Dr. Irwin Redlener, director of the National Center for Disaster Preparedness at Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health, Bush’s call to remain on the offensive has come too late.

“If we had a significant worldwide epidemic of this particular avian flu, the H5N1 virus, and it hit the United States and the world, because it would be everywhere at once, I think we would see outcomes that would be virtually impossible to imagine,” he warns.

Already, officials in London are quietly looking for extra morgue space to house the victims of the H5N1 virus, a never-before-seen strain of flu. Scientists say this virus could pose a far greater threat than smallpox, AIDS, or anthrax.

“Right now in human beings, it kills 55 percent of the people it infects,” says Laurie Garrett, a senior fellow on global health policy at the Council on Foreign Relations. “That makes it the most lethal flu we know of that has ever been on planet Earth affecting human beings.”

Since this flu has never been seen among humans before, there is no natural immunity, according to Garrett. With the US way behind other countries in building stocks of vaccine, as things stand now it will be six months after the outbreak here before any vaccine becomes available. With no immunity in humans built up in the past, as many as 200,000 will die according to Federal forecasts.

Actually, it might be a good idea to call 1 800 I GOTFLU for your vaccine right now because Roche has made it – in the form of ‘Tamiflu’, a vaccine intended for ordinary flu which has turned out to be the only one which works against H5N1, the strain of flu involved. The US lack of planning amazes the Europeans – they have all been stockpiling vaccine for some time. The British have enough to protect a quarter of the population. The US is way down in the line for boosting its stocks which now amount to enough for merely two million people.

Given that the lack of readiness in the US is even less than that for a New Orleans flooding, it seems that all signs are that we are in for a repeat of 1918, they say – a lot of people will die.

Watching this out of the corner of one eye as we eat dinner, by the end of the two segments by this unified, choral narrative we find ourselves thoroughly convinced , and freely grateful to Laurie and Irwin for keeping on top of the situation and helping to prod the bureaucratic sluggery into tardy action on this vital front. In their short face-time on screen, the two have established emotional authority and leadership in our mind and heart.

Admittedly, the fact that Avian flu at present has been blamed for only 57 human deaths so far would normally give us pause, but we are too far gone in being mentally bathed by the warm electrons streaming from the TV, and the frequent comparisons to the great flu of 1918, which killed a massive number of people.


To date, there have been 57 confirmed human deaths, and another suspected one last week in Indonesia. Scientists say the humans have only been infected by birds. However, they add every infected person represents one step closer to the tipping point.

By tipping point, they mean the point where the virus mutates into something that can jump from human to human, not just from goose, duck. swan or chicken to human.


That is exactly what happened in 1918 when the global epidemic called the Spanish flu struck.

“The Spanish flu was killing people in two or three days once they got sick,” Bill Karesh of the Wildlife Conservation Society says.

“In 1918, my now-quite elderly uncle was a young boy, living in Baltimore, Maryland,” says Garrett of the Council on Foreign Relations. “And the flu came through, and his family insisted that he could not go outside for any reason until the whole epidemic was over. He spent afternoons looking out the window and counting the hearses going up and down the neighborhood and trying to guess which of his schoolmates had died.”

Today, when H5N1 arrives, it may be necessary for cop cars to block off whole sections of the city in quarantine, not letting anyone in or out. Hospitals would also be quarantined. Grand Central and the subways would be deserted for fear of contamination.

By this time we have completely forgotten the multi-prize winning Laurie’s record of misreporting and neglect of scientific literature in AIDS, and the only salt we sprinkle is on our dish, not hers. This is no time for skepticism. Preparedness is all.

In fact, we pay close attention to the advice at the end of the program (which goes on to consider the effects of a nuclear strike in Manhattan and some other major disturbance that slips our mind) about how to prepare for such emergencies.

Here is the ABC list of pre-disaster to-dos:


1. Unless you are prepared you will be too scared to think straight. Redlener advises a “family plan” to think out beforehand what you will do.

2. Identify the risks in your area, and plan whether you will stay at home or agree on a location to meet up with other family members. Losing your family members undermines everything – the will to act and the ability to think.

3. Plan escape routes. Gather supplies to put in the car, and to stockpile in the house. The experts suggest food, water and medication for seven to ten days – one gallon of water per person per day (given the experience of New Orleans, shouldn’t this be three months?). Use canned food (can opener!) and dried food. Put some into a backpack to grab and be ready to go in a minute if the danger is approaching rapidly.

4. First aid kit, cash, coins, radio and duct tape to seal up the shelter windows and cracks against radiation. (Presumably this means you should add a few canisters of oxygen to supply the ability to breathe which otherwise would be curtailed). Don’t forget birth certificates, deeds , licenses and tax returns to enable resumption of normal life after the danger passes. There should be medical prescriptions for a few weeks. Extra clothes.

5. Remember that in most natural disasters the chances of dying are rather small. You will live, though your “level of comfort” will go down.

Makng a mental note to prepare our emergency kit and place it by the door ASAP, we switch off the television, have a cup of coffee, and regaining our mental alertness, promise ourselves to check into the science of avian flu. Tomorrow we will see what Pub Med has by Dr Malik Peiris, the most hands-on scientist quoted, who happens also to be the discoverer of SARS, held to account for 700 human deaths, but now apparently no longer a worry.


“Unlike the normal human flu, where the virus is predominantly in the upper respiratory tract so you get a runny nose, sore throat, the H5N1 virus seems to go directly deep into the lungs so it goes down into the lung tissue and causes severe pneumonia,” says Dr. Malik Peiris, the scientist who first discovered the so-called SARS virus, which killed 700 people and drew worldwide attention.

While we wait for the upcoming Frontline report on H5N1 on PBS (next Tuesday on NYC Channel 13 at 9pm, if we are not mistaken), here is the transcript of the ABC Primetime double segment, Avian Flu: Is the Government Ready for an Epidemic? Virus Poses Risk of Massive Casualties Around the World:

ABC News

Avian Flu: Is the Government Ready for an Epidemic?

Virus Poses Risk of Massive Casualties Around the World

Sep. 15, 2005 – It could kill a billion people worldwide, make ghost towns out of parts of major cities, and there is not enough medicine to fight it. It is called the avian flu.

This week, at the United Nations Summit in New York, both the head of the U.N. World Health Organization and President Bush warned of the virus’ deadly potential.

“We must also remain on the offensive against new threats to public health, such as the Avian influenza,” Bush said in his speech to world leaders. “If left unchallenged, the virus could become the first pandemic of the 21st century.”

According to Dr. Irwin Redlener, director of the National Center for Disaster Preparedness at Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health, Bush’s call to remain on the offensive has come too late.

“If we had a significant worldwide epidemic of this particular avian flu, the H5N1 virus, and it hit the United States and the world, because it would be everywhere at once, I think we would see outcomes that would be virtually impossible to imagine,” he warns.

Already, officials in London are quietly looking for extra morgue space to house the victims of the H5N1 virus, a never-before-seen strain of flu. Scientists say this virus could pose a far greater threat than smallpox, AIDS, or anthrax.

“Right now in human beings, it kills 55 percent of the people it infects,” says Laurie Garrett, a senior fellow on global health policy at the Council on Foreign Relations. “That makes it the most lethal flu we know of that has ever been on planet Earth affecting human beings.”

No Natural Immunity

The Council on Foreign Relations devoted its most recent issue of the prestigious journal, “Foreign Affairs,” to what it called the coming global epidemic, a pandemic.

“Each year different flus come, but your immune system says, ‘Ah, I’ve seen that guy before. No problem. Crank out some antibodies, and I might not feel great for a couple of days, but I’ll recover,’” Garrett says. “Now what’s scaring us is that this constellation of H number 5 and N number 1, to our knowledge, has never in history been in our species. So absolutely nobody watching this has any natural immunity to this form of flu.”

Like most flu viruses, this form started in wild birds — such as geese, ducks, and swans — in Asia.

“They die of a pneumonia, just like people,” says William Karesh, the lead veterinarian for the Wildlife Conservation Society. “When you open them up, you do a post-mortem exam. Their lungs are just full of fluid and full of blood.”

Karesh has been tracking this flu strain for the last several years as it has gained strength spreading from wild birds to chickens to humans.

“We start at a market somewhere in Guangdong Province in China,” explains Karesh. “And it’s packed with cages, and you’ll have chickens, and you’ll have ducks. You might have some other animals — cats, dogs, turtles, snakes — and they’re all stacked in cages, and they’re all spreading their germs to each other.”

In response, Asian governments have killed millions of chickens in futile attempts to stop the flu’s spread to humans.

“The tipping point, the place where it becomes something of an immediate concern, is where that virus changes, we call it mutates, to something that is able to go from human to human,” says Redlener, the National Center for Disaster Preparedness director.

Echoes of the ‘Spanish Flu’ Epidemic

Scientists in Asia and around the world are now working around the clock as they wait for that tipping point.

“Unlike the normal human flu, where the virus is predominantly in the upper respiratory tract so you get a runny nose, sore throat, the H5N1 virus seems to go directly deep into the lungs so it goes down into the lung tissue and causes severe pneumonia,” says Dr. Malik Peiris, the scientist who first discovered the so-called SARS virus, which killed 700 people and drew worldwide attention.

To date, there have been 57 confirmed human deaths, and another suspected one last week in Indonesia. Scientists say the humans have only been infected by birds. However, they add every infected person represents one step closer to the tipping point.

“Once that virus is capable of not needing the birds to infect humans, then we have the beginnings of what can turn out to be this worldwide epidemic problem that the experts call ‘pandemics,’” Redlener says.

That is exactly what happened in 1918 when the global epidemic called the Spanish flu struck.

“The Spanish flu was killing people in two or three days once they got sick,” Bill Karesh of the Wildlife Conservation Society says.

“In 1918, my now-quite elderly uncle was a young boy, living in Baltimore, Maryland,” says Garrett of the Council on Foreign Relations. “And the flu came through, and his family insisted that he could not go outside for any reason until the whole epidemic was over. He spent afternoons looking out the window and counting the hearses going up and down the neighborhood and trying to guess which of his schoolmates had died.”

Disaster Would Require Massive Quarantines

Unlike the avian flu, the Spanish flu spread long before the international air travel routes of today. At that time, there were no non-stop flights from flu ground zero to the United States. But not anymore.

Karesh believes the avian flu could travel from China to Japan to New York to San Fransisco within the first week.

“It’s on people’s hands. You shake hands. You touch a doorknob that somebody recently touched,” Garrett says, referring to how the flu is spread.

Redlener, who is stationed at Mailman School of Public Health at Columbia University, has been working with New York City officials to get ready for the deadly epidemic.

“The city would look like a science fiction movie,” according to him. “It’s extremely possible we’d have to quarantine hospitals. We’d have to quarantine sections of the city.”

“I could imagine that you could look at Grand Central Station and not see much of anybody wandering around at all,” Garrett agrees. “People would be afraid to take the subways, because who wants to be in an enclosed air space with a whole lot of strangers, never knowing which ones are carrying the flu?”

As for the hospitals, there would be scenes like the ones this past month in the stadiums of New Orleans and Houston after Hurricane Katrina.

“There wouldn’t be equipment and personnel to staff them adequately that you could really call them a hospital,” Garrett predicts. “You might more or less call them warehouses for the ailing.”

And, as happened in New Orleans, there would be no place for the dead.

“If you look at the expected number of deaths that could occur in cities across the United States, we are wholly unprepared to process those bodies in a dignified and respectful way,” asserts Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy. “We will run out of caskets literally within days.”

The prospects have become so bleak that in planning meetings held in New York City, veteran emergency responders have walked away.

“They just don’t know how we’re going to get through,” says Osterholm of those responders. “If we have a repeat of the 1918 life experience, I can’t imagine anything to be closer to a living hell that that experience of 12 to 24 months of pandemic influenza.”

If the flu does strike, victims at first would not know if it is the kind of easily treated flu that comes every year or the killer flu, known as H5N1.

The man in charge of making sure Americans are prepared in the event of a killer flu epidemic is the secretary of Health and Human Services.

“We would do all we could to quarantine,” says Secretary Michael Leavitt. “It’s not a happy thought. It’s something that keeps the president of the United States awake. It keeps me awake.”

The preparedness plan calls for Leavitt to run operations out of a crisis room in Washington.

When pressed as to how ready the country actually is, Leavitt replied, “Not as prepared as we need to be. We’re better prepared than we were yesterday; we’ll be better prepared tomorrow than we are today.”

The draft report of the federal government’s emergency plan, obtained and examined by ABC News’ “Primetime,” predicts as many as 200,000 Americans will die within a few months. This is considered a conservative estimate.

“The first thing is everybody in America’s going to say, ‘Where’s the vaccine?’ And they’re going to find out that it’s really darned hard to make a vaccine. It takes a really long time,” said Garrett of the Council on Foreign Relations.

In fact, the draft report says it will not be until six months after the first outbreak that any vaccine will be available, and then only in a limited supply.

“I imagine that not a lot of poor people will get vaccinated,” Garrett says. “If you think about New Orleans, this is a similar situation.”

‘Inadequate’ Stockpile of Medicine

While there is no vaccine to stop the flu, there is one medicine to treat it. Called Tamiflu, it is made by the Roche pharmaceutical company in Switzerland. Roche has been selling Tamiflu for years.

Only recently, however, did scientists learn of its potential to work against the killer flu, H5N1. That has since created a huge demand and a critical shortage.

“All of the wealthiest countries in the world are trying to purchase stockpiles of Tamiflu,” says Garrett. “Our current stockpile is around 2.5 million courses of treatment.”

According to Leavitt, that is a long way from the country’s ideal stockpile. “Our objective is to have 20 million doses of Tamiflu or enough for 20 million people,” he says.

He later admitted that only 2 million are currently on hand, but asserted that no other country is in a better position.

Officials in Australia, however, have 3.5 million courses of treatment, and in Great Britain, officials say they have ordered enough to cover a quarter of their population.

“I think at the moment, with 2.5 million doses, you are pretty vulnerable,” warns Professor John Oxford of the Royal London Hospital.

“The lack of advanced planning up until the moment in the United States, in the sense of not having a huge stockpile I think your citizens deserve, has surprised me and has dismayed me,” he admits.

Faced with worldwide demand, the Roche company, which produces Tamiflu, has organized a first-come, first-serve waiting list. The United States is nowhere near the top.

“The way we are approaching the discussions with governments is that we are operating on a first-come, first-serve basis,” says Dr. David Reddy, head of the pandemic task force at Roche.

“Do we wish we had ordered it sooner and more of it? I suspect one could say yes,” admits Leavitt. “Are we moving rapidly to assure that we have it? The answer is also yes.”

When asked why the United States did not place their orders for Tamiflu sooner, Leavitt replied, “I can’t answer that. I don’t know the answer to that.”

Even leading Republicans in Congress say the Bush Administration has not handled the planning for a possible flu epidemic well.

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., says the current Tamiflu stockpile of 2 million could spell disaster.

“That’s totally inadequate. Totally inadequate today,” says Frist, who is a physician by training. “The Tamiflu is what people would go after. It’s what you’re going to ask for, I’m going to ask for, immediately.”

Leavitt says deciding who gets the 2.5 million doses of Tamiflu currently on hand in the United States is part of the federal government’s response plan. However, he also admits that thought has motivated the government to move rapidly in securing more doses of the medicine.

“It isn’t going to happen tomorrow, but if it happened the day after that, we would not be in as good as a position as we will be in six months,” he says.

However, in the end, even the country’s top health officials concede that a killer flu epidemic this winter would make the scenes of Katrina pale in comparison.

“You know, I was down in New Orleans in that crowded airport now a couple weeks ago,” Frist says. “And this could be not just equal to that, but many multiple times that. Hundreds of people laid out, all dying, because there was no therapy. And a lot of people don’t realize for this avian flu virus, there will be very little effective therapy available early on.”

ABC News’ Rhonda Schwartz, Michael Bicks, Samantha Chapman, Maddy Sauer, Simon Surowicz, Jill Rackmill, Steve Baker, Monica DelaRosa, and Jennifer Needleman contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2005 ABC News Internet Ventures

Are AIDS skeptics flagging? A few inspirational words from Rafe Esquith

September 12th, 2005

In AIDS, activists of the skeptical kind range widely in type and scientific expertise. They go from the few notable scientists willing to step forward and confirm that the most intensely reviewed scientific literature demolishes the reigning paradigm, to lay people who smell numerous rats and say so loudly and clearly even though they cannot always quote the scientific literature to advantage.

It is surprising that any of them survive. Together, they face a wall of resistance from well placed scientific opponents, the fellow traveling daily and weekly media, careerist government officials, hugely profitable global drug companies, pandering mainstream publishers, confidently uninformed Hollywood personalities, trench-informed doctors and nurses, authority wielding NGO personnel in afflicted foreign countries, statistically adept UNAID researchers, smugly collegial grant officials in establishment foundations, fearful AIDS patients, angry gay activists, and a vast flock of sheep.

By flock of sheep which we mean the high proportion of such woolly, baa-ing critturs, temperamentally speaking, among the uninformed public, who apparently now have an almost religious belief in this paradigm inculcated by ads for testing, AIDS walks, NIH officials appearing on the Charlie Rose show, the coverage of New York Times reporters and editors, AIDS runs in Central Park, social endorsements by movie stars, and so on, so that questioning it subjects the AIDS skeptic to being recategorized as insane and possibly dangerous.

Faced with the immovable mass of this international congregation of the high church of HIV-AIDS, it would hardly be surprising if after many years the irresistible force of AIDS truthseeking might falter in its determination, and truthseekers bow down under the weight of their social burden.

However, the surprising thing is that few of them do so. In fact Truthseeker, having long acquaintance with many of these naive idealists of science and human nature, knows few examples of any important dropout, let alone any turncoat, among the ranks of this frequently ragged rebel army, more than one of whom live on the verge of eviction while their opponents roll in the financial hay.

The only exceptions we can think of right now are Jad Adams, a young British author who after early on writing one of the best book exposes of what he saw as the self-evident AIDS boondoggle early in the affair (Jad Adams, “AIDS: The Virus Myth”, St Martins Press, 1989) apparently retired injured in the aftermath of a storm of scurrilous press attacks in London (though also some support in Nature, see early post here) and moved on to other topics to pay the rent, and Walter Gilbert.

The renowned molecular biologist Gilbert, 1980 Nobel prize winner for a seminal advance in the lab analysis of DNA, was a star at Harvard until he retired to pursue his artwork. Years ago he was quite willing to say to this writer for publication that Peter Duesberg was probably right about HIV and it was quite possible that AIDS had another cause entirely, and later he went on record on film saying so. The quote is now used by the skeptics (eg see http://www.virusmyth.com/ site, a repository for key skeptic texts up to the last couple of years, when the webmaster ran out of money) as an exhibit to show that, with Kary Mullis, there are two Nobelists who support their questioning.

For several years Gilbert even used Peter Duesberg’s 1989 review in the Proceedings of the National Academy as an impeccable example of how to challenge a paradigm for his graduate student seminar. Interestingly, as Nature Biotechnology’s founding science editor Harvey Bialy has pointed out, not a single one of Gilbert’s brainy graduates was moved to write a rebuttal and make their name at the beginning of their careers. Could this be because, tutored by Gilbert, they all recognized its unanswerable quality? But eventually Gilbert tired of the press exposure and cried off further interviews on the topic, perhaps understandably (though in the view of some, still irresponsibly) preferring to conserve his political capital for his own fights.

Of course, the unswerving dedication of AIDS skeptics to their cause may simply be a reflection of the fact that the AIDS establishment, secure and even smug in its dominance of all information outlets from the New York Times to Charlie Rose to science journals to college textbooks, has seen fit not to offer any cash sum to persuade any of them to cross over.

Certainly no one has contacted Truthseeker with a substantial offer, which we find vaguely insulting. How is it that our efforts to illuminate this situation, and turn over the stone beneath which numerous Truthconcealers hide, has met with no attractive counter offer? We hereby announce our willingness to entertain any offer of any kind significantly over the six figure mark. Please email “Sellout@newaidsreview.com” as soon as possible.

After all, it is not as if such an offer is without precedent. One merely has to turn to page 177 of what is currently the definitive evisceration of the theorizing and antics of the AIDS-HIV paradigm and its promoters, “Oncogenes, Aneuploidy and AIDS: A Scientific Life and Times of Peter H. Duesberg”, by Harvey Bialy, North Atlantic Books (see earlier post). Here we find a prime example of temptation from the devil.

In the fall of 1994, as Bialy tells it, Duesberg was invited to the San Francisco opera by an old colleague from the NIH passing through on the way to China, one Stephen O’Brien. At drinks afterwards O’Brien reached into his tuxedo and fished out a folded manuscript, saying “This has already been accepted at Nature. All you have to do is sign.”

The text turned out to be, under the heading “HIV causes AIDS: Koch’s postulates fulfilled”, a rehash of the arguments of the self-serving epidemiology of AIDS that purported to show that HIV is the cause of AIDS, while assuming it.

When Duesberg took the mansucript in hand (he was to be listed as one of the three co-authors, and thus redeemed in the eyes of the world and restored to his previous cardinalship as the incorruptible and reliable authority in the field) and corrected its content and its title, Steve O’Brien wrote to him that though he considered Duesberg “one striking exception” to the numerous “blatant examples of fraud in science”, he thought that his “campaign that HIV does not cause AIDS is not so compelling and I am afraid wrong, just wrong” and that “I believe you should consider signing the article for your own good.”

Of course, Duesberg didn’t sign it and the article never ran in Nature, eventually surfacing in the obscure Current Opinion in Immunology two years later, with a note saying mysteriously that Duesberg had declined joint authorship. The letter, meanwhile, reposes in the Peter H. Duesberg Archive of the Bancroft Library at the University of California at Berkeley. Anyone who can gain access to it can read who it was that Steve O’Brien had in mind when referring to scientists who had perpetrated “blatant fraud” in duping the scientific community, a list which unfortunately is omitted by Bialy’s book on the advice of the publisher’s lawyers.

Anyhow, with this precedent in mind we find ourselves humbled that no representative of the AIDS establishment has approached us with an offer of any kind, and while encouraging them to do so, we realize that it is simply an indication of how unimportant we are compared to Peter Duesberg, on whose metaphorically mighty shoulders ride all who call attention to the anomalies and absurdities that have been airbrushed out of the AIDS picture.

Let’s acknowledge that Duesberg in declining the opportunity to sell his soul to the devil and put his name to a paper which he found repellent was not just giving up renewed membership in the Bob Club, as the AIDS scientific establishment was known in the early days. He was giving up millions of dollars, both in the renewed flow of Government funding for his laboratory that would quickly come with collegial status and also the private investment money which of late in various ways magically streams into the pockets of scientists who get a slice of the action.

Some of that money flows into the pockets of many of the AIDS-HIV promoting groups listed above who cooperate and coordinate with each other in maintaining the AIDS-HIV paradigm and its consequences. In fact, the few journalists such as Celia Farber brave or foolhardy enough to pursue their investigation of the underside of AIDS are having a field day finding out just how heavily dependent on drug company money are AIDS-HIV activist groups. The inspiring answer is that the drug companies fund their operations to a high level, and that the agitation seen at AIDS Conferences would never happen without this kindness.

As far as investigative journalists go, in AIDS, at the moment as far as we know Farber is unique except for Liam Scheff, the young journalist who took the lid off the AIDS Orphans Used as Drug Test Guinea Pigs scandal in New York (see earlier post). That such people exist let alone continue their work and their moral outrage under current conditions seems amazing to us. But neither shows any signs of weakening.

Nor does the remarkable Harvey Bialy, the founding science editor of Nature Biotechnology who now teaches at the Institute of Biotechnology at the Autonomous National University of Mexico in Cuernevaca. Bialy, however, having delivered his broadside against the tyranny of Duesberg’s opponents in both cancer and AIDS, in the form of his hyper-intelligent, no-foolishness-overlooked book last year, is waiting for the slow but possibly explosive final outcome of this sleeper, which takes the lid off the egregious bending, subversion and diversion of science into profitable but ultimately empty cul-de-sacs in both fields, as it works its way through the reading lists of those in the know towards the attention of outside journalists and other interested parties, such as government officials, congressional staff and just possibly in the end the public prosecutor responsible for detecting scams on the public purse.

Meanwhile Bialy has apparently taken refuge in art for the moment, starting a heavily visited weblog featuring his collages and poetry at http://bialystocker.net/ which is strongly influenced as is all his Web posting and email by humor drawn from the Goon Show, a British radio show of the fifties featuring Harry Secombe and Peter Sellers, whereby Bialy develops and speaks in the voice of Eccles, an alter ego drawn from the show.

This tendency to metamorphise from an earnest AIDS discussionist into a humorist is an urge felt by many in the game of critiquing AIDS-HIV ideology from the famously witty Peter Duesberg on downwards, including this author. Perhaps it is caused by the inescapable tediousness of repeating the same obvious flaws in the AIDS-HIV hypothesis time after time to the slower witted adherents of the paradigm, many of whom seem to have given up independent thinking almost completely. That, and the hilarity induced by the sheer gigantic absurdity of some of the unscientific beliefs promulgated with a straight face by the powers that be in the field.

Just to take one example, the idea of an army of testers going around in major American cities and now increasingly among the hapless poor of Namibia and other African countries, and points further east in Asia and Russia, using a questionable test for antibodies to an agent to mark future victims of the disease supposedly caused by the agent which is typically absent, is such an outrage to common sense, let alone science, which tells us that in any other case whatsoever antibodies are a sign of cure in the absence of the agent, this idea is such an absurdity that it is impossible for its humor to remain repressed, however unhappy the result may be when the unfortunate Namibians, Indians and soon Chinese are beset with lethal “drug cocktail” antidotes at cut rate prices from the global drug companies via aid from UN member nations and their NGOs partly funded by the right-thinking promoters and audiences of large rock concerts.

Laughter at this cartoonish if ultimately murderous picture is in fact one of the few rewards of an uphill fight that never seems to get anywhere for the skeptics of AIDS, so the example of an idealist such as Rafe Esquith who has achieved such magical results by pushing his vision against the envious and petty resistance of his colleagues is worth quoting.

Actually it is Esquith who is worth quoting for the encouragement his example offers to all such idealists who find themselves alone in the crowd they are trying to benefit.

Who is Rafe Esquith? A teacher who has achieved miracles with passion and purpose.

We thought of the passion of Peter Duesberg and his supporters last night when PBS rebroadcast the latest POV segment, a documentary about Esquith. Rafe Esquith is an elementary school teacher in “Koreatown”, Los Angeles, whose teaching led the New York Times to call him a genius and a saint.

Esquith is by his own account an ordinary man distinguished by two things, a passion for teaching and faith in his charges, who consist of 9-11 year olds from a district in Los Angeles which has many ambitious immigrant parents from countries such as Korea and Mexico who send their children to the school, but who do not speak English at home.

In some kind of educational miracle Esquith has taught their children to read and act Shakespeare, and he has achieved such winning success at this that the children have given invited performances in the old Globe theater in England, at the Supreme Court, for the National Press Club, and at Shakespeare festivals around the country. Do these eager kids understand the plays they read and act in? The documentary shows that they understand them well enough to cry and laugh with Shakespeare’s characters as they read. They recite the lines with more meaning than many professionals.

The New York Times

September 6, 2005

TELEVISION REVIEW; Through Shakespeare, Lessons of Life And Devotion

By ANITA GATES

In a fifth-grade classroom in a poor and dangerous part of Los Angeles, Hobart Boulevard Elementary School pupils (mostly Latino and Asian) are doing ”Hamlet.” They are so good at it that at one point Sir Ian McKellen, who has played Hamlet, Macbeth, Iago, Richard II and Richard III, drops in to watch, to do a little recitation of his own and to praise them.

”The best thing about the Hobart Shakespeareans is that they know what they’re saying,” Sir Ian tells them, adding that this cannot be said of every adult who has ever appeared in a Shakespearean play.

In Mel Stuart’s fine and passionate documentary ”The Hobart Shakespeareans,” which has its premiere tonight on the PBS series ”P.O.V.,” several things are clear. The 49-year-old teacher, Rafe Esquith, is a genius and saint. The American education system would do well to imitate him. These children’s lives have been changed by their year with this man. And it is not all about Elizabethan drama.

Mr. Esquith’s pupils play guitar. They name the six states that border Idaho. They discuss whether Huckleberry Finn would be doing the right thing to turn in his friend Jim, a runaway slave. They visit the Lincoln Memorial on a class trip.

Their classroom world operates like the real one: with money. In this case the currency is play money, in which they are paid salaries. It costs more to sit at the front of the class than in the back. Not doing your homework brings a $50 fine. At Christmas, Mr. Esquith gives them real Barnes & Noble gift certificates.

But it is the yearlong study of a single Shakespearean play that symbolizes Mr. Esquith’s methods and his success. It is thrilling to hear Brenda De Leon read a speech of Ophelia’s beautifully, to watch Lidia Medina express Gertrude’s pain and to see Alan Avila, who was considered a problem student by a previous teacher, tackle the title role of the melancholy Danish prince. At the outset, Mr. Esquith explains what ”Hamlet” is about: death. ”They’re throwing skulls all over the graveyard,” he says.

During Christmas vacation, the children in the play come in every day to work on it. Mr. Esquith tells the camera that this is teaching them discipline, teamwork and sacrifice. He is a man fond of mottoes: ”Be nice and work hard.” ”There are no shortcuts.” As Hamlet says: ”Words. Words. Words.”

But words have impact. This is clearest, on a class visit to the campus of U.C.L.A., Mr. Esquith’s alma mater, when he tells the children: ”This is the life you’re working for. You can do this.” He has Ivy League pennants on his classroom wall, gifts from former students who have gone on to those schools, to prove it.

P.O.V.

The Hobart Shakespeareans

PBS, tonight at 10, check local listings.

Directed and produced by Mel Stuart; Alex Rotaru, co-producer, editor and cinematographer; Tamara Blaich, Chad Baron, associate producers; additional photography by Damani Baker, Chad Baron, Jerry Henry and Mel Stuart.

Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company | Permissions | Privacy Policy

As usual, Esquith’s accomplishment is partly an uphill battle against the conformity and inertia of those less inspired. While the children often go on to Yale and Harvard, Esquith is left dealing with the hostility and envy that national attention and money from Oprah Winfrey and other sponsors has engendered among the other teachers at the school, which the documentary omits, but which can be read in the news coverage of what is to many people the most sensational story in teaching.

What we like and think is relevant here is the courage Esquith has shown in the face of years of overwork, underfunding and sniping from his colleagues.


While Esquith has won honors, such as the National Medal of Arts from President Bush (which he keeps locked away in a cabinet for safekeeping) and the National Teacher of the Year Award (which he accepted wearing a tuxedo with his white tennis shoes), his peers have not always been kind. He has received hate letters from fellow teachers who feel their efforts have been overlooked in light of Esquith’s national attention, and he gets his fair share of cold shoulders on campus.

His classroom too has come under fire — vandalized and burglarized by gang members. And his students say they are picked on for being in the Shakespeare productions, ostracized as “snobs” by former teachers and fellow students alike. For Esquith, it’s not about making an easy path for his students but about opening doors for them to work hard and create better lives for themselves.

However, support for Esquith’s valiant efforts to prove that kids can achieve wonders if properly inspired now comes from other successful people, perhaps demonstrating one of life’s great principles, that those who attempt great things must seek support from the great and not from the small.

At first, Esquith and his wife, Barbara, funded his program out of their own pockets and with prodigious expenditures of their time and energy. Today, donations from major corporations and private individuals cover the cost of the class’s extra-curricular activities None of these funds are used to supplement Esquith’s salary as an inner-city school teacher.

Some say that Esquith’s successes are the product of a singular sense of mission, and therefore not examples broadly applicable to an education crisis in which poor kids in poor schools fall ever farther behind. But what Esquith has proved, albeit through singular sacrifice, is that with the best educational tools – tools that society could provide if it wanted – any kid can succeed. That, for Rafe Esquith, is the American dream.

“With all my thrilling experiences in the movie business, this was a wonderful film to shoot,” says producer/director Mel Stuart. “We can see these kids blossom and open up. It’s a testament to the powers of art and to the difference one thoroughly committed person can make.”

It is on the record of people like this, who show that commitment and passion can achieve the world in the end, that one can expect the AIDS idealists to succeed sooner or later in opening up the door to free speech and outside review in this problematical field, where the truth seems to be that two decades and billions of dollars, not to mention many lives, have been wasted barking up the wrong tree.

Here are a few paragraphs from Esquith’s book, “There Are No Shortcuts”:


Perhaps I have an unusual view of the world of education, but each and every day I walk into my classroom and I remind myself of something important: I remember whom I work for. It’s not my principal, who is a good guy with many positive qualities. It’s not any of his assistants, some of whom I like and some of whom never met Will Rogers. It is certainly not the children, although some teachers forget this and actually believe the children should have an equal voice in the daily running of a classroom.

I work for the parents and the taxpayers. They are the people who pay me and they are the people I serve. It’s my job to provide them with the best service I possibly can. This is not always easy or convenient. I simply believe that anyone who becomes a teacher must accept that there are certain parts of the job not described in the contract. As a teacher, I accept the fact that not all the children will be easy to teach. I know that I will often be called on to stay after school to help a child in need. I know that large amounts of my personal time will be spent shopping for my class and planning my lessons. My wife, Barbara, a nurse for fifteen years, taught me that her shift at the hospital did not end when the clock struck a certain hour; it ended when her patients were well cared for, comfortable, and in the hands of the next shift. If that meant staying an extra hour on certain days because a patient needed a hand held or a back rubbed, Barbara was there. It was the job. The same is true for other service professions, and teaching is no different.

In an elementary school, the single most important factor in determining the progress of your child is: Who will be the teacher for the year? Your child will be spending thousands of hours with this person. We all know that the teacher creates the weather in a classroom. Will it be a happy place? Will your child be challenged without being frustrated? Will your child have a voice? We have all been in classrooms and know that it’s the teacher who holds the answers to these crucial questions.

As a parent, one of the best things you can do for your elementary-aged children should happen a few months before their next school year. This is the time when schools begin to pencil in which teacher will teach which grades. Most parents know nothing about this process. When this selection occurs, the current school year is well under way and the parents have been to Open House, have seen report cards, and have had a parent conference. Most parents assume that they’ve done their duty until they turn up the following year to meet the new teachers and check on their child’s progress. Yet one of the most important things parents can do is to be part of the process of teacher selection for the next school year. I’ve seen schools where the local PTA is actually part of the hiring process, and this is as it should be. But this isn’t what happens at the Jungle and many other schools, and parents need to know what is going down.

Not too hard to see a parallel here with disease science, practised as a profession rather than a vocation, and as a consequence filled with mediocrities whose ambition is realized through politicking rather than passion for discovery.

Certainly what is happening in science in some quarters is not what the public thinks, and it needs to send its representatives to find out what is going down.

This is the story in the LA Times

September 6, 2005

latimes.com : Education

Shakespeare, to expand their globe

# A Koreatown teacher sets high goals for his fifth graders. The results are chronicled in a PBS documentary.

By Merrill Balassone, Times Staff Writer

The bell shrills at Hobart Elementary in the heart of Koreatown, signaling the end of the school day. The campus quickly empties, but no one budges in fifth-grade teacher Rafe Esquith’s classroom. Instead, more children file in; some perch on filing cabinets bordering the room and some former students, still enjoying summer vacation before the start of middle school, pack into the back.

Today is an important day for this group, the Hobart Shakespeareans, and a hush falls, punctuated only by excited whispers. The cast list is being announced for this year’s Shakespeare production, “Love’s Labour’s Lost.”

The children, ages 9 to 11, know there are months of work ahead of them. Esquith has asked them to sacrifice video games and television. These children, many from immigrant families who don’t speak English at home, will memorize and perform the unabridged work. But they are inspired by the students from years past, who have traveled the country to perform and attended top-notch universities, and whose fans include actors Ian McKellen and Michael York. Many alumni, some still children themselves, return to help the new actors memorize their parts and master the rhythm of the lines.

The young troupe is the subject of a PBS documentary, “The Hobart Shakespeareans,” directed by Mel Stuart that premieres on “P.O.V.” at 9:30 p.m. Friday on KCET in the Los Angeles area. The hourlong film chronicles the group’s year of rehearsals as they prepared for their performance of “Hamlet” in 2003.

Esquith’s students suffer from poverty and struggle against the influences of gangs and drugs, which result in a culture of low expectations. To compete with students from more privileged schools, his classes work twice as hard. His rallying cry, echoed in a banner at the front of the classroom: “There are no shortcuts.”

Nearly all his students arrive at 7 a.m. — an hour before school starts — for extra math work and spend their recess and lunch breaks learning guitar. After school is Shakespeare rehearsal, and on Saturdays and vacations, students practice grammar and math, while alumni can get SAT tutoring and help with college applications. The students read higher-level literature, such as “Lord of the Flies,” “Huckleberry Finn” and “The Catcher in the Rye.”

“I ask these children to defy the culture of their neighborhood,” Esquith said. “I want my kids to know that they’re just as good and just as American as Abraham Lincoln, George Washington or Dr. Martin Luther King. My worst fear is that they will become ordinary.”

Brenda De Leon, 12, who starred in the production of “Hamlet” as Ophelia, said her experience as a Hobart Shakespearean broadened her horizons and taught her to set higher standards for herself.

“In other classes, they don’t expect much — if you got average grades they would be happy with you,” said Brenda, who now hopes to attend an Ivy League school and become an AIDS specialist. “I was very shy and wouldn’t participate in class. In Rafe’s class, there was lots of work and lots of sacrifice, and I learned I had to be excellent all the time.”

As a Shakespearean, Brenda also took trips: one to perform in front of 1,000 people in Hawaii, where she also swam with dolphins; a trip to Ashland, Ore., for its annual Shakespeare Festival; Washington, D.C., for a tour of American monuments; and South Dakota to learn about Native American heritage.

“Before, I felt that Koreatown was the whole world,” Brenda said. “Then I saw that there were better communities and neighborhoods. There weren’t always gangs.”

Esquith said the trips are an opportunity to teach the children real-life skills, such as how to manage a budget, plan meals and even tip the maids.

“When we travel, we won’t stay in Motel 6 — that’s not what we’re working for,” he said. “I’m tired of walking into a hotel and seeing that the only Latinos there are the workers. I want my Latino students to be running these hotels someday.”

As a young teacher, Esquith worked four jobs, including graveyard shifts, to raise the money for trips and to purchase books and musical instruments for his students. Still, he would arrive at Hobart at 6:30 each morning wearing his signature uniform: a crisp button-down shirt, sweater vest and tie, with white Adidas sneakers.

His schedule eventually took him past the brink of physical exhaustion, but even that didn’t slow him down. He once climbed out of a hospital window after a severe asthma attack so he wouldn’t miss a trip with his students. It took pleading from his wife, Barbara, a registered nurse, to make him realize the toll on his health.

“I had to grow up a little bit,” Esquith said. “If you’re all passion and no brains, you’re not effective. You’re no good to anyone if you drop dead.”

In 1992, an alumnus from Esquith’s first year of teaching, by then in his third year of Yale Law School, came to his rescue. He set up a nonprofit organization called the Hobart Shakespearean Foundation that now brings in about $200,000 a year in donations.

The documentary shows snippets of the troupe’s “Hamlet” performance, which is interspersed with rock songs and performed in Esquith’s classroom with stage lights and bleachers set up for the audience, which included British actor York.

“I cannot watch Mel’s documentary without being moved to tears,” York said. “There’s such a bad rap about education, immigration and all these ills, but here’s someone who has a solution and the dedication to carry it out. Rafe says his big fear is that the kids will be ordinary, but you have the sense that none of them are.”

York said he was particularly moved by a scene in which the students read an excerpt from “Huckleberry Finn” dealing with Huck deciding whether to turn in his friend Jim, an escaped slave, to the authorities. The children take turns reading, their sobs choking the words as they are overcome with emotion.

“I was truly amazed, and I’m not just talking about the Shakespeare,” York said. “It’s all the other things that go along with it — the extraordinary civility of the children.”

The motto “Be Nice, Work Hard” is another tenet the Shakespeareans must live by. On a recent afternoon during recess, the classroom is full of students who are learning to play guitar. The walls are covered with pennants from the nation’s top universities — Yale, Stanford, Harvard. Under the pennants are placards inscribed with the names of the students who now go there, with the date they graduated from Esquith’s class.

While Esquith has won honors, such as the National Medal of Arts from President Bush (which he keeps locked away in a cabinet for safekeeping) and the National Teacher of the Year Award (which he accepted wearing a tuxedo with his white tennis shoes), his peers have not always been kind. He has received hate letters from fellow teachers who feel their efforts have been overlooked in light of Esquith’s national attention, and he gets his fair share of cold shoulders on campus.

His classroom too has come under fire — vandalized and burglarized by gang members. And his students say they are picked on for being in the Shakespeare productions, ostracized as “snobs” by former teachers and fellow students alike. For Esquith, it’s not about making an easy path for his students but about opening doors for them to work hard and create better lives for themselves.

“I’m just this really ordinary guy that stuck with it,” Esquith said. “My job is done when they’re ready for their lives.”

This is a review from San Antonio Current by Steven G. Kellman:

A lesson in teaching

By Steven G. Kellman

09/01/2005

In The Hobart Shakespeareans, one instructor proves again that children rise to meet expectations

To find an early advocate of dumbing down the curriculum, look to Shakespeare’s Desdemona. “Those that do teach young babes/ Do it with gentle means and easy tasks,” she tells Iago. However, though Rafe Esquith reveres Shakespeare, the tasks he sets the young babes in his classroom are far from easy. Esquith teaches fifth grade at Hobart Elementary, a large public school serving a neighborhood in central Los Angeles so tough that the building sometimes has to be locked down to protect the children from violence outside. Most of his students are either Latino or Asian, and none speaks English as a first language. Yet Esquith inspires his 10-year-old charges to mount a production of Hamlet that astonishes Ian McKellen. “You understand every single word,” the master actor tells the young performers, in awe of an accomplishment that eludes most college students, and even their professors. “Once they’re in a culture of excellence, they do fine,” says Esquith about the correlation between expectation and achievement.

Fifth-grade teacher Rafe Esquith uses Shakespeare to teach vocabulary, fencing, ethics, and more. His unorthodox, award-winning dedication to a Los Angeles public school is documented in P.O.V.’s Hobart Shakespeareans.

The Hobart Shakespeareans focuses on preparations for the staging of a Shakespeare play that concludes the school year for each successive cohort under Esquith’s tutelage. It is a grander example of San Antonio’s “Shakespeare in the Barrio” program. But the film, which is scheduled for broadcast on KLRN-TV Tuesday, September 6, at 10 p.m., as part of the PBS P.O.V. series, is not confined to Elizabethan drama. Esquith also teaches math, geography, history, music, and baseball, as well as discipline, civility, and compassion. “We do Shakespeare because I personally love him,” he explains. But Hamlet becomes a pretext for the study of vocabulary, fencing, ethics, and much else.

“Be nice. Work hard.” If a secular institution must have commandments carved in granite, those two rules that govern the world according to Rafe would do just fine. The children enrolled in Esquith’s class are not there because of any special tracking. They happen to live in the impoverished district and are fortunate enough to be assigned a teacher so dedicated to his profession and pupils that he voluntarily comes to school six days a week. Esquith even holds sessions during vacations, and, until wealthy patrons began making donations, paid for group trips with his own funds. He expands the boundaries of the California classroom by taking his students to Washington, Gettysburg, Williamsburg, and Mount Rushmore. In a society that honored teachers as much as politicians, the pedagogical paragon of Hobart Elementary would be immortalized on the face of a South Dakota cliff.

The Hobart Shakespeareans

Dir. Mel Stuart

Some dissent.

Mercedes Santoyo, his principal, hints at the envy that Esquith’s international attention has aroused in fellow teachers. But director Mel Stuart (best known for the original Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory) offers no elaboration. Sixth-grade teachers must consider Esquith a hard act to follow. Except for a glimpse of him lecturing in Houston, we are shown no interaction between Esquith and others except his adoring students and his devoted wife, Barbara. Nor do former students testify to his influence during a career spanning two decades. Ignoring the neighborhood, the camera remains riveted on Esquith at work. While reading about Huckleberry Finn’s moral dilemmas, several students are moved to tears. Learning about the reading list – including Lord of the Flies, To Kill a Mockingbird, The Autobiography of Malcolm X, and A Catcher in the Rye – that these fifth-graders master, a viewer is moved to wonder why Johnny can’t read in twelfth-grade classes elsewhere. Like Jaime Escalante, who – portrayed by Edward James Olmos in Stand and Deliver – taught calculus and self-esteem to disadvantaged youngsters in East L.A., Rafe Esquith is an inspiration to us all, and an admonition to all those Texas leaders who lack and limit education. •

©San Antonio Current 2005

This is an interview with Rafe and the filmmaker Mel:

The Atticus Finch of Hobart Elementary

By Terrence McNally, AlterNet. Posted September 6, 2005.

In a stunning new documentary, a fifth-grade teacher at one of the nation’s largest inner-city schools inspires his students to lead extraordinary lives, despite language barriers and poverty.

Documentaries today may be giving us what we hunger for. The film March of the Penguins, which reveals the birds’ harsh and glorious Antarctic mating season, has become the second highest grossing documentary in history, behind only Fahrenheit 9/11. Another documentary, Mad Hot Ballroom, takes us inside a ballroom dancing competition for New York City’s fifth graders. A third film, The Hobart Shakespeareans (premiering on PBS Tuesday, Sept. 6), made by filmmaker Mel Stuart, follows Rafe Esquith’s fifth-grade class in inner-city Los Angeles as they learn to perform a full-text Hamlet by the end of their school year.

Whether it’s penguins or fifth graders, all these documentaries are about goodness, dedication and purpose, as well as respect and treating others well. There’s something joyful and painfully touching when we see the life force in action with purpose.

Rafe Esquith leads his fifth graders through an uncompromising curriculum of English, mathematics, geography and literature. His classroom mottos are “Be nice. Work hard,” and “There are no shortcuts.” Every student performs in a full-length Shakespeare play. Despite language barriers and poverty, many of these Hobart Shakespeareans move on to attend outstanding colleges.

Esquith, who grew up in Los Angeles and attended the city’s public schools, has taught fifth grade at Hobart Boulevard Elementary for over 20 years. “I don’t want my students to be ordinary,” he says. “I want them to be extraordinary because I know that they are. If a 10-year-old, who doesn’t speak English at home, can step in front of you and do a scene from Shakespeare, then there is nothing that he cannot accomplish.”

TERRENCE MCNALLY: Rafe, what led you to teaching and to Hobart Elementary?

RAFE ESQUITH: I became a teacher because my father taught me that a life without service is a wasted life. I found I had a knack for teaching, I taught at a middle-class school for two years. Great kids, but they didn’t need me. I was challenged by a principal to come to Hobart School, where there are 2,400 children, and I realized that we were a perfect match. These were kids who want a way out, and after many years of teaching, I figured out a way to help them get out.

Mel, what led you to this documentary?

MEL STUART: Luck. That’s a very important part of being a filmmaker. You have to be lucky. I was read in the paper that Rafe had won an award for teaching inner-city schoolchildren, nine and 10 years old, a curriculum that included performing Shakespeare. I’m a Shakespeare nut, have been since I was 13 and saw Henry V with Olivier. So I called Rafe and asked him, “What play are you doing next year?” and he said, “Hamlet.” I said, “Perfect, that’s the one I want to do.”

I was initially attracted to the film because of the Hamlet hook, but when I watched it, I saw so much more. What did you know before you decided to do it, and what surprised you?

MEL STUART: I went there planning to do Hamlet, but it turned out, they were playing baseball to learn to be American citizens, they were simulating a money economy in the classroom, they were reading the most incredible books. Rafe was guiding them through the great books of our literature.

Fifth-graders.

MEL STUART: Fifth-graders reading Catcher in the Rye and Malcolm X, or Huckleberry Finn. You see the effect it has on these kids. I only wish that my own children could have gone to Rafe’s class. I made the film because I want the whole nation to know what Rafe can do with children that don’t have the background and the money that other children in this country have.

Rafe, in the film and in your book you mention a turning point, when you realized that you were a pretty good teacher and you were a teacher kids liked, but that you weren’t making the difference you needed to make.

RAFE ESQUITH: You’re too kind. The truth is, I was failing, because the real measure of a teacher is not that the kids like him or that they do well at the tests at the end of the year. The real measure is where are these children five years from now, 10 years from now? What am I giving to these children that they’ll be using for the rest of their lives?

One night when I was really ready to give it up, my wife Barbara said, “Rafe you ought to re-read To Kill a Mockingbird.” In Atticus Finch, I found the model I was looking for. Early in that book his children ask, “Are we gonna win?” Finch says no. But he doesn’t run from the courtroom, he goes in and fights the fight anyway, because he believes strongly in Tom Robinson’s innocence and he’s going to speak the truth.

My classroom is that courtroom. I feel all the time that I’m a very ordinary human being, but what separates good teachers from other teachers is good teachers don’t give up. I tell the children not to give up. That means I can’t give up either.

Late in the documentary, you say, “I’ve won these awards, I’ve written this book, I’ve got this documentary, I could make more money doing something else, and I’ve been here 20 years now … But for 20 years I’ve been telling them this is important. For me to walk away would make me a hypocrite.”

RAFE ESQUITH: Well, we always say, “No child left behind.” I see a lot of teachers now who win an award or two, and they write their book and they get their website, and then they leave. Talk about no child left behind, they leave them all behind! I can’t do that.

What are some of the things you’ve come up with over the years? It’s looks like a totally unique world inside your classroom.

RAFE ESQUITH: You’re right, we’ve created a different culture — a culture that’s different from the neighborhood in which these kids live, a culture different from society. We do it through character development. We have the children develop a code of behavior. Right now I’m not in the classroom, but I’ll come back in an hour after I’m done talking to you, and the kids will be behaving perfectly because they don’t behave for me. A lot of children try to please adults. I don’t want them to please me, I’m a very small part of the story.

The real heroes in this film are the children who have the courage to walk the path that I’ve laid out for them. That means a push for excellence. Our society doesn’t value excellence, and I don’t think excellence is a switch you can throw on at 3 p.m.: Hey, now it’s Shakespeare time, now we’re gonna be excellent! I want them to have a code of excellence in the way they approach their mathematics and their literature and the way they write and the way they speak in front of people, and the way they play baseball and travel on the road. It’s not a dog-and-pony show, it’s a way of life in Room 56.

If I were a young teacher at your school, and I said, “My God, I walked through the neighborhood to get here this morning, I’m looking at what’s around here, I’m looking at the way kids were out in the parking lot, how can I possibly do what you do?” How do you transform them? Why do your kids buy in?

RAFE ESQUITH: First of all, lesson one, you are the role model, and you have to be the person you want the children to be. I want my kids to work hard, so I’ve got to be the hardest worker they’ve ever seen. It’s not a question of preaching. I’m at that school at 6 in the morning, and right away, the kids go, “My God, this guy is really gonna work hard, so I have to work hard.” I don’t raise my voice to these kids, I don’t humiliate these children. I’m a tough teacher, but if I want them to be nice to each other, I better be the nicest guy they ever met. So rule number one, be the person you want the children to be.

Mel, I’ve heard you say that this is one of your favorite two or three projects of your career. That’s saying a lot. Why?

MEL STUART: Number one, it is the most cinéma vérité film I’ve ever made. Nothing was re-enacted. Everything was the only take. Rafe has that incredible quality which he’s shy to admit, he can talk and walk at the same time. In our business it’s very rare to find somebody who can go about doing what he’s doing and still talk to you. He’s doing his business, and the kids don’t care and the class goes on, and you have a tremendous sense of reality. I never had to ask Rafe a question twice, the right answer always came out of his mouth. It’s a very rare art, and Rafe has it. There were no re-takes.

How did you choose to shoot it with Rafe occasionally speaking directly to camera?

MEL STUART: No, he doesn’t talk to camera. He talks to me, and that’s a very important difference. I don’t want him to talk to the camera, because first of all, it’s a very hard thing to look at a camera and be yourself. Most of the time Rafe’s walking this way and that around the classroom, and he has a thought and just hits me with it. If he hit the camera with it, it would look false. It’s just the thoughts coming out of his head, but always on the nose.

And we mustn’t forget how important all the children are in this. There was a moment when I was interviewing the little boy who plays Hamlet, and I ask him, “What did you think of Huckleberry Finn? What kind of experience was that for you?” And he said, “Well, I thought the characters were interesting. They held a mirror up to nature.” A 10-year-old Mexican kid just used that as a phrase. It blew me away! That was just a wonderful moment for me.

A point you make even more in your book than in the documentary, Rafe, is the value of reading above all else. In teaching to change their lives, reading is something you find enormously important.

RAFE ESQUITH: We have a Wall of Fame in my classroom. We have all the former students up who are in college now. I tell the children, there are a lot of different kinds of kids up there. There are jocks and there are artists and there are wild kids and there are shy kids. But the one thing they all have in common is they all read for pleasure and they all read well.

One of the things that’s wrong with the schools today is that in throwing basal readers at the children, and getting them to take all their tests and everything — has anybody ever asked the children how they feel about the reading program? The kids hate it. They despise the reading program. The companies will say, “Oh, but test scores are going up.” Their goals have to do with fluency and speed. My goals have to do with pleasure and passion. There’s a scene in the film when the kids are reading Huck Finn, and they’re absolutely in tears as Huck has to decide between heaven and hell, whether or not he’s going to turn Jim in ….

That is very powerful. Ten-year-olds together in a school classroom coming to a point in the book, and they cannot control their emotions.

RAFE ESQUITH: That’s what reading is supposed to be. We just finished Tom Sawyer and kids were hysterically laughing as Tom hoodwinks his friends into whitewashing the fence. My class’s reading scores are so high because my kids love to read. They read all the time. And it’s not because I’m such a good teacher, but I put great books in front of them. We forget Mark Twain’s a great product. Children read him in the 1800s.

Most kids won’t get these books until years later, if at all. And these are not just fifth graders. Most of them are either Asian or Latino, and in their homes English is not the first language.

RAFE ESQUITH: There’s a key to that also. When they get thrown Steinbeck or Twain in the eighth or ninth grade, and are told, go home and read this, many children are going to home environments where it’s just not conducive for reading. That’s why we read these books together in the class. When people say to me, gosh Rafe, this takes a long time, I say well so what? I’m not in a hurry. When I say there are no shortcuts, that’s for teachers too. We can’t look for these simplistic solutions to complicated problems.

You titled your book There are No Shortcuts. You have it spelled out on a banner in the front of your classroom. Where did that phrase come from and what does it mean to you, to your kids, and to the larger American society?

RAFE ESQUITH: I’m a learner and I once took kids to the Hollywood Bowl to see the great cellist Lynn Harrell play, and Lynn loved my class so much he pulled his kids out of private school in Beverly Hills and put them at Hobart.

There’s an endorsement!

RAFE ESQUITH: It was pretty funny to have these two white kids at Hobart. One of them wound up at Vassar and one of them wound up at Princeton, and they’re still in touch with me all the time.

We went backstage to visit Lynn and a young cellist looked up at Lynn Harrell, who’s 6 foot 5, and the little kid said, “You know, I play the cello, Mr. Harrell, but it doesn’t sound like that, how do you do it?” And Lynn just looked down and said, “Well, there are no shortcuts.” I was in about my fifth or sixth year of teaching, and I said, “Boy, that encapsulates everything I’m trying to get across to these children.”

It’s almost like a small tribe who share a certain set of iconic rules.

RAFE ESQUITH: Being in Los Angeles and loving basketball, I always used to tell the children, there’s nothing magic about Magic Johnson. This talented man worked for hundreds of thousands of hours in lonely gyms when there weren’t people cheering him on to create that magic. There are no shortcuts.

You openly tell the children you want a better life for them than the one their school, their neighborhoods or even their families offer. On field trips you put them up at hotels and feed them at restaurants. “There’s a scene in the bus on the way back from Washington, when you address them about how they feel about going back to their normal lives. What’s your thinking behind all this? Do you get flak for it?

RAFE ESQUITH: I don’t get flak for it; as a matter of fact I’ve got 60 kids showing up at 6:30 in the morning.

I meant from other teachers or politically correct folk.

RAFE ESQUITH: Sure, I teach with 125 teachers. Most of them are incredibly nice to me, and eight or 10 believe I’m the anti-Christ. And that’s OK. The best teacher who ever lived was Socrates and they killed him.

Exactly.

RAFE ESQUITH: So if they’re not shooting at me sometimes I’m probably not doing anything right. I do want a better life for these kids and surely, to live in a neighborhood where you hear gunfire at night is not the best thing to envision in your future. There are other children in America who don’t have to go to bed with that. I’m just trying to level the playing field.

“The Hobart Shakespeareans” premieres on PBS Tuesday, Sept. 6. Check your local listings for times.

Interviewer Terrence McNally hosts Free Forum on KPFK 90.7FM, Los Angeles (streaming at kpfk.org), where he interviews people he believes can help create ‘a world that just might work.’

« AlterNet Home

The world prematurely accused of ignoring the vital goal of an AIDS vaccine

September 9th, 2005

The urgent need to fund the search for an AIDS vaccine at much greater expense than hitherto is being somehow overlooked, according to the UN Secretary General’s special envoy for HIV/AIDS in Africa speaking to scientists at the AIDS Vaccine International Conference in Montreal yesterday (Sept 8 Thu).

Stephen Lewis said he couldn’t explain this oversight, given the dire threat which looms over the planet.


Lewis said he can’t explain the lack of enthusiasm for the research in Canada and other developed nations.

“I don’t think the world yet realizes the carnage that is to come,” Lewis said. “I don’t think the world yet realizes the full, incomparable horror of AIDS, and its inexorable spread around the planet.”

(The full clip if you wish to read it is as follows)

Friday, September 9, 2005

Search for AIDS vaccine at risk due to lack of interest and funding: Lewis

Canadian Press

September 8, 2005

MONTREAL (CP) – The pursuit of a vaccination against AIDS is dying due to lack of funds and global commitment, according to the Canadian who is the United Nations point man on the fight against the deadly disease in Africa.

In a Tuesday evening speech to scientific researchers who are chasing a vaccine for AIDS, Stephen Lewis said the quest for a vaccine received $640 million US in funding in 2004, about half of the amount that should be dedicated to the research.

The UN Secretary General’s special envoy for HIV/AIDS in Africa pointed to recent high-level meetings on AIDS prevention where scant mention was made of the search for a vaccine.

“Your pursuit is in jeopardy,” Lewis said in prepared remarks to researchers at the AIDS Vaccine International Conference.

“Your collective voices must be heard on the funding dimensions of a vaccine. It can’t be left solely to activists. You’re the influential professionals. You should give no quarter. The world depends on it.”

Lewis was speaking at a conference organized by the Canadian Network for Vaccines and Immunotherapeutics – a network of researchers working on clinical trials for a vaccine for AIDS and SARS. The federal government last summer pulled $34 million in funding towards the clinical trials.

Seven vaccines developed by the Canadian researchers were ready for clinical trials next year, according to the organization.

Lewis said he can’t explain the lack of enthusiasm for the research in Canada and other developed nations.

“I don’t think the world yet realizes the carnage that is to come,” Lewis said. “I don’t think the world yet realizes the full, incomparable horror of AIDS, and its inexorable spread around the planet.”

Lewis urged the scientists to emerge from their laboratories to become champions for the cause.

“The world desperately needs your voices,” he said.

© The Canadian Press 2005

Perhaps Mr. Lewis would have felt better if he had attended the invitation-only meeting at the New York Academy of Sciences a couple of months ago.

Here the top names in the AIDS vaccine effort gathered with a few close and simpatico colleagues to talk about the ongoing scientific progress and the approximate date of expected success in this urgent endeavor.

The presentations by the renowned David Ho, the short but extremely charming hero of AIDS research into protease inhibitiors who found himself on Time’s cover in the late nineties for his pioneering of this supposedly effective anti-HIV regimen, and others of his ilk revealed the answers to these questions.

First, progress was nil. Secondly, it was unlikely to amount to anything in the foreseeable future ie at least a decade if not two. Thirdly, however, the vital importance of increasing the funding devoted to this line of work could not be overlooked.

Apparently boosted by the third or monetary factor and its prospect of success, and not the first two and the prediction of continual failure, the atmosphere of bonhomie generated during the meeting reached a climax in the gathering afterwards in an adjoining room, where drinks were served.

Certainly today it seems clear that their confidence is justified and anything to do with vaccines, even something as logically haywire as an AIDS vaccine, is likely to be well funded in the future. Vaccines are viewed as the profit wave of the future by the pharmaceutical companies, and they are being fully backed by the Western governments that are increasingly their partners in this global enterprise.

Only the other day (Sep 7) Glaxo announced it will buy a Canadian vaccine maker for $1.4 billion.


Hoping to become a major supplier of flu shots to the United States, GlaxoSmithKline said yesterday that it would pay $1.4 billion to acquire ID Biomedical, a Canadian vaccine maker.

The deal comes a week after Novartis offered $4.5 billion for the 58 percent of Chiron it does not already own, which would put Novartis in the vaccine business. So far, Chiron has rejected that offer as too low.

The takeover activity could reflect a change of perception among pharmaceutical companies, many of which have long regarded vaccines as an unattractive business.

“You’re seeing the big pharma companies recognizing the value of the vaccine business,” Anthony F. Holler, chief executive of ID Biomedical, said in an interview.

(Here is the full Times report:)

The New York Times

September 8, 2005

Glaxo to Acquire Canadian Vaccine Maker for $1.4 Billion

By ANDREW POLLACK

Hoping to become a major supplier of flu shots to the United States, GlaxoSmithKline said yesterday that it would pay $1.4 billion to acquire ID Biomedical, a Canadian vaccine maker.

The deal comes a week after Novartis offered $4.5 billion for the 58 percent of Chiron it does not already own, which would put Novartis in the vaccine business. So far, Chiron has rejected that offer as too low.

The takeover activity could reflect a change of perception among pharmaceutical companies, many of which have long regarded vaccines as an unattractive business.

“You’re seeing the big pharma companies recognizing the value of the vaccine business,” Anthony F. Holler, chief executive of ID Biomedical, said in an interview.

The flu vaccine business in particular seems to have become more attractive as shortages have lifted prices and concern has grown about a possible pandemic stemming from bird flu.

Last year the United States experienced a severe shortage of flu shots when Chiron’s factory in Liverpool, England, was shut down because of sanitary problems. Since Chiron was one of only two major suppliers, the shutdown deprived the United States of about half the expected supply of 100 million doses.

The supply outlook for this winter is still somewhat uncertain and will depend on how many doses Chiron can deliver.

In response to the shortage and federal efforts to recruit new suppliers, both GlaxoSmithKline and ID Biomedical had already been moving to enter the American market.

Glaxo, which already sells flu vaccine in dozens of countries, won United States approval last week but will sell only about eight million doses in this country this year because of capacity constraints at its factory in Dresden, Germany. Some of Glaxo’s vaccine was used on an emergency basis in this country last year.

ID Biomedical has been aiming for United States approval next year.

David Stout, president of pharmaceutical operations at Glaxo, said the acquisition “gives us immediate access to some capacity, state-of-the-art facilities, and product that is close to approval in the U.S.” He said owning the ID Biomedical factory would also allow Glaxo to produce bird flu vaccine, if necessary, for a possible pandemic.

Glaxo’s takeover of ID Biomedical would reduce the number of potential vaccine suppliers by one. The deal, however, and the possible acquisition of Chiron by Novartis, would put the American supply into the hands of financially stronger companies. The leading supplier of flu shots to the United States is Sanofi-Aventis.

Glaxo has said it planned to more than double the capacity at its German factory to 80 million doses by 2008. ID Biomedical, which now sells about 8 million doses a year to the Canadian government, is expanding capacity to about 70 million doses by 2007, with much of that output destined for the United States.

In an all-cash deal Glaxo has agreed to pay 35 Canadian dollars a share, or about $29.50. ID shares rose $3.46, to $29.46 yesterday.

The agreement does not preclude another company from making a higher offer, but Glaxo would have the right to match such an offer.

Biotech Monthly, an investment newsletter, said ID, which is based in Vancouver, was getting far less, relative to sales, than Novartis offered for Chiron. But Geoffrey C. Porges, an analyst at Sanford C. Bernstein & Company, disagreed, saying the relatively higher price offered for ID would pressure Novartis to raise its offer for Chiron.

* Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company

Then we have the plan announced yesterday by four European nations to raise $4 billion on the bond market to enable drug companies to vaccinate the world’s poor children.


The new funds would roughly double the resources of the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization, an umbrella group of countries, international organizations, vaccine industry representatives and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

(Here is the Times story by Celia Dugger:)

The New York Times

September 9, 2005

Billions for Vaccines for the Poor to Be Raised in Bond Markets

By CELIA W. DUGGER

WASHINGTON, Sept. 8 – Britain, France, Spain, Italy and Sweden will announce an agreement on Friday to raise almost $4 billion on the bond markets for an enormously expanded use of vaccines across the developing world. The World Health Organization estimates this undertaking will save the lives of five million children over the next decade.

Commitments from some of the participating nations have been secured only in recent days.

The new funds would roughly double the resources of the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization, an umbrella group of countries, international organizations, vaccine industry representatives and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Over the past five years, the alliance has financed the immunization of 78 million children and prevented more than a million child deaths, the health organization estimates.

The alliance’s board has already approved ambitious programs for 2006 to expand measles coverage in South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa, as well as to help eradicate polio worldwide and increase the use of maternal and neonatal tetanus vaccines. These plans can go forward now that the new financing has been secured.

“We hope this pilot will demonstrate the feasibility and the power of this financing mechanism, and we look to gain more support from more countries,” said Paul Kissack, a spokesman for the British treasury.

The United States has declined to join the vaccine plan. Bush administration officials could not be reached for comment Thursday night, but said earlier this year that the long-term commitment to raise money through the bond market is not consistent with the annual appropriations process in Congress. The United States provides $60 million to $70 million a year to the alliance.

“We hope if this process is successful that the United States will reconsider its position,” said Dr. Julian Lob-Levyt, the vaccine alliance’s executive secretary.

British officials have said they hope the new resources will help the world reach the goal adopted unanimously five years ago at the United Nations to reduce child deaths by two-thirds by 2015. More than 170 government leaders will gather in New York next week to assess progress in meeting the antipoverty objectives they set in 2000.

The pact marks the first time rich nations have used pledges of increased aid to back government bonds as a means of financing a major development program. This so-called international finance facility is the brainchild of Gordon Brown, Britain’s chancellor of the exchequer.

Under the plan, income from the sale of the bonds would be provided to the global vaccine alliance to pay for vaccinations over a period of 10 years. The five participating nations would pay off the bonds over 20 years. The two largest donors are Britain, which has pledged to cover 35 percent of the cost, and France, which is covering a quarter.

The money will be used to purchase vaccines and bicycles to transport them, as well as to rehabilitate health clinics and pay health workers to do the immunizing in remote areas. Leaders of the alliance hope the vaccine plan will strengthen basic health services in poor countries, not just immunization efforts.

Yesterday, also, we had the front page story of the New York Times helpfully (for the cause of drumming up business for vaccines in general) telling us that it is for lack of a vaccine that a dreadful virus (Japanese encephalitis) is ravaging India’s poor, accompanied by a vivid picture of a wide eyed victim all skin and bones.


All were victims of the viral disease known as Japanese encephalitis, which causes high fever, aches, eventual coma and often death. It has struck this region with a particular fury this year, shining a harsh light on India’s inability to halt an entirely preventable disease that has killed or stunted some of its most vulnerable citizens for the last quarter-century – the young rural poor.

The director general of the state government’s health department said Wednesday that since July 1 the death toll had reached nearly 500, and those were only cases reported to government hospitals across the state. Reuters on Wednesday gave a figure of 600.

(Here is the full Times story by Somini Sengupta:)

The New York Times

September 8, 2005

Virus Ravaging India’s Poor Stirs Call for Counterattack

By SOMINI SENGUPTA

LUCKNOW, India, Sept. 7 – Government ministers descended on this storied North Indian state capital on Wednesday to kick off an ambitious rural health initiative. The city’s roads were freshly tarred, and banners hung along the main boulevard to welcome its chief guest: former President Bill Clinton.

But across town in a government hospital ward with paint peeling off its walls lay small children clinging to life. One, in her father’s arms, could barely swallow spoonfuls of milk. Another had been unconscious for 10 days. A third could not breathe on his own.

All were victims of the viral disease known as Japanese encephalitis, which causes high fever, aches, eventual coma and often death. It has struck this region with a particular fury this year, shining a harsh light on India’s inability to halt an entirely preventable disease that has killed or stunted some of its most vulnerable citizens for the last quarter-century – the young rural poor.

The director general of the state government’s health department said Wednesday that since July 1 the death toll had reached nearly 500, and those were only cases reported to government hospitals across the state. Reuters on Wednesday gave a figure of 600.

More than 1,500 suspected cases of Japanese encephalitis have been reported so far, according to the state.

And while the number of suspected cases is considerably higher than in past years – five times as high as the counts in the last few years at the King George Medical University hospital here, for instance – critics said that the rise should be no surprise to government health officials and that the misery inflicted could have been significantly reduced.

This year, only 200,000 of the 7 million children who needed to be immunized in high-risk areas of Uttar Pradesh were vaccinated, and other ways of preventing its spread – keeping pigs, which harbor the virus, at a safe distance from people, and spraying against mosquitoes, which ferry it to humans – were apparently inadequately pursued.

“There is gross apathy of the government,” said T. N. Dhole, a professor of microbiology at the Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of Medical Sciences here, fresh from a tour of some of the most badly affected district hospitals. “You could have reduced mortality if you had done a little homework before.”

Even as the rural health initiative begins, the United Nations released its annual human development report on Wednesday, showing unsettling rates of infant mortality in this country.

For every 1,000 Indian children, 63 die, according to the report, a rate worse than neighboring and far poorer Bangladesh. Uttar Pradesh, India’s most populous province, is one of the four Indian states with the worst rates of infant mortality.

Over all, India spends less than 1 percent of its gross domestic product on public health; the government has pledged to increase that share.

The encephalitis virus grows in wading birds as well as pigs; children are often the mosquitoes’ main victims.

Approved vaccines are in short supply worldwide, though another vaccine, derived from the cells of hamster kidneys, is widely available but yet to be approved by the World Health Organization. India says it plans to conduct clinical test trials of that vaccine, but that will not happen in time to help the children who need it now.

In Uttar Pradesh, the central government health minister, Dr. Ambubani Ramadoss, said in an interview here on Wednesday that he would encourage state health officials to mount a more aggressive spraying operation. State health officials have said health department staff members and vehicles, which could have been deployed to spray high-risk areas and monitor Japanese encephalitis, were deployed for local election duty in July and August – the crucial mosquito-breeding months.

Pigs are reared primarily by the caste groups, mostly poor and landless, who make up an important source of votes for the state’s ruling party. “Some political problems,” is how the state’s director general of health and medicine, O. P. Singh, put it. “They will try to separate next year.”

He was cheerful about the challenge. Next year, he said, the government would procure additional vaccines. “We will get vaccinations,” he said. “We will do it.”

In Gorakhpur, the eastern Uttar Pradesh epicenter of the epidemic, not a single corner of the three encephalitis wards in the local government hospital was free of misery and stink. Children were hooked up to nasal feeding tubes and oxygen tanks, and distraught parents camped out on the floor. In most beds, two children had been squeezed in. Additional beds spilled out into the hallways. Medical personnel have poured in from outlying areas to help.

On Wednesday alone, 30 new patients were wheeled in.

Dr. Ramadoss said it was primarily the state government’s responsibility to stop the epidemic. Then he corrected himself. “It’s a collective responsibility but implementation is for the state,” he said. “The state government has to be more proactive.”

Dr. Ramadoss pointed out that India was now a destination for medical tourism, its private clinics drawing foreigners seeking medical treatment.

By the time children arrived at the hospital at King George Medical University, they were either unconscious or suffering from seizures, or had lost some of their motor skills. Parents said they had watched their children deteriorate as they went from village doctor to local hospital to here.

As a rule, rural hospitals in this country are in short supply of oxygen, medicine and qualified staff.

“If you caught a child early on and gave him supportive treatment, yes, you would save some children,” said Rashmi Kumar, a pediatrician at the hospital. Of the six children who were in one of the encephalitis wards, she found it hard to say how many would survive.

The one ray of hope was Brijesh, 6, who had stood on his own and, holding his father’s fingers, walked a few steps along the hospital floor.

He was running a fever of 102 when he was admitted a week ago. He had had two seizures that very day. Before the fever gripped him, his father, Matadin, said, he would sprint across the village at the sound of a television set. Today he could barely whisper into his father’s ears. “Let’s go home,” he said.

Soon enough, Brijesh will be able walk like a normal little boy. But, the doctors say, his cognitive abilities might never fully rebound.

Hari Kumar contributed reporting from Gorakhpur for this article.

* Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company

We are not here inclined to question that there is such a virus attack in India and that vaccines may help repel it, since the story gives specific symptoms, and numbers of victims, and generally enough medical facts to make sense and fit with standard medical principles. But nowadays we retain a certain wary tendency to examine such stories in detail for such factors before swallowing them whole.

The reason is our standing familiarity with the extreme professional gullibility of correspondents for the Times and other respected media outlets when they are officially informed by the medical-scientific fraternity of a new viral threat, most famously in the case of AIDS, and perhaps in the case of SARS, mad cow disease and other slightly suspect tales of the modern virus hunting mania.

“AIDS repeats its dreadful patterns across this continent.”

One perfect example of the media gullibility we have in mind in AIDS was the report last night carried by the BBC on Namibia. The correspondent was a tall, baby faced, dark haired young Englishman named Barnaby, who one must say seemed unsuitably rosy faced and well fed as he intoned his dread story of local kids orphaned by parents who have “died of AIDS”.

Handsome in khakis and a billowing blue shirt, the kind sold on Jermyn Street for more money that would feed the African children he is covering for a year, Barnaby introduces us to one of six or eight children from a family that has lost both parents to “AIDS”, and is now beset by the loss of status and social support that brings, according to a report that we assume is accurate in that respect, at least.

“Sometimes my brothers and sister cry,” says the child who can’t be more than ten or eleven, who has big brown eyes. “When they go without food at night they know something is wrong. It makes me so upset.” The camera lingers on his face as his big brown eyes turn up to the faces of his listeners and his mouth turns down in despair.

They cut to a picture of a couple of grass roofed huts while Barnaby continues, in the singsong tone of personal urgency seemingly patented by British news reporters, to tell us that “their uncle is trying to force them out to take their house. Other relatives have stolen their frming tools and animals.”

His tone turns ominous: “African society, resilent and compassionate, is cracking under the strain of this disease.”

“The good news is that fewer Namibians are catching HIV today than they were a few years ago. The bad news is that damage may have already been done and the numbers of deaths will continue to rise and rise in the years ahead so that by 2020, according to the UN, more one third of all Namibian children will be orphans.”

The image switches to a group of children sitting on the ground attended to by a woman in a red shirt, black skirt and headkerchief who feeds them what looks like blue corn mash in a bowl.

“At a nearby school a sad group of orphans are taken aside each day and given the extra food because there is none in their broken homes and without it they are two hungry to learn,. The women who cook are volunteers like Numborga who can’t bear to see a generation slipping away.

The camera lingers on the children’s face close up as they lick their fingers of the last vestiges of a portion before taking another, their big brown eyes frowning as the camera and presumably the visitors peer at them behind the bars of their social zoo.

Then we cut to the woman in the red shirt again walking straightbacked through a field of long golden grass with her bowl on her head. She is curtseyed to by an old woman who then shakes her hand with a triple grip in the manner one had assumed was invented in the US inner city.

“Walking in the afternoon Namborka takes more food to another destitute household. Marinconga is 75 years old. She should be resting in the last years of her life., Instead she is caring for ten grandchildren because most of her children are dead. She says she has sleepless nights worrying about the future, and what will happen to Mateus who is eight, or Tengi who is six, or to any of them when their grandmother goes. “

All the while the camera is lingering on the big brown eyes of the children looking glum and trapped by the predicament into which they have been plunged, socially and mentally, though one gets the impression they have not made much sense out of any of it yet. (One can sympathize – they have lost their parents to a disease which is labeled AIDS and therefore presumably is not effectively treated if treated at all, and now they are threatened with loss of all possessions and all care except charity, while simultaneously being placed on the world stage via BBC World News.)

Then the windup. Barnaby Phillips, reaching for his starkest, most sombre tone, recites his windup line with the declamatory intonation of a poet and a Cassandra: “AIDS repeats its dreadful patterns across this continent.”

But then in the twinkle of an eye he returns to the upbeat, non committal tone of a professionally objective reporter ready for his next assignment as he signs off. “Barnaby Phillips, BBC News, Northern Namibia.”

(BBC World News Broadcast of Tue Sep 13, carried on Channel 21, WLIW, New York City )

Since the mainstream scientific AIDS literature as we have shown in the last few posts shows that the fantasy of heterosexual AIDS on which this story rests is scientifically, socially and sexually impossible, one wonders exactly what the diseases are in Namibia that might singly or together be responsible for the deaths of the parents of these Namibian orphans, and whether the national death rate shows any sign of change in the last decade, or has remained more or less constant as it has in South Africa, where “AIDS” is supposedly rampant.

In other words, the first place we would look would be the total of Namibian orphans over the last years. Have they multiplied or not? And if so, what diseases would that reflect, if “AIDS” was erased from the picture as spurious, as the mainstream AIDS literature shows it must be?

Even if one can’t blame the professionally gullible Barnaby for simply following the mainstream line as far as his young human exhibits go in the story of Namibian AIDS, as it is being scripted by the ever resourceful statisticians at the UN, can one perhaps blame his editors, or at least whomever the BBC has on staff or as a consultant advising them on medical matters, for not developing a more judicious view of Africa that the constant reiteration of this picture of the continent as a medical basket case blamed on “AIDS”?

That is, assuming that the BBC has medical or scientific advisors of some kind. On the basis of this kind of fairy tale, one wonders. If they do, then clearly they are not up on their research. The whole issue and debate about the viability of the global AIDS epidemic as founded on heterosexual transmission is no secret. It has been reported in Nature Medicine (Vol 10 Number 5 May 2004) and even in the popular press (Discover Magazine Vol 24 No. 06 1 June 2003).

Perhaps they were misled by the patently absurd efforts of the man who discovered the difficulty, Pennsylvania based consultant David Gisselquist, to blame it all on dirty needles used in the African health care system, which the UN in the Lancet and angry African medical authorities have dismissed as rubbish.

With both sides in that dispute calling each other racist, it is high time for cooler heads to admit that it is the heterosexual AIDS pandemic in Africa and everywhere else that is rubbish, as the heterosexual transmission rate of 1 in 1000 that everyone agrees on shows without the need for further analysis (see earlier posts).

But of course, at this stage that would be like the Jesuits questioning the existence of God – too clever by half.

Air conditioning for igloos

And as to the potential efficacy of an AIDS vaccine, we wonder when that will be questioned by the mainstream, since the very concept, as we have pointed out in previous posts, makes no sense at all. Vaccines are designed to prime the human body with antibodies, or rev up the tendency to create antibodies rapidly, to the agent they are designed to thwart.

Yet those counted as “AIDS” patients are precisely those who test positive for HIV antibodies, not the virus, which is mostly untraceable even in those with declining immune systems unless you use a very special method called PCR (polymerase chain reaction) which can infinitely multiply the few residual molecules present.

In other words, the vaccine hunters, anxious to help “AIDS patients” fight off HIV, are trying in sophisticated ways to develop some way of vaccinating them to create HIV antibodies, when all the patients harbor in their blood is HIV antibodies, and quite enough of them.

This is rather like trying to work out how to get a shipload of ice through to the North Pole.

Small wonder that every year or two we hear of investor hopes being dashed as one vaccine initiative after another proves a cul-de-sac.

One has to question if the brains of all those involved in this absurd initiative have stopped working altogether. After all, supposing one did succeed in developing a vaccine that provoked the human body to produce antibodies to HIV. This is only what HIV itself would do if injected into the body, so why not do it directly? Just inject people with HIV. This would ensure that after six weeks they would have a plentiful supply of antibodies and a virtually untraceable residue of HIV (the scientific literature shows that there would be one active HIV per 10,000 human T cells, the immune system cells it supposedly destroys in some manner than has not yet been discovered even after two decades).

Well, one might answer, that negligible amount of HIV is the deadly agent that one must avoid at all costs, so an artificial method of creating the antibodies to it would be preferable.

Fine. But one would still end up with patients all of whom would “test positive for HIV”, since the HIV tests of both kinds are for the presence of antibodies, not the HIV itself.

If the vaccine was applied throughout the US, the entire population would test positive for HIV. And according to the Alice in Wonderland logic of AIDS as currently purveyed by the authorities, that would make them all candidates for medication with the current regimen of antiviral pills.

Since as has been pointed out in previous posts, this regimen brings with it the unpleasant side effects of large lumps and fatty humps, general debilitation, kidney and liver damage and in the end death, contrary to the fantasy of the uninformed that it enables patients to “live normal lives”, this would seem to be contraindicated for future public policy.

So the expensive efforts of the AIDS vaccine brigade will be by definition useless even if they succeed.

Such is the conclusion of any logical analysis of the situation. But as so often in the Lewis Carroll school of science and medicine that promulgates AIDS, logic is not the point.

That is why we confidently expect that the AIDS vaccine effort will be lavishly funded through the next two decades, just as the drinks party at the New York Academy of Sciences celebrated.

Benjamin Franklin comments on the AIDS dispute

September 1st, 2005

“If you will not hear Reason, he will surely rap your knuckles’, as Poor Richards says.” – Father Abraham in “The Way to Wealth”.


Bad Behavior has blocked 2400 access attempts in the last 7 days.