Science Guardian

Truth, beauty and paradigm power in science and society

I am Nicolaus Copernicus, and I approve of this blog

News, views and reviews measured against professional literature in peer reviewed journals (adjusted for design flaws and bias), well researched books, authoritative encyclopedias (not the bowdlerized Wiki entries on controversial topics) and the investigative reporting and skeptical studies of courageous original thinkers among academics, philosophers, researchers, scholars, authors, filmmakers and journalists.

Supporting the right of exceptional minds to free speech, publication, media coverage and funding against the crowd prejudice, leadership resistance, monetary influences and internal professional politics of the paradigm wars of cancer, HIV(not)AIDS, evolution, global warming, cosmology, particle physics, macroeconomics, information technology, religions and cults, health, medicine, diet and nutrition.

***************************************************

HONOR ROLL OF SCIENTIFIC TRUTHSEEKERS

Halton C. Arp wki/obit/txt/vds/txt/txt/bk/bk, Henry Bauer txt/blg/ blg/bks/bk/txt/bk/vd, John Beard bk, Harvey Bialy bk/bk/txt/txt/rdo/vd, John Bockris bio/txt/ltr/bk, Donald W. Braben, Peter Breggin ste/fb/col/bks, Darin Brown txt/txt/txt/txt/txt/vd, Giordano Bruno bk/bio/bio, Frank R. Buianouckas, Stanislav Burzynski mov, Erwin Chargaff bio/bk/bio/prs, James Chin bk/vd, Nicolaus Copernicus bk, Mark Craddock, Francis Crick vd, Paul Crutzen, Marie Curie, Rebecca Culshaw txt/bk, Roger Cunningham, Charles Darwin txts/bk, Erasmus Darwin txt//bk/txt/hse/bks, Peter Duesberg ste/ste/bk/txt/vd/vd, Freeman Dyson, Albert Einstein, Richard Feynman bio, John Fewster, Rosalind Franklin, Bernard Forscher tx, Galileo Galilei, Walter Gilbert vd, Goethe bio/bk/bio, Nicolas Gonzalez tlk/rec/stetxt/txt, Patricia Goodson txt/bk/bk, Alec Gordon, James Hansen, Etienne de Harven bk/txt/vd, Alfred Hassig intw/txt, Robert G. Houston txt, Steven Jonas vd, Edward Jenner txt, Benjamin Jesty, Adrian Kent vd, Thomas Kuhn, Fred Kummerow, Stefan Lanka txt/txt/vd, Serge Lang, John Lauritsen vd, Paul Lauterbur vd, Mark Leggett, Richard Lindzen, James Lovelock, Andrew Maniotis, Lynn Margulis, Barbara McClintock, Christi Meyer vd, George Miklos, Marco Mamone Capria, Peter Medawar, Luc Montagnier txt/txt/vd, Kary Mullis, Linus Pauling prs/vd/vd, Eric Penrose, Roger Penrose vd, Max Planck, Rainer Plaga, David Rasnick bio/vd/bk, Robert Root-Bernstein vd, Sherwood Rowland, Otto Rossler, Harry Rubin, Marco Ruggiero txt/txt/intw/vd, Bertrand Russell Carl Sagan vd, Erwin Schrodinger, Fred Singer, Barbara Starfield txt, Gordon Stewart txt/txt, Richard Strohman, Thomas Szasz, Nicola Tesla bio/bio, Charles Thomas intw/vd, Frank Tipler, James Watson vd/vd, Alfred Wegener vd, Edward O. Wilson vd.

ACADEMICS, DOCTORS, AUTHORS, FILMMAKERS, REPORTERS AND COMMENTATORS WHO HAVE NOBLY AIDED REVIEW OF THE STATUS QUO

Jad Adams bk, Marci Angell bk/txt/txt/txt, Clark Baker ste/txt/rdo/vd, James Blodgett, Tony Brown vd, Hiram Caton txt/txt/txt/bk/ste, Jonathan Collin ste , Marcus Cohen, David Crowe vd, Margaret Cuomo, Stephen Davis BK/BK,/rdo, Michael Ellner vd, Elizabeth Ely txt/txt/ste, Epicurus, Dean Esmay, Celia Farber bio/txt/txt/txt/vd, Jonathan Fishbein txt/txt/wk, T.C.Fry, Michael Fumento, Max Gerson txt, Charles Geshekter vd, Michael Geiger, Roberto Giraldo, David Healy txt, Bob Herbert, Mike Hersee ste/rdo, Neville Hodgkinson txt /vd, James P. Hogan, Richard Horton bio/vd/vd, Christopher Hitchens, Eric Johnson, Claus Jensen vd, Phillip Johnson, Coleman Jones vds, William Donald Kelley, Ernst T. Krebs Sr txt, Ernst T. Krebs Jr. txt,/bio/txt/txt/ltr, Paul Krugman, Brett Leung MOV/ste/txt/txt/tx+vd/txt, Katie Leishman, Anthony Liversidge blg/intv/intv/txt/txts/txt/intv/txt/vd/vd, Bruce Livesey txt, James W. Loewen, Frank Lusardi, Nathaniel Lehrman vd, Christine Maggiore bk/ste/rec/rdo/vd, Rouben Mamoulian txt/txt/txt/txt/txt/doc/flm/flm, Noreen Martin vd, Robert Maver txt/itw, Eric Merola MOV, Lady Mary Wortley Montagu, Michael Moore bio/MOV/MOV/MOV, Gordon Moran, Ralph Nader bk, Ralph Moss txt/blg/ste/bks, Gary Null /txt/rdo/vd, Dan Olmsted wki, Toby Ord vd, Charles Ortleb bk/txt/bk/intw/flm, Neenyah Ostrom bk, Dennis Overbye, Mehmet Dr Oz vd, Eleni Papadopulos-Eleopulos ste/vd, Maria Papagiannidou bk, Thomas Piketty bk/bk/bk/bk/bk/bk/bk/bk/bk/bk, Robert Pollin txt/vd/bk, Jon Rappoport bio/bk/bk/ste/bk/bk/vd, Janine Roberts bk/bk, Luis Sancho vd, Liam Scheff ste/txt/bk/bk/rdio/vd, John Scythes, Casper Schmidt txt/txt, Joan Shenton vd/vd, Joseph Sonnabend vd, John Stauber, David Steele, Joseph Stiglitz bk/txt, Will Storr rdo Wolfgang Streeck, James P. Tankersley ste, Gary Taubes vd, Mwizenge S. Tembo, John Tierney vd, Michael Tracey, Valendar Turner rec, Jesse Ventura bk, Michael Verney-Elliott bio/vds/vd, Voltaire, Walter Wagner, Andrew Weil vd, David Weinberger bio/bk/blg/blg/BK/bk/pds, Robert Willner bk/txt/txt/vd, Howard Zinn.

*****************************************************
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. I am Freeman Dyson, and I approve of this blog, but would warn the author that life as a heretic is a hard one, since the ignorant and the half informed, let alone those who should know better, will automatically trash their betters who try to enlighten them with independent thinking, as I have found to my sorrow in commenting on "global warming" and its cures.
Many people would die rather than think – in fact, they do so. – Bertrand Russell.

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

One should as a rule respect public opinion in so far as is necessary to avoid starvation and to keep out of prison. – Bertrand Russell

Fraud and falsehood only dread examination. Truth invites it. - Samuel Johnson

A sudden bold and unexpected question doth many times surprise a man and lay him open. – Sir Francis Bacon (1561 – 1626)

He who knows only his own side of the case, knows little of that. – John Stuart Mill

Whenever you find that you are on the side of the majority, it is time to reform. – Mark Twain

Although science has led to the generally high living standards that most of the industrialized world enjoys today, the astounding discoveries underpinning them were made by a tiny number of courageous, out-of-step, visionary, determined, and passionate scientists working to their own agenda and radically challenging the status quo. – Donald W. Braben

An old error is always more popular than a new truth. — German Proverb

I am Richard Feynman and I approve of this blog

When even the brightest mind in our world has been trained up from childhood in a superstition of any kind, it will never be possible for that mind, in its maturity, to examine sincerely, dispassionately, and conscientiously any evidence or any circumstance which shall seem to cast a doubt upon the validity of that superstition. I doubt if I could do it myself. – Mark Twain

It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his income depends on his not understanding it. – Upton Sinclair

A clash of doctrines is not a disaster, but an opportunity. - Alfred North Whitehead

Fraud and falsehood only dread examination. Truth invites it. – Samuel Johnson

Man’s mind cannot grasp the causes of events in their completeness, but the desire to find those causes is implanted in man’s soul. And without considering the multiplicity and complexity of the conditions any one of which taken separately may seem to be the cause, he snatches at the first approximation to a cause that seems to him intelligible and says: “This is the cause!” – Leo Tolstoy

The evolution of the world tends to show the absolute importance of the category of the individual apart from the crowd. - Soren Kierkegaard

Who does not know the truth is simply a fool, yet who knows the truth and calls it a lie is a criminal. – Bertold Brecht

How easily the learned give up the evidence of their senses to preserve the coherence of ideas in their imagination. – Adam Smith

Education consists mainly in what we have unlearned. – Mark Twain

The mind likes a strange idea as little as the body likes a strange protein and resists it with similar energy. If we watch ourselves honestly, we shall often find that we have begun to argue against a new idea even before it has been completely stated. – Arthur Koestler

Whenever the human race assembles to a number exceeding four, it cannot stand free speech. – Mark Twain

People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices. - Adam Smith

There isn’t anything so grotesque or so incredible that the average human being can’t believe it. – Mark Twain

He who knows only his own side of the case, knows little of that. – John Stuart Mill

It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere. – Voltaire

People are generally better persuaded by the reasons which they have themselves discovered than by those which have come into the mind of others.- Blaise Pascal.

Illusion is the first of all pleasures. – Voltaire

The applause of a single human being is of great consequence. – Samuel Johnson

(Click for more Unusual Quotations on Science and Human Nature)

Important: This site is best viewed in LARGE FONT, and in Firefox for image title visibility (place cursor on pics to reveal comments) and layout display. Click the title of any post to get only that post and its Comments for printing. All posts guaranteed fact checked according to reference level cited, typically the original journal studies. Full guide to site purpose, layout and how to print posts out is in the lower blue section at the bottom of the home page.
---Admin AL/E/ILMK---

Mexican market expanding for AIDS

July 17th, 2007

Times front pager full of questionable assumptions hails AIDS expansion south of the border

Conflict with peer reviewed science invisible to paper of record

Meme inspired fantasy yields research bounty for 2008

mexicanfruitpicker.jpgThe front page of the paper of record continues to carry stories to agitate the hearts of all those who worry about the poor, the weak and the underprivileged, such as the migrant workers who underpin the roaring 21st Century US economy, with its 15,000 households with $9.5 million or more to spend in income annually, some of them with more than $1 billion coming in.

Unfortunately, the coverage of HIV∫AIDS, with all its enthusiasm for the drugs and concern for those in Africa and Asia who cannot yet get them supplied by the US tax payer, is a constant concern for every reader who is scientifically informed, since every reporter handling the topic is apparently unread in the science and a stranger to even the basic truths that have been established in this area, in particular the result that HIV positivity is absolutely not transmitted between the sexes according to the largest study ever conducted in the US on this aspect of the vexed paradigm.

That one paper by the admirable HIV∫AIDS research general Nancy Padian should be forwarded to Marc Lacey, who wrote the front page story today on migrant workers who return from the US to Mexico with HIV infections affter seeking extra-marital comfort north of the border, and thus endanger and kill their wives and children, some of whom cannot get the antiretroviral drugs they need to ward off the deadly effects of HIV, at least in the short run.

If the Padian paper is accepted at face value, uncompromised by Nancy’s specious backpeddling on the AIDSTruth site, it tells us that HIV transmission between the sexes in normal sex is nil, just as reason and conventional science, which tells us that antibodies are not infectious, would indicate. Even politely accepting Nancy’s rather ineffectual, non-peer reviewed disavowal, her best rate of 1 in 1100 is still quite inadequate to support the story of hard working Mexican migrants picking up HIV from incautious assignations while they are in the US and then infecting their wives and children, let alone the famous global pandemic.

To put it bluntly, there is a serious disconnect – of the order of the Grand Canyon – between the maximum Padian rate of transmission and the lurid imagination of the researchers spinning tales where rape and prostitution support a still to be seen “explosion” in Mexican positive HIV tests.

Especially when her paper actually said 1 in 1100 man to woman and much, much less – 1 in 8800 – woman to man (lowered to 1 in 10,000 in her AIDSTruth disavowal!), making the chances of a Mexican migrant contracting HIV from a prostitute virtually nil.

mexicanmigrants.jpegBut in the meme-fevered brain of Marc Lacey and his editors, the story is a Mexican version of the Ugandan long distance drivers visiting prostitutes at every stop and decimating their home villages with AIDS when they return to their wives.

But AIDS is spreading quickly in rural Mexican states with the highest migration rates to the United States, researchers say. The greatest risk of contracting AIDS that rural Mexican women face is in having sex with their migrant husbands, a new study found, a problem that is compounded by their husbands’ refusal to use condoms.

Research has shown that migrants have more sexual partners than those who stay at home. For women, life on the road brings risks of rape and sexual abuse. For many migrants, being displaced from their homes and families is a lonely experience, one that prompts them to form new relationships in the United States.

Adding to the problem, both Mexico’s northern and southern borders have become magnets for prostitutes and drug dealers, drawn by the flow of migrants north.

Not even the fact that the research is ongoing and apparently has yet to provide comparative figures to establish higher rates and spread – at least none at all are quoted – is allowed to restrain the busy Lacey from painting this lurid picture complete with the deaths of Mexican babies and bewildered Mexican husbands and wives accused of lying under the threat of the stigma when they claim not to know how they could possibly have contracted the Virus.

But the stigma surrounding AIDS in Mexico is such that even migrants who have contracted the virus dismiss the notion that extramarital affairs were a factor.

Another H.I.V.-positive migrant, a mother of three named Ana María who is now taking government-dispensed antiretroviral drugs, had gone to the United States with her husband and worked long hours in a fast-food restaurant and hotel in Chicago. She, too, found out she carried the virus after giving birth at a Chicago hospital.

“Many people get infected there and then bring it back here,” said Ana María, who is in her early 40s. “I don’t know how we get infected but it could have been in the hospital there.” Her husband, who migrated with her and is also infected, nodded in agreement.

“I thought the crossing was the worst thing in my life,” she said, sitting on the front step of her home in a village outside of Puebla. “We saw human bones and clothes in the desert. There were robbers there, who would rape the girls and take all the money they could. I thought that had to be worst. Now, I have this.”

The piece is filled with speculation from researchers about the sociological trends at work which seems just as imaginative and ungrounded in evidence as the theories of the Mexicans themselves.

Many migrant husbands have sex with people more likely to have H.I.V., have limited access to health care and frequently cope with “the social isolation of the migrant experience by seeking comfort in sexual intimacy,” Jennifer S. Hirsch, a professor of public health at Columbia University, wrote in The American Journal of Public Health in June.

She found that unfaithful migrant husbands who were otherwise devoted to their wives were often the highest risk. They were more likely, she said, to seek sex with prostitutes while in the United States and less likely to have long-term relationships with other women.

The risks were compounded because the subject of unfaithfulness is frequently taboo within relationships. “Men’s long absences lower the reputational risk of infidelity by ensuring that it occurs far away,” she wrote.

At Puebla General Hospital, Dr. Indiana Torres said 22 percent of the 1,000 or so cases of H.I.V. and AIDS that her clinic handles can be traced to migration, mostly to the New York area. A new more spacious clinic is under construction to handle the load.

The story actually reports that there is no explosion yet in HIV positive figures in Mexico, which are half the US rate, and shows no sign that the expansion of AIDS into Mexico is anything more than the expansion of HIV testing by researchers into more remote villages than before.

AIDS has not yet exploded in Mexico and is focused mostly among prostitutes and their clients, and drug users and gay men, experts say. The AIDS rate here is still considerably lower than that in the United States, nearly half as low, according to United Nations statistics published in 2006. The H.I.V. infection rate for people ages 15 to 49 in the United States is about 0.6 percent, compared with 0.3 percent in Mexico, the United Nations says.

Yet the high-risk behavior that various surveys have documented among many Mexican migrants worries researchers. “Our concern is it could take off in this population in the future,” said Dr. Lemp, who is leading a joint United States-Mexican study of migrants and AIDS.

mexico2008.jpegBut no doubt there is nothing that will stop the the exploitation of whoever can be found to test positive in Mexico without regard to any objections that might be made by people who can actually compare what is going on with the literature, which is not high on the reading list of any busy AIDS researcher nowadays it is clear, even as they add to it.

After all, the next World AIDS Conference is scheduled for Mexico City next year, so naturally the hot research area is now south of the border. Presumably they expect the Mexican nation to be suitably grateful for this paving the way to supplying it with the drugs their research will reveal that it needs.

See Mexican Migrants Carry H.I.V. Home:

The New York Times
July 17, 2007
Mexican Migrants Carry H.I.V. Home
By MARC LACEY

PUEBLA, Mexico — Cres has spent almost half his 32 years working in the United States, in the fields of California and Texas and the factories of Chicago and New York. His wife and three children were with him some of the time. But he was alone for long spells, and it was during one of those periods that he figures he contracted H.I.V.

“I don’t know how or where or when I got it,” said Cres, who spoke on condition that he would be identified only by his nickname. He paused whenever his pregnant wife entered the darkened home, built with his paychecks from America. “I don’t have any idea who it was with. I don’t want to know. I just want to go ahead with my life.”

Migrant workers like him go to the United States with dreams of new prosperity, hoping to bring back dollars. But some are bringing back something else as well, H.I.V. and AIDS, which they are spreading in the rural parts of Mexico least prepared to handle the epidemic.

As sweeping proposals for immigration-law changes founder in the United States, the expanding AIDS crisis among the migrants is largely overlooked on both sides of the border. Particularly in Mexico, AIDS is still shrouded by stigma and denial. In the United States, it is often assumed that immigrants bring diseases into the country, not take them away.

But AIDS is spreading quickly in rural Mexican states with the highest migration rates to the United States, researchers say. The greatest risk of contracting AIDS that rural Mexican women face is in having sex with their migrant husbands, a new study found, a problem that is compounded by their husbands’ refusal to use condoms.

Research has shown that migrants have more sexual partners than those who stay at home. For women, life on the road brings risks of rape and sexual abuse. For many migrants, being displaced from their homes and families is a lonely experience, one that prompts them to form new relationships in the United States.

Adding to the problem, both Mexico’s northern and southern borders have become magnets for prostitutes and drug dealers, drawn by the flow of migrants north.

“Migration leads to conditions and experiences that increase risks,” said George Lemp, an epidemiologist who directs the University of California’s AIDS research program and is studying the spread of the disease among migrants. “Migrants are vulnerable. They are isolated. They are exposed to different sexual practices. They have language barriers to services and there is a lot of depression and loneliness and abuse.”

AIDS has not yet exploded in Mexico and is focused mostly among prostitutes and their clients, and drug users and gay men, experts say. The AIDS rate here is still considerably lower than that in the United States, nearly half as low, according to United Nations statistics published in 2006. The H.I.V. infection rate for people ages 15 to 49 in the United States is about 0.6 percent, compared with 0.3 percent in Mexico, the United Nations says.

Yet the high-risk behavior that various surveys have documented among many Mexican migrants worries researchers. “Our concern is it could take off in this population in the future,” said Dr. Lemp, who is leading a joint United States-Mexican study of migrants and AIDS.

The first AIDS cases diagnosed in Mexico in 1983 were found among migrants, researchers say. Since then, studies have continued to show that migrants to the United States make up a significant percentage of those contracting the disease.

The percentage of Mexicans with H.I.V. who have lived in the United States fluctuated between 41 percent and 79 percent in the 1980s and early 1990s, studies have shown. But since 1992, Mexico has not reported comprehensive figures.

Still, recent studies show the risks that migrants face. A study financed by the California-Mexico AIDS Initiative found that more than a third of the migrants at job-pickup sites in Los Angeles had been offered money by men for sex. About a tenth of the migrants, desperate to earn a living, have agreed, the study found.

Many migrant husbands have sex with people more likely to have H.I.V., have limited access to health care and frequently cope with “the social isolation of the migrant experience by seeking comfort in sexual intimacy,” Jennifer S. Hirsch, a professor of public health at Columbia University, wrote in The American Journal of Public Health in June.

She found that unfaithful migrant husbands who were otherwise devoted to their wives were often the highest risk. They were more likely, she said, to seek sex with prostitutes while in the United States and less likely to have long-term relationships with other women.

The risks were compounded because the subject of unfaithfulness is frequently taboo within relationships. “Men’s long absences lower the reputational risk of infidelity by ensuring that it occurs far away,” she wrote.

At Puebla General Hospital, Dr. Indiana Torres said 22 percent of the 1,000 or so cases of H.I.V. and AIDS that her clinic handles can be traced to migration, mostly to the New York area. A new more spacious clinic is under construction to handle the load.

“They think that because it’s the United States, it’s safer,” Dr. Torres said. “It’s their fantasy and it’s not true.”

One of the women in the emergency room at the hospital, a 25-year-old mother who spoke on condition of anonymity, said her husband had infected her after returning from a long stay in Washington State.

She found out that she carried the virus only after giving birth to a girl who was born with H.I.V. and died. An older daughter also contracted the virus from birth. The woman and her husband have since separated.

Doctors say routine screening for H.I.V. is not common, and many people find they are carrying the virus only after births or going to hospitals for other reasons.

“I don’t know what’s going to happen now,” the woman said through tears and an oxygen mask to aid her breathing after she was admitted with a possible tuberculosis infection, which her weakened immune system may have permitted.

Mexico provides antiretroviral drugs even to poor migrants without health insurance, but the challenge for them is reaching the cities where the drugs are dispensed. The transportation costs strain their budgets. Taking time off from work for doctor’s visits is another challenge.

The government has also slowly begun to acknowledge the problem, sending health workers into the countryside to visit returning migrants and teach them about the risks they face on the road. One program is called “Go Healthy, Return Healthy.”

Government health workers are focusing their prevention efforts not just on returning migrants but on those who intend to go. A variety of approaches have been used, from comic books to soap operas. The messages focus on the causes of AIDS, the benefits of condoms and the dangers of sharing needles.

But the stigma surrounding AIDS in Mexico is such that even migrants who have contracted the virus dismiss the notion that extramarital affairs were a factor.

Another H.I.V.-positive migrant, a mother of three named Ana María who is now taking government-dispensed antiretroviral drugs, had gone to the United States with her husband and worked long hours in a fast-food restaurant and hotel in Chicago. She, too, found out she carried the virus after giving birth at a Chicago hospital.

“Many people get infected there and then bring it back here,” said Ana María, who is in her early 40s. “I don’t know how we get infected but it could have been in the hospital there.” Her husband, who migrated with her and is also infected, nodded in agreement.

“I thought the crossing was the worst thing in my life,” she said, sitting on the front step of her home in a village outside of Puebla. “We saw human bones and clothes in the desert. There were robbers there, who would rape the girls and take all the money they could. I thought that had to be worst. Now, I have this.”

Blood money saves nurses

July 17th, 2007

Libyan medical hostages saved by $1 million per family payout

EU, US, Bulgaria and Libya fund $460 million jackpot

montagnier.jpegLuc Montagnier can breathe easier now, along with many around the world who were concerned that the eight years of prison, rape and torture inflicted on five Bulgarian nurses and an Egyptian doctor in Libya would end in execution, as ordained by the Libyan Supreme Court.

A promise of $1 million per family has been made to the parents of the babies supposedly somehow infected by HIV at the Tripoli hospital, and this has been accepted as sufficient blood money to allow them to relent and be satisfied with a different outcome.

Reuters reports that the nurses can expect to be released from their torment soon by the Judicial Panel, now that the Libyan lynch mob has been paid off.

The payout is expected to bring to a close the eight-year legal case surrounding the medics and the children and remove a major obstacle to Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi’s return to the international stage after decades of diplomatic isolation.

montagnier3.jpegMontagnier is now released from the obligation of finally confessing that he, the half hearted originator of the global scientific fantasy launched by his rival Robert Gallo on the world in 1984, doesn’t really believe in it. This might have been the only way in which the lives of the nurses and doctor could have been saved, if the nearly half billion dollar payout hadn’t become available.

Unlikely as that may seem, we have sufficient confidence in Montagnier as the only leader of the political movement for HIV∫AIDS paradigm promulgation, protection and prevention of review to possess any gentlemanly qualities whatsoever that he might have considered abandoning the whole project with the lives of innocent men and women at stake.

Unlike the many millions of gays and black and brown people in Africa and Asia who have been and will be victims of the gross miscarriage of science with which Montagnier has been a half hearted fellow traveler. these six had faces, and their predicament was unjustified even by the false assumptions of standard HIV∫AIDS thinking that Montagnier has gone along with so skittishly for so long.

montagnier4.pngMontagnier was brave and decent enough to go to Tripoli and ascertain that the conditions in the city’s hospitals are so unhygienic that the motives of officials in scapegoating the Bulgarians became very clear, and he was willing to say so. It seems just possible that as the unfortunate group approached the Libya execution chamber that Montagnier, who in our opinion judging from his gourmand features is a lot more interested in the good life than he is in hurting people, would have broken down and confessed.

montagnier1.jpegNow we shall never know, and indeed, the story will probably have the opposite effect, confirming the validity of HIV∫AIDS paradigm in the minds of millions more people around the world, who might otherwise have doubted it for the many conflicting claims inherent in the ideology which so flout common sense. The chief of these of course is a pandemic based on a condition of possessing HIV antibodies which cannot be transmitted between the sexes at a rate faster than 1 in 1000, if at all, as Nancy Padian’s research has confirmed.

After all, a paradigm that can sustain eight years of torture of innocent nurses, at least three of whom are very pretty, and a payout of nearly half a billion dollars, must be valid.

Mustn’t it?

Families receive settlement in Libya HIV nurses case:
Families receive settlement in Libya HIV nurses case
Tue Jul 17, 2007 7:07PM BST
By Salah Sarrar

TRIPOLI (Reuters) – The families of hundreds of HIV positive children in Libya received a $460 million (230 million pound) financial settlement on Tuesday, opening the door for a judicial panel to free six foreign medics condemned to death for infecting them.

The payout is expected to bring to a close the eight-year legal case surrounding the medics and the children and remove a major obstacle to Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi’s return to the international stage after decades of diplomatic isolation.

The medics — five Bulgarian nurses and a Palestinian doctor — were sentenced to death last year after being convicted of intentionally starting an HIV epidemic at a children’s hospital in the city of Benghazi. They say they are innocent.

Spokesman Idriss Lagha said 460 families in all had received “compensation money”, each family receiving $1.0 million.

He would not comment on speculation they would send a declaration to Libya’s High Judicial Council renouncing the medics’ death sentences but said the way appeared open for a pardon.

“They did not say they had pardoned the medics, but my personal interpretation is that their move is the equivalent of a pardon because the compensation money is the equivalent in Islam to ‘blood money’, which entails pardon,” he said.

In jail since 1999, the medics say they are innocent and confessions central to their case were extracted under torture.

Foreign HIV experts say the infections started before the workers arrived at the hospital and are more likely to be the result of poor hygiene.

The victims’ families have said the case was part of a Western attempt to undermine Muslims and Libya. Fifty-six of the children have died, which has provoked widespread anger in Libya over their suffering.

RULING EXPECTED

The High Judicial Council, which has the power to commute sentences or issue pardons, took over the case last week after Libya’s Supreme Court upheld the death sentences.

The Council has held off on ruling on the fate of the medics pending the families’ acceptance of the deal with the European Union, which has campaigned on behalf of its new member Bulgaria to have the nurses freed and sent home.

Benita Ferrero-Waldner, EU commissioner for external relations, welcomed the families’ acceptance of the settlement.

“This is indeed good news,” she said.

“We trust that this should now permit the High Judicial Council to take a decision in favour of the Bulgarian nurses and the Palestinian doctor.” She added that the Union would continue to stand by commitments to assist the HIV infected children.

Lagha said many sources had contributed: “The money came from the Benghazi International Fund, which is financed by the European Union, United States, Bulgaria and Libya.”

He said the documents signed by the families would be taken to the judicial council later on Tuesday, and Othman Bizanti, a leading lawyer for the nurses, said he had “great hope” that the council would free the medics.

Bulgaria and its allies in the EU and the United States say Libya is using the medics as scapegoats to deflect criticism from a dilapidated health care sector.

They have also suggested that not freeing the nurses would hurt Gaddafi’s efforts to emerge from isolation, a process he began by scrapping a prohibited weapons programme in 2003.
© Reuters 2006.

Libyan nurses held over void

July 16th, 2007

Decision today on reprieve, otherwise it’s goodbye unless the Bulgarians pay up

Montagnier presumably wracked by guilty conscience over his “peaceful virus”

libya-nurses.jpg
Last week, the Libyan Supreme Court upheld the death sentences of the Libyan nurses and Egyptian doctor falsely accused and convicted of infecting Libyan babies with HIV. Today, the Supreme Judicial Council of Libya, which can overturn the decision, meets.

Apparently the Libyans are still trying to put the squeeze on the Bulgarians even after raising $13 million per child so far from the European Community. The amounts involved are too large for the Bulgarians to agree. So the nurses, having suffered Libyan jail accommodation for a decade, where they say their confessions were obtained through rape and other torture, are now close to death.

Previously Luc Montagnier and Vittorio Colizzi of Italy have done their best to extricate the hapless women from their predicament without themselves confessing that there is no good science behind the HIV∫AIDS paradigm on which the fantasies of the Libyan families, the Libyan officials, the European Community officials, the Bulgarian officials, the Times reporter Elisabeth Rosenthal and her editor, and the nurses and doctor hinge.

Now France’s dynamic and independent new First Lady has flown in to give Quaddafi a piece of her mind for countenancing this filthy behavior, which leaves Libya’s reputation in shreds again around the world.

France’s first lady, Cécilia Sarkozy, yesterday made her first foray into international diplomacy, travelling alone to Libya for talks with Colonel Muammar Gadafy and meeting the Bulgarian nurses sentenced to death for allegedly infecting children with HIV.

The surprise journey was her first solo appearance on the international scene since her husband was elected president in May, and marked her swift transformation from a fashion icon to a new role as an international diplomat.

President Nicolas Sarkozy confirmed to reporters last night that his wife had travelled without him to visit the Bulgarian nurses, the Libyan leader and the parents of the children infected with HIV. She was “still in Libya”, where she met Col Gadafy once yesterday morning and was due to hold a second meeting with the Libyan leader last night. The French ambassador in Libya refused to comment.

Click this for the story – France’s first lady flies to aid death row nurses

Montagnier’s conscience – his “peaceful virus”

At least Luc Montagnier also had the courage to go to Libya to try and set things straight, unlike the American scientits behind HIV∫AIDS.

One wonders what is going through the mind of Montagnier now as the nurses, at least one of whom is quite pretty, judging from the photo the Times has dug up from last year, approach oblivion at the hands of Libyan executioners as a consequence of the fantasy he has peddled to the world for twenty two years as his one claim to fame and fortune, while clearly believing in it less and less himself, as his ongoing struggle to expand the culprit for AIDS to co-factors reveals.

We well remember the events at the San Francisco AIDS Conference in 1990 when Montagnier turned up with his news that he had discovered a mycoplasma was the sine qua non of actual AIDS symptoms, only to be barred from the Conference grounds by his colleagues and having to hold his press conference in a stuffy, low ceilinged hotel meeting room.

He was not even invited for dinner afterwards by Bob Gallo and Anthony Fauci, and had to go home to Paris by the next plane in shame and confusion. Not much was heard from him in public since about co-factors, although in his biography. Virus, published in 2000 in its English edition, he has a whole chapter theorizing that this particular strain of mycoplasma is the factor which accounts for the latency period of ten years on average before the Virus works its deadly and insidious damage. Patients only go down when this mycoplasma meets HIV, otherwise a “peaceful virus” that is “normally well tolerated” by the host.

Not that Montagnier believed that HIV caused AIDS in the first place, judging from the fact that he made no such claim in the year it took Gallo to catch up with him after he had found evidence of retroviral activity in the blood of a gay with lymphadenopathy, not even an AIDS patient, which is why he called it LAV.

LAV of course subsequently proved to be identical to the strain of HIV discovered by Gallo (HTLV-III) and by Robin Weiss in England, confounding their claims of independent discovery of the Virus somewhere else other than in a Fedex package from Montagnier.

Even though it was discovered by Gallo in the blood of only 36% of the AID patinets – compared with cytomegalovirus, a much better candidate for causing immune suppression, in over 90%, Epstein Barr over 90%, other Herpes viruses over 90% – this didn’t prevent a quarrel between America and France over royalties that went on for years, until the credit was unfairly split.

Robert Root Bernstein shows all this in his excellent book, Rethinking AIDS, 1993, MacMillan Free Press, in Chapter 4 on Multiple, Concurrent Infections and AIDS, which goes through infections as multiple causes of immune suppression, such as candida, yeast infection, mycoplasma, mycobacteria, Helminths worms and other parasites flourishing in the tropical isle of Manhattan.

UPDATE: Reuters and Al Jazeera report that a deal is in the works, with the “blood money” ransom for the five nurses and doctor kidnapped by Libya settled at $1 million per family.

Reuters Deal close to free HIV nurses in Libya: sources
Mon Jul 16, 2007 3:10PM EDT

SOFIA (Reuters) – A deal has been reached to free six foreign medics sentenced to death in Libya on charges of infecting children with HIV, but a few final details must still be worked out, sources familiar with the talks said on Monday.

Under the deal, the families of at least 426 infected children will receive over $400 million in compensation, a source familiar with the talks told Reuters.

“We are talking about $1 million per each family,” said the source, who did not want to be identified because of the sensitivity of the discussions.

“They are collecting signatures now,” the source added, declining to give other details.


The medical workers — four Bulgarian nurses and a Palestinian doctor — were sentenced to death in December after being convicted of intentionally starting an HIV epidemic at a children’s hospital in the city of Benghazi.

In jail since 1999, the six say they are innocent and that they were tortured to confess. Foreign HIV experts say the infections started before the workers arrived at the hospital and are more likely a result of poor hygiene.

Behind the scenes talks between the EU, which Bulgaria joined in January, and families of the children have been taking place for weeks and both sides have suggested a deal was close.

Bulgaria and its allies in the European Union and the United States say Libya is using the medics as scapegoats to deflect criticism from its dilapidated health care sector.

They have also suggested that not freeing the nurses would carry a diplomatic cost for Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, who after scrapping a prohibited weapons programme in 2003 is trying to emerge from more than three decades of diplomatic isolation.

DEAL PENDING

Last week, Libya’s Supreme Court upheld the death sentences, placing the medics’ fate in the hands of the government’s High Judicial Council, a government body that has the power to commute sentences or issue pardons. It held a meeting on Monday.

Libyan officials said the body would only agree to release the nurses if a settlement is reached in private talks with the families on “blood money” — payments for which the families could grant mercy — and funding for the children’s medical care.

Another source familiar with the negotiations said the final details of the deal had yet to be agreed.

“They have not completed the work on the details over implementing the compensation deal. It will take more time, perhaps 24 hours or more to complete the work,” the source said.

“Until they finalize these implementation measures, the families of the children will sign no paper and the High Judiciary Council will receive no document from them.”

A delay in sealing the accord could postpone the decision by the council on the fate of the medics, experts say.

It was also not clear who would be paying the more than $400 million involved in the deal.

Relatives of the children have said the infections were part of a Western attempt to undermine Muslims and Libya.

Libya Upholds Death Sentence in H.I.V. Case:The New York Times

July 12, 2007
Libya Upholds Death Sentence in H.I.V. Case
By ELISABETH ROSENTHAL

ROME, July 11 — The Libyan Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld the death sentences of five Bulgarian nurses and a Palestinian doctor who had been found guilty of intentionally infecting more than 400 Libyan children with the virus that causes AIDS in 1998.

An investigation by two of the world’s leading AIDS specialists concluded that the children’s H.I.V. had been caused by unsanitary medical conditions at the children’s hospital in Benghazi. The Libyan court rejected the conclusion.

The six medical workers have been incarcerated for nearly a decade, and their fate remained uncertain on Wednesday despite months of negotiations to secure their release. The European Union and the United States have repeatedly pressed Libya to free them, and groups of Nobel laureates have gone to Tripoli to plead their case with the Libyan leader, Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi.

The Supreme Judicial Council of Libya, which could overturn the ruling or reduce the sentence, will meet Monday.

The reaction in Europe to the verdict was swift and dismayed.

“I deeply regret the verdict of the Supreme Court confirming the death sentence for the Bulgarian nurses and the Palestinian doctor,” said Benita Ferrero-Waldner, the European Union’s commissioner for external relations. “I firmly hope that clemency will be granted to the medical staff,” she said. “This should be done in the same spirit of mutual respect and humanitarian compassion which characterized the European response to the plight of the Benghazi children and their families.”

In the past two years, the European Union, member states and even private corporations have funneled aid into Libya to help resolve the case. One high-level European Union diplomat, who spoke on condition of anonymity, in accordance with protocol, estimated the amount at more than $13 million per infected child.

In recent weeks, representatives of the Qaddafi Foundation, a charitable group run by the Libyan leader’s son, said repeatedly that a deal that could lead to the medical workers’ release was imminent. Officials at the foundation did not respond to more than a dozen attempts to question them by phone Wednesday. Under Islamic law, the families of the children may accept compensation for the injury and express forgiveness, which would lead to the dismissal of the cases. Libyan negotiators have long said that this would be the best way to resolve the case, diplomats involved in the talks said.

But the Bulgarian Foreign Ministry has refused to consider compensation, saying that would imply guilt, and the country could not afford the amounts under discussion, which could run into the billions of dollars. “The court’s decision was not unexpected,” said a statement Wednesday by Dimiter Tzantchev, the spokesman for the Bulgarian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, who said no further comment would be made Wednesday. “We expect the High Judicial Council of Libya to be convened. Bulgaria is ready to react appropriately in the next days following the development of the situation.”

Even as the Qaddafi Foundation has said it was negotiating an agreement with the children’s families, there have been signals that they would not be easily placated.

“We are awaiting the execution of the death sentence,” the lawyer for the families, Al-Monseif Khalifa, said Wednesday in Tripoli, according to Reuters, which noted that 20 families had protested outside the court. Fifty of the infected children have died.

The medical workers’ convoluted case began in 1998, before Bulgaria was in the European Union. In the indictment, which reads like a spy novel, Libyan prosecutors claimed the medical workers had infected the children in a plot by the Mossad, the Israeli secret service, to undermine Libya. Prosecutors said that the nurses had confessed, and said vials of tainted blood had been found in one nurse’s room. The nurses said they had been tortured and raped so they would confess. In 2001, the foundation invited two of the world’s foremost AIDS experts, Dr. Luc Montagnier of France and Dr. Vittorio Colizzi of Italy, to study the evidence. They concluded that poor sanitary practices had led to the spread of H.I.V. and said that records indicated that some of the children had AIDS before the nurses arrived. Bush Names Ambassador to Libya

WASHINGTON, July 11 (Reuters) — President Bush announced Wednesday that he had chosen Gene Cretz as ambassador to Libya, a post that had been empty for years, in a sign of improving ties between the countries. Mr. Cretz is deputy chief of mission at the American Embassy in Tel Aviv and had held the same job at the embassy in Damascus, Syria.

Matthew Brunwasser contributed reporting from Sofia, Bulgaria.

Chickens flying home

July 16th, 2007

Signs that justice may not be delayed for ever in convicting top miscreants, starting with Lord Black

Times pursues why miracle drugs not prescribed, the conscience of the rich, and innocents convicted

So what just punishment for HIV∫AIDS scientists who prevent review with lives at stake? AZT?

conradblack.jpgThis weekend’s New York Times’s – Saturday and Sunday July 15 2007 – are a parade of stories wherein the elite are saying that they don’t deserve so much money, or they are being executed for bribery, or exposed for buying influence, or for being bought, or jailed for embezzlement, and the unjustly convicted poor are being fought for by those who believe in their innocence.

Is this a trend? Is the pendulum of justice swinging? Is it possible that the same species of chickens will come home to roost in the halls of justice even for the leaders of HIV∫AIDS, who all the scientific literature now indicates are propping up their paradigm only by dint of bullying, frightening and sanctioning advocates of review into a censored backwater unrecognized by the editors of the New York Times, even though they (the likes of Anthony Fauci, John P. Moore, Mark Wainberg, Nancy Padian etc) must know very well their belief is questionable, since this is shown by their otherwise irrational resistance to review?

These two Times editions have us thinking that this is not out of the question after all, however long it may take. On Saturday we learned that Conrad Black, peer of the current Elizabethan realm (Lord Black of Crossharbor) and one time press magnate whose holdings stretched from the New York Sun, Manhattan’s lively and intellectual conservative daily, to the Daily Telegraph in London, the Jerusalem Post and the Chicasgo Sun-Times, was convicted by a jury with three friends for robbing the till of $6.1 million of shareholders’ money, a rather trivial sum for one whose net worth at its peak was $400 million.

Conrad M. Black, the Canadian-born press baron who cut a glittering swath through financial, political and high-society circles in Toronto, London and New York, was found guilty of fraud yesterday in a Chicago courtroom, along with three of his former employees.

Mr. Black, the former head of Hollinger International, faces as many as 35 years in prison, although the exact sentence determined by Judge Amy St. Eve at a sentencing hearing Nov. 30 is likely to be far shorter.

On the same front page, an extensive piece by Alex Berenson complained in Market Forces Cited in Lymphoma Drugs’ Disuse that oncologists were sticking to their usual armory of chemotherapy and drugs and ignoring two less profitable drugs which have cured cancer of the immune system in one go.

All three recovered after a single dose of Bexxar or Zevalin, both federally approved drugs for lymphoma. And all three can count themselves as lucky.

Not just because their cancers responded so well. But because they got the treatment at all.

Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma is the fifth most common cancer in the United States, with 60,000 new cases and almost 20,000 deaths a year. But fewer than 2,000 patients received Bexxar or Zevalin last year, only about 10 percent of those who are suitable candidates for the drugs.

vinod-gupta.jpegA third front page story tells of the rise of Vinod Gupta, a wealthy supporter of Bill and Hillary Clinton, who has named two schools in India after the Clintons, who is now under a cloud with accusations he wasted millions on perks for himself and payments to the Clintons from the till of infoUSA, the company he built from nothing into a major player in consumer information.

Many people who know Mr. Gupta view his wooing of politicians as a hobby that enhanced his profile back in India and gave him and his family a thrill, while secondarily aiding his businesses. Robert Farmer, a former consul general to Bermuda, met Mr. Gupta after Mr. Clinton considered appointing the Nebraska businessman as Mr. Farmer’s successor.

“I think like many people who have been successful as immigrants, Vin found politics is very exciting, and I think he really enjoys playing it,” Mr. Farmer said. “Obviously, Bill Clinton is as high as you can get, so it’s another mountain to climb.”

Some of the benefits to Mr. Gupta are tangible. The Democrats paid infoUSA $5 million over the last six years for computer consulting and data services (the Republicans paid it $6 million for data), and the company was granted the rights to resell lists of donors to the Democratic Party, as well as to Mrs. Clinton’s Senate campaign, Mr. Clinton’s presidential library and the Clintons’ legal defense fund.

Other benefits are harder to quantify. Mr. Gupta estimates that just being seen with Mr. Clinton, and paying him to speak at company events, has yielded millions of dollars in new business. Testifying in civil suits involving his businesses, Mr. Gupta has impressed juries with tales of how the former president has nominated him for diplomatic posts, appointed him to the board of the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in Washington and accompanied him to India, trial transcripts show.

It is not clear from the Times story, Clinton Backer’s Ties to Powerful Cut Both Ways, what exactly Mr Gupta has done wrong, just as it is not entirely clear whether the doctors who have not yet prescribed the sometimes magical lymphoma cures Zevalin and Bexxar are not simply being cautious (the clinical trials to prove they increase survival are not yet complete), but the bloodhound attitude of the Times reporters is impressive.

Today, the rich excuse themselves, the poor get shafted

On Sunday’s front page, we learned that the Archdiocese of Los Angeles will pay a record $660 million to more than 500 people abused by the clergy, heading off the embarrassments of a court trial. The front page also boasted a big centerpiece, The Richest of the Rich, Proud of a Gilded Age by Louis Uchitelle, which informed us that there are almost 15,000 US families with incomes of $9.5 million or more a year, but which indicated that many of the richest felt compelled to justify their riches – Charity And Skill Justify It All, Tycoons Say was the subhead – and some admitted that so much money wasn’t necessary to call forth their maximum effort:

A handful of critics among the new elite, or close to it, are scornful of such self-appraisal. “I don’t see a relationship between the extremes of income now and the performance of the economy,” Paul A. Volcker, a former Federal Reserve Board chairman, said in an interview, challenging the contentions of the very rich that they are, more than others, the driving force of a robust economy.

The great fortunes today are largely a result of the long bull market in stocks, Mr. Volcker said. Without rising stock prices, stock options would not have become a major source of riches for financiers and chief executives. Stock prices rise for a lot of reasons, Mr. Volcker said, including ones that have nothing to do with the actions of these people…..

In contrast to many of his peers in corporate America, Mr. Sinegal, 70, the Costco chief executive, argues that the nation’s business leaders would exercise their “unique skills” just as vigorously for “$10 million instead of $200 million, if that were the standard.”

As a co-founder of Costco, which now has 132,000 employees, Mr. Sinegal still holds $150 million in company stock. He is certainly wealthy. But he distinguishes between a founder’s wealth and the current practice of paying a chief executive’s salary in stock options that balloon into enormous amounts. His own salary as chief executive was $349,000 last year, incredibly modest by current standards.

“I think that most of the people running companies today are motivated and pay is a small portion of the motivation,” Mr. Sinegal said. So why so much pressure for ever higher pay?

“Because everyone else is getting it,” he said. “It is as simple as that. If somehow a proclamation were made that C.E.O.’s could only make a maximum of $300,000 a year, you would not have any shortage of very qualified men and women seeking the jobs.”

Mr Sinegal is right, no question about it. As many economists have pointed out humans tend to value almost anything in goods and services according to what others possess and what others pay, ie in relative terms. That is one reason why they are no happier when they are six times as rich in 2007 than their peers were in the sixties, when houses were a quarter the size of the ones being built today. If these CEOs were aborigines, they would be happy with the biggest mud hut.

troy-davis.jpgInside the same paper we read on page 23 of Troy Davis, who has spent two decades facing execution in Atlanta for a killing for which the only evidence was the testimony of nine bystanders seven of whom now admit they were induced to lie. As Execution Nears, Last Push From Supporters by Brenda Goodman makes clear that the noose is around Davis’s neck now only because of the shoddy legal work done for him in the past, and courts who now refuse to hear new evidence this late in the process.

With no physical evidence — the murder weapon was never found — prosecutors relied heavily on the testimony of nine eyewitnesses who took the stand against Mr. Davis.

But since his trial, seven of the nine have recanted or changed their testimony, saying they were harassed and pressed by investigators to lie under oath. Other witnesses have come forward identifying a different man as the shooter.

But because of a 1996 federal law intended to streamline the legal process in death penalty cases, courts have ruled it is too late in the appeals process to introduce new evidence and, so far, have refused to hear it.

Legal experts, including William S. Sessions, a retired federal judge, a former director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and a self-described supporter of the death penalty, have sounded the alarm over Mr. Davis’s case. They say it underscores the many ways the death penalty is unevenly and wrongly applied, particularly in the South, the region with the most death penalty cases.

“It would be intolerable to execute an innocent man,” Mr. Sessions wrote in an op-ed article for The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. “It would be equally intolerable to execute a man without his claims of innocence ever being considered by the courts or by the executive.”

Representative John Lewis, Democrat of Georgia, is expected to testify at the clemency hearing Monday.

In the Metro section, we have a very similar report of the case of Richard Lapointe, Supporters See Innocent Man Serving Life. He now has a hearing for a new trial after being in prison for 15 years for crimes he obviously never committed, if the facts are as told by Peter Applebome, the columnist. He was convicted on coerced confessions (three inconsistent confessions) in a case was evidently preposterous from beginning to end. Unfortunately there is no DNA evidence to settle the issue immediately, but the conclusion is so obvious to 25 or more friends of Lapointe that they have stuck by the humble dishwasher all this time. Needless to say the assistant state attorney supervising the case is “sure that they are well meaning but I don’t believe their beliefs are supported by the evidence.”

Readers can make up their own minds whether Lapointe is likely innocent or not, but all the signs we see point to the usual flaws in the justice system – grabbing the nearest suspect, railroading him into conviction with forced confession against all narrative indications, the prosecutors maintaining the conviction as a win against all reasonable argument.

Weekend Times: paper with a conscience

Whence this conscience laden editing? It seems possible that the Saturday and Sunday papers have different editors, and if so, we hope they rise in the Times power pyramid, since if this kind of work is encouraged we can imagine that even the Science section might be prodded to do a little skeptical investigative work for a change, especially in the blatantly compromised area of HIV∫AIDS science, pace Larry Altman, whose CDC trained mentality may be the brake here, though old science hands like Nicholas Wade (in his salad days co-author of Betrayers of the Truth) have no business following his lead if it is.

Perhaps we are simply imagining things. “It is in the nature of a hypothesis, when once a man has conceived it, that it assimilates every thing to itself, as proper nourishment; and, from the first moment of your begetting it, generally grows stronger by every thing you see, hear, read or understand.” – Laurence Sterne, The Life and Opinions of Tristram Shandy (1760).

Will Fauci et al have to answer in court?

However, assuming we are not, and that at the Times and perhaps in society generally the pendulum is swinging over farther and farther into the territory where the robber businessman and the corrupt official are sooner or later forced to pay for their sins, it seems not impossible that the leaders of HIV∫AIDS science, the promoters of the paradigm who fight so viciously – “all out war”, in John P. Moore’s phrase – to prevent review, will be brought to the bar of justice and asked to justify themselves and their interference with the normal process of professional science, which is to conduct a free debate at all times of any ruling wisdom, and especially one on which public policy involving the spending of billions and the administration of billions of doses of dangerous medications world wide.

What will Fauci, Moore, Gallo and Wainberg have to say for themselves? It is hard to imagine them bringing a valid excuse to bear. For their crime is not to think that HIV is the cause of AIDS – no one can ever prove they do not think this, even though they acknowledge its flaws very clearly in papers they write, as both Fauci and Moore have done more than once – but to prevent review, even by the media, and to prevent others from advocating review.

This policy is a conscious one, it is clear. Can it be justified in a court of justice by claiming that the review itself is dangerous? Clearly not, since whether it is dangerous or not – by virtue of possibly persuading people that the drugs are not after all aimed at the right target – depends entirely on the outcome. If the paradigm is shown to be unjustified by reason or evidence, as the literature has always shown when this blog has examined it, then it is the paradigm and the medication that are dangerous. Either way, the argument does not serve as justification for interfering with review.

Does their conscious interference over two decades with review of the paradigm, and interference with media coverage of the review and of the flaws in the paradigm, when lives are at stake, constitute criminal culpability, if it is taking advantage of a situation and exploiting it for money, power and prestige, when the officials and the scientists concerned know very well that the review is needed, and may decide against them?

zheng-xiaoyu.jpegChina decided to make an example last week of Zheng Xiaoyu, 62, whose corruption in running the Chinese equivalent of the FDA led to deaths of pets and people from tainted Chinese exports, by executing him six weeks after he was found guilty. Vietnam also treated corruption as a capital offense in 2006 when it executed Phung Long Thai, an anti smuggling investigator who had accepted bribes to smuggle $70 million worth of goods.

According to Nelson Schwartz, in Bribes and Punishment in Weekend Review (we are still getting through the Sunday Times), severe and bloody sanctions for bribery have a long history, from Athenian officials executed, to Byzantium officials blinded and castrated (by a furious mob) in the 11th Century, to public flogging of John the Cappadocian, who supplied tainted food to Emperor Justinian’s army.

Let them eat AZT

What those who debate the justice and punishment if any to be meted out to the officials and scientists responsible for quashing free debate of the HIV∫AIDS paradigm have to decide is, what do Anthony Fauci, John P. Moore, Mark Wainberg and Robert Gallo deserve if it is established that they prevented free and proper review of HIV∫AIDS for more than twenty years, and thus potentially endangered the health and lives of millions, for personal and professional gain?

enjoyazt.jpegOne can imagine that those who have lost loved ones to the fearsome breakdown and eventual death brought on by AZT and its accompanying drugs might wish to serve up the same medications to those who have advocated them for so long.

Does this conclusion depend on the proper review of HIV∫AIDS and a decision as to whether the paradigm is the correct hypothesis or not? After all, if it decides that HIV is valid as the cause of AIDS, then the group in the dock will argue that they were quite justified, and it was the dissenters who were indeed dangerous.

Clearly not. The interference with free debate and open review is the act which opens them to liability, and not whether the act turns out to be harmless or even beneficial. For that cannot be determined before the censorship is broken, and provides no justification for that blatantly anti-science policy whatsoever.

A cover up is a cover up, even if it turns out to be harmless in the end.

And there is nil indication in the scientific literature that it will. Which of course is the only conceivable reason why there should be such resistance to review in the first place.

No one resists review who doesn’t have something to hide.

Expanded name

July 15th, 2007

Science and Ethics Guardian – why?

Blog host disavers all moral superiority

ethicsscience.jpgFollowing the events and claims of HIV∫AIDS and its dissent over two and a half years, from January 2005 to mid-2007, with Comments open to and attracting contradictions and objections from all comers, the blog host has sadly concluded that the case against HIV as the cause of AIDS, the ruling paradigm under assessment in New AIDS Review, is complete, and there are no further arguments or supposed evidence to entertain against the debunkers who have weighed in against it.

For that reason, as we have noted, the expansion of the topic to other paradigms under review, such as human caused global warming, cancer caused by oncogenes, etc., which we have dealt with from time to time, seemed appropriate to avoid repetition.

Moreover, it has also become increasingly clear that the fundamental issue in discriminating between good science and bad science is whether the science is practiced according to genuine professional standards or not, ie without bias introduced by human nature (see the blog logo) and without the distortion introduced by censorship, bullying and other means of evading open review (see Anthony Fauci, John P. Moore, Mark Wainberg).

Ethics are fundamental

ethics.jpgSince good science is truthseeking, and a social activity in which professional standards are maintained, it seems to us that the ethics of good and bad behavior are the fundamental rules that have to be observed to get it, and that this blog is concerned as much with those ethics as with science per se (data, observation, hypothesis and theory).

So we have expanded the title of the blog to Science and Ethics Guardian to better reflect our area of concern.

Lest this give the wrong, arrogant impression we hasten to add that this implies absolutely nothing about the behavior of the blog host, who in no way sets himself up as the example to be followed, though admittedly we do try to live a decent life in accordance with the principles we imagine lead to the greatest social happiness and personal security of all.

Calling Exxon, Shell, etc.

moneybag1.jpegHowever, we also hurry to admit that if the representatives of large corporate entities or other fine institutions wish to offer us contributions to enable us to go forward with the work of this blog in promulgating what we think are worthwhile social goals, and those contributions are large enough, we cannot promise that we will refuse, and if we accept we cannot guarantee that our minds and our posts will not be subtly twisted in the general direction of tolerance of the self-serving views and opinions which seem to go hand in hand with such gifts in the case of other commentators.

For who are we to claim we are less human than anybody else ?

And we certainly wouldn’t want to be caught being an ethical Mrs Grundy.

mrs-grundy.pngSUNDAY OBSERVANCE.

There’s a man that plays and sings…

WHAT a shocking state of things,

Oh, my goodness, Mrs. GRUNDY!

There’s a man that plays and sings

In a Blackpool hall on Sunday!

Oh, what wickedness, oh, dear!

Sunday music! What a scandal!

Folks might even go and hear

Things by HAYDN or by HANDEL!

Rush and find some obsolete

Act of wise and pious GEORGES,

Which will help us to defeat

Such abominable orgies!

But here’s worse news, I declare;

Gracious patience, Mrs. GRUNDY!

Eastbourne people cannot bear

Nice Salvation bands on Sunday!

Acts, not words, again we need,

Just to show them they are silly.

Sunday Music stopped? Indeed,

They must like it, willy nilly!

(Punch, April 9th, 1892)

Moore bombs at the Globe

July 4th, 2007

Wainberg and Moore spark Web catfight with call for Inquisition

Their solution to HIV science critique: kill the messengers

Is Moore dishonest, if he denies own paper?

stinkbomb.jpegThe Globe and Mail is Canada’s equivalent of the New York Times or the London Times, and the editors there still like to keep its pages free of the kind of ill considered impolitesse that litters the Internet nowadays even in the pages of science blogs like Aetiology and paradigm dispute sites like John Moore’s AIDSTruth, where people who are probably fairly collegial in person are demons of rash certitude in Web comments and email.

Just after midnight last night it seems that a particularly offensive literary stink bomb along these lines was let off by Mark Wainberg and John Moore in those hallowed Toronto environs, but luckily they were barred from the printed editorial pages they aimed for and their unpleasantness was confined to the Globe and Mail Web pages, where it ignited some good replies from the AIDS dissenters who were its targets.

inquisition2.JPGThe basic theme of their diatribe was what anyone familiar with these two lieutenants of the HIV∫AIDS defense team would have expected. The weapons they use in defense of their livelihood enhancing belief tend to be the kind that belong to “all out war “, as Cornell macaque microbicide researcher Moore has described his strategy to the HEAL San Diego activist Michael Geiger in a frank email. Montreal University’s Wainberg is famous for advocating that HIV∫AIDS paradigm skeptics be hanged as soon as possible.

Science Sold Out is hard to deflect

sciencesoldout.jpegThe failed attempt at getting an Op Ed piece into the newspaper proper followed the rejection of a similar initiative aimed at Rebecca Culshaw, recently author of Science Sold Out (North Atlantic 2007), a slim book which contains enough damning exposure of the irrational science of HIV∫AIDS and its papers to sink the entire operation, if more than a few Congressional staff members read it.

rebeccaculshaw.jpegCulshaw is a mathematician who spent some years modeling HIV’s supposed behavior, until she threw up her hands in disgust at the falsities that poked through every seam of her efforts, and revised her opinion of the validity of the HIV∫AIDS paradigm accordingly. After two bombshell essays on LewRockwell.com, she then wrote a very sharp book, containing all one needs to know about the paucity of reason and evidence under the HIV paradigm.

Moore is evidently concerned at the threat posed by Science Sold Out, since he has mounted an embarrassingly inadequate answer to it at AIDSTruth.org. Characteristically, it is not one written not by him. He is somehow too busy to address it himself, in the familiar manner of prominent paradigm defenders of HIV. Instead, he has employed a naive graduate student he brought into his paradigm goon squad recently, which leaves him safely out of the line of fire as critics demolish its puerile contentions.

How to win against science

Since this response to Science Sold Out on his tiny, 150 a day site was so flimsy and transparently questionable Moore has followed up with his notorious technique of calling the employer of a dissenter. He and presumably his cohorts called Culshaw’s university and tried to get her fired from the faculty, but as befits any decent academic institution it sent him away with his perfidy unrewarded. His unabashed mention of this is in his piece.

Attempts to shut down these sites or to prevent the dissemination of denialist literature are routinely dismissed on the grounds that dissenters have a right to express their views and that the public interest is better served by the defence of freedom of expression.

The latter sentiment appears in a letter to us — researchers on the front lines of the global AIDS crisis — from the provost and vice-president of a well-known U.S. university, after we complained that one of his faculty members had written a book based on an HIV-AIDS denialist position. The university should have shown leadership on the issue and dismissed the faculty member from her position, rather than hiding under the cloak of academic freedom.

As an indication of how far from scientific debate Moore and Wainberg’s antisocial and medically irresponsible mentality is, their call for censorship is worth quoting in full, if sensitive readers can stomach it :

EXCLUSIVE COMMENT
AIDS and the dangers of denial
MARK WAINBERG AND JOHN MOORE
Special to Globe and Mail Update
July 4, 2007 at 12:46 AM EDT
Imagine the scenario: The cafeteria at your child’s high school is frequented by a few individuals telling your children that it’s fine to smoke. They make passionate exhortations that statistics linking cigarettes to cancer, stroke and heart disease are flawed, because many people have smoked regularly without ever suffering ill effects. They say lung cancer is twice as common in women as it was two generations ago because of other causes, such as exposure to jet fuel fumes, a super-poison unleashed by rogue former KGB agents or a shadowy oil-driven cabal. They tell your child that the link between cigarette smoking and cancer is a hoax perpetrated by personal injury lawyers.

What would you do? Would you contact the school board or the police department and ask that these crackpots be removed from the premises? Or would you defend freedom of speech as an important right that must be preserved under all circumstances, even if it might provoke reckless behaviour and even death?

We live in an time when information is available and disseminated to society, including our children, in myriad ways. In the absence of an effective filter to protect the vulnerable, disinformation can kill. And while we spend billions of dollars worldwide in public service announcements educating our children about the perils of drug use and unsafe sex, we do little or nothing to counter the bewildering chorus of voices arguing that HIV, a virus that has killed more than 25 million people around the world in the course of a single generation, is utterly harmless.

People who argue that HIV does not cause AIDS have formed clubs, published newsletters and freely disseminated terribly harmful information on this subject through the Internet and other widely available channels. Attempts to shut down these sites or to prevent the dissemination of denialist literature are routinely dismissed on the grounds that dissenters have a right to express their views and that the public interest is better served by the defence of freedom of expression.

The latter sentiment appears in a letter to us — researchers on the front lines of the global AIDS crisis — from the provost and vice-president of a well-known U.S. university, after we complained that one of his faculty members had written a book based on an HIV-AIDS denialist position. The university should have shown leadership on the issue and dismissed the faculty member from her position, rather than hiding under the cloak of academic freedom.

We submit that the same standards of public health enforcement should apply to HIV-AIDS as to cigarette smoking and to other organisms, such as tuberculosis, that cause epidemic infectious disease.

We have long accepted that free societies do have an obligation to impose restrictions on freedom of speech in the interest of public safety. Among other jurisprudence, Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes famously opined in Schenck v. United States (1919) that the right to free speech does not permit one to falsely yell “fire” in a crowded movie theatre because of the injuries and deaths that would ensue as people stampeded toward the exits.

HIV denialism is lethal. It is responsible for the infections of at least several hundreds of thousands more people around the world than would have otherwise been infected and died. South African President Thabo Mbeki and his health minister, HIV denialists until last year, were among those in Africa whose refusal to be content with mere ostrich-like obliviousness, whose insistence on propagating flagrant disinformation about the disease, amounted to an arguably criminal abrogation of leadership.

Last sumíer, when political pressure generated by the International AIDS Conference in Toronto caused them to finally reverse their position, a scientific presentation there estimated that the number of HIV-infected people in South Africa was approximately 25 per cent higher than otherwise because of that country’s policies.

The reasons for AIDS denial are probably as varied as the deniers themselves, but they’re clearly not all motivated by political expediency. In the United States, the daughter of an HIV-infected woman named Christine Maggiore died of AIDS two years ago because she was not treated with anti-HIV drugs. The mother’s reasoning was that the drugs could not possibly have done any good, since they act against a virus that has nothing to do with AIDS. In Canada, a similar case resulted in the custody of two HIV-infected children being transferred to foster parents who ensured that proper care was received. Those children have thrived.

In a recent case in Australia, a man was charged with transmitting HIV to several sexual contacts. He had been fully aware of his HIV-positive status, but argued that it had not been conclusively proven that HIV was the cause of AIDS. The defence based its case in part on information found on the websites of members of HIV denialist movements. The man was convicted, but is now appealing, and a spate of similar cases are pending in North America and elsewhere.

Our lawmakers need to enact legislation to put appropriate limits on such irresponsible expression and to counter the ongoing damage perpetrated by denialists. The scientific evidence that HIV causes AIDS is no less incontrovertible than the evidence that cigarette smoking causes cancer and heart disease. At a time when progress in HIV-AIDS drug treatments and life expectancy is informing an alarming new complacency in our children, policy-makers should defer to proven scientific fact and stop the transmission of deadly lies.

Dr. Mark Wainberg is director of the McGill University AIDS Centre at the Jewish General Hospital in Montreal. He was co-chairman of the International AIDS Conference in Toronto in August, 2006. Dr. John Moore is a professor of microbiology and immunology at Cornell University’s Weill Medical College in New York.

markwainberg2.jpegThis reversal of reality – whose “deadly lies” are we talking about, gentlemen? If the cap fits, wear it, as they say – triggered a discussion which was closed tonight, for what reason we do not know. Letters to the Editor are still allowed, however, and David Crowe has written one which is worth quoting straight away, as a most effective riposte to the unscientific behavior of the HIV paradigm’s increasingly notorious odd couple, whose giveaway behavior speaks volumes about their inner conflict and doubts about the security of their scientific position.

davidcroiwe.jpegCrowe wrote this, in our opinion hitting the bullseye of an easy target with every shot:

It is unfortunate that the Globe & Mail published a hateful screed by John Moore and Mark Wainberg, albeit only in the online edition.

It is truly amazing that these AIDS researchers would be calling for the censorship of people, including experienced doctors and scientists, who ask why, if HIV is sexually transmitted, that African women are more likely to be HIV positive than men, in many African countries. And why clean needle exchange users are more likely to become HIV-positive than drug users who never use clean needle exchanges. And why an antibody test is used to claim that a virus is present and pronounce a death sentence. And why HIV has never once been purified. And how, without purification, HIV tests can possibly be validated.

Wainberg and Moore ignore the simple evidence that many so-called denialists are alive and healthy without AIDS drugs years after being given a death sentence. It has been 15 years for Christine Maggiore, for example. It is clear that her young daughter died of an allergic reaction to amoxicillin, a penicillin-like antibiotic, not AIDS. Their claim that Eliza Jane Scovill died of AIDS is the most hateful part of their letter, followed by their proud attempt to get a scientist fired for having the courage to go against the mainstream and write a questioning book.

If these men are scientists, science is now a religion.

– David Crowe

Moore fighting inner demons

johnmoore.jpegA hard one for Moore and Wainberg to deal with honestly, clearly, but no doubt they will smear it as quickly as they can to prevent people taking its point if it finds publication.

With Moore as we have pointed out having written papers which show very clearly that he has agreed with the key points in the HIV dissent in the past, we have to wonder if he is in a state of psychological tension, a schizophrenia between lambasting dissenters for the benefit of his colleagues and others in public but quietly granting their points in private. This especially since we discovered another example of one of these papers the other day, which we will add here tomorrow when we have a moment.

**************************************************
ADDENDUM: Pussycat not a tiger
: The 1992 paper is Factors Underlying Spontaneous Inactivation and Susceptibility to Neutralization of Human Immunodeficiency Virus, Scott P. Layne et al. including John P. Moore and a bunch of authors from Los Alamos Biology and Biophysics Group, Theoretical Division – that is Layne’s affiliation, with UCLA as the reprint address – NCI, Aaron Diamond Center in NY, which was John P. Moore’s affiliation at the time, courtesy of David Ho, American Bio-technologies Inc in Cambridge, and Robert Koch Institute in Berlin, Virology 189, 695-714 (1992).

The conclusions of this seminal admission by ten stalwart generals of the HIV propaganda campaign were essentially that the Virus was effectively non infectious, and that even when safely away from human antibodies (which otherwise neutralize it faster than Chuck Norris could defeat a little old lady) it disintegrates all by itself, ie does a better job of getting rid of itself than Anti Retroviral drugs. The infectivity of HIV-1 was so low – ranging down to 1 in 10 million particles infectious in the batch they were studying – that the group were in effect scotching the paradigm, agreeing with Peter Duesberg that the terrorizing particle is a kitten not a tiger, biologically speaking.

Some money quotes:

For freshly harvested stocks, the ratio of infectious to noninfectious viral particles ranged from 10_(-4) to 10_(-7) in viral stocks containing 10_(9) to 10_(10) physical particles per millilietr.

The spontaneous shedding of gp120 envelope proteins from virions was exponential, and a half life of approx. 30 hr. The loss of RNA polymerase activity in virions wa also exponential, with a half life of approx. 40 hr. The physical breakup of virions and the dissolution of p24 core proteins were slow (half life less than 100hr) compared to the gp120 shedding and polymerase loss rates.

At short preincubation times, the loss of infectivity correlated with a spontaneous shedding of gp120 from virions. At longer times, an accelerating decay rate indicated that HIV requires a minimal number of gp120 molecules for efficient infection of CD4+ cells

Gee, the virus is virtually benign, according to Moore et al in 1992, decaying all by itself in a matter of days as it sets its vital components adrift. No wonder transmission is so rare as to be virtually non existent even among Africans 80% of whom are not using condoms. Why has Moore been so shy in the interim, hardly mentioning these reassuring results? One can only speculate. Sheer modesty, perhaps?

A Nobel for Moore?

Non infectious with a half life of hours! Nice electron micrographs of the Virus, too, for Perthians.

Though we have to take into account John’s mysterious burying of this reassuring news in the years since, once again we see that when it comes to digging up very good reasons not to take the Virus seriously as a health threat, there are few so competent as John Moore, and the world should show its gratitude by including him with Anthony Fauci, Robert Gallo and Peter Duesberg in the roll call of pioneers in research who would have nipped the paradigm in the bud, if only the world had listened.

In other words, while we haven’t ourselves heard of it we have no doubt that John Moore has been as assiduous behind the scenes spreading word of the harmlessness of the Virus as Peter Dueberg has been in public, and this fine Cornell researcher, despite his difficulties with microbicides turning out to enhance the spread of the Virus, deserves to be considered for the AIDS Nobel along with the aforementioned paradigm busters, even if they are at the moment senior to him.

NAR once again nominates John Moore for the Nobel for his paradigm busting advance of truth and security in science and health. Congratulations, John!
*********************************************************

Shouting “Fire!” at a crowded trough

We are not of course calling Moore a liar, or indeed the dark Mark Wainberg a conscious murderer either, because there are many more complicated and subtle reasons for intelligent human beings to take up arms against themselves in this way and attack others especially vehemently when they are really upset at themselves and their own doubts.

But we have to say that, given the enormous and overwhelming weight of scientific literature now in the balance against the HIV-causes-AIDS notion, and the complete absence of any evidence for it which withstands examination, if we were the Moore type we would probably be calling HIV claims by no other name than “deadly lies”.

aidsdrugshump.jpegAfter all, the only piece of evidence that promoters of this paradigm have left is that “the drugs work”, a statement that is so full of holes as a piece of logic let along evidence that it seems to us they cannot both claim to intelligent scientists and also that this is enough to support their belief when so much is against it, and so many lives are at stake in whether or not admittedly otherwise deadly drugs should be delivered to millions based on this rationale.

Below are the Comments which descended like barracuda on this piece of rotten meat thrown into the otherwise clear stream of public discourse at the Globe and Mail, still a banner for reasonable Canadian debate and so far immune to the viral Moore-Wainberg meme of “summary execution of dissenters guarantees unanimity in science.” Here are a handful of the best:

Michael Ellner from New York, United States writes: One need not be a virologist, medical doctor or a rocket scientist to notice that some thing is very wrong with the official line concerning “infectious” AIDS. The AIDS Establishment tells us that HIV/AIDS is a sexually transmitted disease –The Evidence says – Zero Transmission! (Padian, et al., American Journal of Epidemiology, vol. 146, no. 4, p. 350 , 1997) The AIDS Establishment tells us that HIV/AIDS is transmitted via needle use — The Evidence says – “HIV infection remains rare in injecting drug users” — (http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/?newsid=14954) The AIDS Establishment tells us that testing HIV-positive is proof of infection – A comprehensive review concludes, “All positive results are false positives in lieu of viral isolation (Is a Positive Western Blot Proof of Infection, Bio/Technology, 11, 6/93.) The AIDS Establishment tells us that anti-HIV treatments are extending life — The claim that early treatments extend life has been discredited by the St. Mary’s Study, (BMJ 7/96). The AIDS Establishment tells us that AIDS in Africa is caused by sexually transmitted HIV — HIV infections in sub-Saharan Africa not explained by sexual or vertical transmission, (International Journal of STD & AIDS 2002; 13: 657±666) The AIDS Establishment tells us that “Every one is at risk for AIDS” — Public Health Officials, gay AIDS activists and the media misled us! (The Wall Street Journal, Pg 1 and A6, 5/1/96. “AIDS FIGHT IS SKEWED BY FEDERAL CAMPAIGN EXAGGERATING RISKS”, Bennett and Sharpe.)

David Crowe from Calgary, Canada writes: It is certainly true that most Canadian children are taught that HIV causes AIDS in school. It is probably true that most would consider this belief that they have learned by rote to be scientific. But how can a belief be scientific when the holder has never examined the primary literature?
The fact is that HIV has never been purified, and I challenge any reader to provide a scientific reference showing that this is not true. Purification is necessary not only to prove the existence of HIV but also to validate HIV tests, which are clearly not tests for HIV, but for antibodies or genetic material that has never been proven to be directly associated with HIV.
I don’t understand how people who clearly have never read a single scientific paper regarding the matter of HIV/AIDS causation can support the censorship of research into this area. To me this is the height of ignorance. At least we don’t burn people at the stake any more or I’d be going out and buying an asbestos suit.

Dee Nicholson from Canada writes: As a health freedom activist, I, along with my thousands of colleagues in dozens of countries, am horrified at the idea of legislation of “truth”, especially when it comes to AIDS. All of you who comment that the HIV/AIDS connection is “undeniable” are merely parroting the mainstream line, and have not done the research on both sides of that argument to learn the following FACTS: 1. Robert Gallo, who was the individual pinning the HIV retrovirus to AIDS, and sex as a means of transmission, NEVER OFFERED HIS RESEARCH FOR PEER REVIEW. Amongst the top researchers in the world, the debate still rages, because the mainstream belief that HIV causes AIDS HAS NEVER BEEN PROVEN SCIENTIFICALLY. 2. Retroviruses typically do NOTHING within the human body. 3. Immune crashes, regardless of cause, are REVERSIBLE with proper supplementation of nutrients, especially Vitamin C; in fact, Double Nobel Laureate Dr. Linus Pauling stated clearly (and has never been rebutted) that “you can trace every disease, every condition in the body to a mineral DEFICIENCY”. As for treatment by pharma drugs, a huge, swelling pile of bodies attests to their FAILURE and TOXICITY. 4. BOTH the Ellisa and Western Blot test packages carry box warnings about their poor accuracy and both are notorious for false positives, especially with pregnant women. 5. AZT, one of the major drugs used in AIDS treatment, is a FAILED CHEMO DRUG which was shelved in 1961 by the FDA because it was considered far too toxic and dangerous even for short, spaced administration for cancer, but now it’s okay to give daily to AIDS patients?????!!!!! These are but a few of the FACTS that the authors have failed to mention. Follow the MONEY, people! AIDS is a multi-billion dollar BUSINESS (check out “AIDS, Inc.” by Pulitzer nominee Jon Rappoport)… and a patient cured is a customer lost. Do not be so blind as to believe that the Pharma companies which benefit from this fraud are in it for your health!

Charles Geshekter from Baltimore, United States writes: First of all, everyone should carefully read the thoughtful remarks by Michael Ellner on thgis comments board.
Second, they should wonder why a so-called AIDS case in Africa is so decisively different than one in Canada. If a Zulu, Xhosa, Somali, Kikuyu, or Fulani has a persistent cough, high fever, diarrhea for 14 days, and has lost 10% of their body weight in 8 weeks they have “AIDS.” This is absurd, racist nonsense. Why is that so obviously NOT a case of AIDS in Alberta, Quebec or the Yukon?
Third, the trembling, edgy censorship of Moore and Wainberg – neither of whom are physicians – is evidence of the truly shaky grounds upon which the entire viral theory of AIDS rests.
I have watched those two at public forums and could not stop laughing at their nervousness whenever serious questions about sexual behavior came up.
The key reason why Moore, Wainberg and their fellow true believers will never agree to meet their critics at an open public forum – but prefer to villify and demonize from their “safe houses” – is because their critics are so easily able to destabilize and discredit their horrific pseudo-science and to point out the flaws, inconsistencies, erroneous predictions, and sheer waste of billions of dollars on their fruitless and barren theories.
If everyone is at risk for “AIDS” via hetersexual contacts, then why has the total cumulative number of “AIDS” cases among heterosexual women in San Francisco amounted to less than ten – 10 – per year for over 25 years?

John Bleau from Quebec, Canada writes: As a believer that HIV causes AIDS, I was invited some years ago to look into AIDS dissidence (denialism is an invented term to discredit the dissidents). The first thing I looked for was the studies that established that HIV causes AIDS, and I immediately hit a stumbling block: I could find no such study. Now, when questioning Einstein’s Relativity, I can find a whole rash of studies: measurements of the advance of the perihelion of Mercury, time dilation in cosmic rays, the bending of light by the sun and, of course, the study that started it all, Michelson-Morley. There is no witch hunt against people who would question Relativity which, with so many studies supporting it, is rock solid. People still do question it, though: for example, the Pioneer anomaly may have ramifications on the theory. Now, if theoretical physics were to adopt the mindset Wainberg and Moore are advocating, then today’s string theorists, currently occupying a huge proportion of the important seats in physics departments, could lobby for censorship of their detractors, even though their theory so far has no evidentiary support and is not falsifiable. Rather than produce the following studies: – study establishing HIV as the probable cause of AIDS (as announced by Gallo and Heckler in 1984) – study establishing HIV as THE cause of AIDS (as announced by the CDC shortly after) – study(-ies) establishing that HIV is sexually transmissible, the AIDS establishment calls for the censorship of those who insist on these studies before adopting the HIV/AIDS quasi-religion. (end of part one)
John Bleau from Quebec, Canada writes: (part two) Here’s a quote by one of the authors (Moore, recipient of AIDS drug manufacturer Bristol-Myers Squibb’s $500,000 “Freedom To Discover” grant) from the Toronto conference (I invite the reader to Google John P. Moore to gauge the vitriol/sapience ratio in his writings): “Some AIDS denialists [sic] work in bona fide universities. Some even teach students. If this happens in your neighborhood ask the university authorities why they allow this and then write about it. There’s a case in Chicago I know about. Science and health journalists should talk to the editorial desk and letters editors and vice versa to ensure that AIDS denialist [sic] letters are spotted on arrival and spiked, not published.” Now why does AIDS dissidence attract such virulent calls for censorship? Clearly not because HIV/AIDS is well-established. After all, they cannot produce the most fundamental studies, and Relativity is sufficiently well-established to withstand any challenge without calls for censorship. How about to save lives? Here is where the dissidents really touch a nerve. When AZT was prescribed in 1.25 gm daily doses, most patients died within a year or two and all died within three years. AIDS deaths in the USA hovered between 50 and 60 thousand a year. These decreased as a result of reductions in dosage and the advent of combination therapy. However, the former is more responsible for this reduction, since nowadays deaths are under 20 thousand (re: CDC) – a 60-70% drop, though now fewer than ¼ of all patients are taking the medicines (re: Johns Hopkins), which could not, therefore, account for more than a 25% drop in deaths. The ramifications go way beyond this: currently, funds are grossly misappropriated in Africa for a syndrome that, over there, has the crudest of diagnoses. (end of part two)
John Bleau from Quebec, Canada writes: (third and last part)
In other words, while accepting grants and throwing themselves laurels for saving lives, these individuals are staunchly defending a paradigm that, while granting one of them half a million dollars, has caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands and seeks to cause more without ever having to look over its shoulder. Talk about casting the first stone.

SPECIAL ADDENDUM – PHOTO OF HIV PARTICLES IN THE ABOVE PAPER. Since Comments to this post have erupted in an unexpectedly combative series of posts from some who are convinced that the Perth Group are right to say that no particles have ever been proved to be HIV, since the HIV test doesn’t do that, we hereby display the two electron micrographs included in the paper for their inspection and comment. The file size is large (1.6MB) so do not open unless you can deal with that in your browser – Click next Show tab. The arrows in the second photo point out the knobs on the surface envelope gp120, and one can also detect the outline of the core in these slices: Click this line for two HIV particles images

Here are the Comments:
MARK WAINBERG AND JOHN MOORE
Special to Globe and Mail Update
Latest comment posted at 3:26 AM EDT 04/07/07
We need laws to counter those who deny the link …Read the full article

THIS CONVERSATION IS CLOSED

Skip to the latest comment

Rae Vandenberg from Canada writes: Mark Wainberg and John Moore have not differentiated what the role of the state is in disseminating information from what individuals have the right to express. An individual in school (a student, for example) might tell students that AIDS does not kill, but the school board and teachers should not be doing so. We don’t need to silence people who are clueless. We need to make sure there are good public health programs which teach kids and the public about what is known to be true about HIV and AIDS from an objective, scientific opinion.
Posted 04/07/07 at 6:48 AM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Stephen Bond from Toronto, Canada writes: Denny Shizzle from Bev Hills, United States, your post can be described as nothing less than ignorant in all regaurds saving one, that being that according to a strict definition of a disease AIDS does not qualify. AIDS or acquired immune deficiency syndrome is simply a description of a symptom, that being an extremely week immune system. This statement is rather irrelevant however when you consider that the vast majority of cases in which the symptom known as AIDS occurs (although it is theoreticly possible to achieve this symptom in some other fashion) are directly attributable to human immune deficiency virus or HIV. This makes the assertion that AIDS is primarily caused by HIV highly a highly valid one. Your other comments regarding what people in Africa die from are also true to a degree but rather irrelevant to the main issue. Yes, the leading cause of death in Africa is more than likely mal nutrition or parasitic infection due to unclean water (though I don’t actually know for certain). That does not mean that there are not deaths in Africa directly attributable to AIDS and HIV nor does it mean the number of deaths caused by AIDS as developed from HIV is insignificant. All this said I agree with p m and Mr. Vandenberg in that legislation on this issue seems a little bit of a stretch.
Posted 04/07/07 at 8:48 AM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Arzie Chant from Canada writes: HIV of course causes AIDS. This is undeniable. That said, Drs. Wahlberg and Moore do need to recognize, particularly as univerity professors, that academic freedom and freedom of speech must only ever be limited with the greatest of care. While we can all think of cases in which we think it should be limited (and Moore and Wahlberg to a great job presenting two more such cases), there is a real danger in doing so.
A far better route would be to educate our children and all people not only on specific facts, eg: the undeniable link between HIV and AIDS, but also on how to effectively research a position and reach a conclusion. The link between HIV and AIDS is clear-cut, but many other questions out there are less evident. To that end, we do our society a favour not when we try to silence dissenting voices (even the most ridiculous), but when we educate others to recognize when an argument is valid and when it is garbage.
Posted 04/07/07 at 9:07 AM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Emmanuel M from Canada writes: We need a law that protects Truth. Not only truth about the Holocaust or AIDS, not only against the libel of individual, but the whole Truth.
Isn’t it surprising that, of the non-religious of the ten commandments, the only one not legislated in the Western world is ‘though shalt no lie’? Now, who would vote for such a law? Politicians? Ya, right.
… Did you hear about Paris Hilton?
Posted 04/07/07 at 9:16 AM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Robert Paradis from Boucherville, Canada writes: I don’t think we can expect much from an ideological government such as the one we have. Do we realize that Christian believers (including the Pope) are against the use of preservatives (condoms) as a mean to prevent HIV transmission. Instead, they promote abstinence!?! If this is not disinformation then it is total blindness and or stupidity. Most of peoples are believers. They read daily astrology report in papers, on the Internet. They believe in chance and act for promoting it, they think. They are stubborn, once they adopt an habit, they don’t review their reasoning and keep the same habit. The worst of all is that in fact they don’t know how to reason per say, their brains are locked on beliefs. What modern times brought us is that reality is what makes the world click. Science, knowledge’s of all kinds is what we need for making our world better. The proofs that HIV causes AIDS are numerous, obvious, outstanding but we still have believers of the contrary. It is an endless fight against believers … So Sorry! We must not be shy of speaking about HIV-AIDS. WE must repeat over and over the same things. Use condom and new needle. HIV is about getting VERY SICK for the rest of your life and dying of AIDS. Oh Lord! Be creative, speed up evolution and so, deliver us from BELIEVERS!
Posted 04/07/07 at 9:29 AM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Mike Dolson from Toronto, Canada writes: Denny, I sure hope that was an attempt at satire.
I’m pretty sure I trust the opinions on infectious disease of doctors employed by MUHN and Cornell more than I trust yours.
That said, I think legislating speech can be problematic. However, I think there is a legal argument which can be made in this case (remember, s. 2 of the Charter is subject to reasonable limits), as the Crown could attempt to argue a restriction on a public health ground. I don’t think the odds of success are great, but it might be worth a shot.
However, I think Drs. Wainberg & Moore do bring up a more disturbing point in regards to South Africa: namely, that one cannot force people to accept the truth, and all the laws in Canada will do little to help where the problems really are.
Posted 04/07/07 at 9:31 AM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Lyndon Akiwenzie from Toronto, Canada writes: This article, for almost half its length, is about something completely different than the topic. You don’t have to waste 3 paragraphs setting up the story.
I think its topical, but there’s good education out there and people for the most part are aware that HIV causes AIDS. If you want to avoid the topic, become chaste. Then you won’t have to worry about STD’s and AIDS.
Posted 04/07/07 at 9:32 AM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Robert Paradis from Boucherville, Canada writes: I don’t think we can expect much from an ideological government such as the one we have. Do we realize that Christian believers (including the Pope) are against the use of preservatives (condoms) as a mean to prevent HIV transmission. Instead, they promote abstinence!?! If this is not disinformation then it is total blindness and or stupidity. Most of peoples are believers. They read daily astrology report in papers, on the Internet. They believe in chance and act for promoting it, they think. They are stubborn, once they adopt an habit, they don’t review their reasoning and keep the same habit. The worst of all is that in fact they don’t know how to reason per say, their brains are locked on beliefs. What modern times brought us is that reality is what makes the world click. Science, knowledge’s of all kinds is what we need for making our world better. The proofs that HIV causes AIDS are numerous, obvious, outstanding but we still have believers of the contrary. It is an endless fight against believers … So Sorry! We must not be shy of speaking about HIV-AIDS. WE must repeat over and over the same things. Use condom and new needle. HIV is about getting VERY SICK for the rest of your life and dying of AIDS. Oh Lord! Be creative, speed up evolution and so, deliver us from BELIEVERS!
Posted 04/07/07 at 9:46 AM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Robert Paradis from Boucherville, Canada writes: I don’t think we can expect much from an ideological government such as the one we have. Do we realize that Christian believers (including the Pope) are against the use of preservatives (condoms) as a mean to prevent HIV transmission. Instead, they promote abstinence!?! If this is not disinformation then it is total blindness and or stupidity. Most of peoples are believers. They read daily astrology report in papers, on the Internet. They believe in chance and act for promoting it, they think. They are stubborn, once they adopt an habit, they don’t review their reasoning and keep the same habit. The worst of all is that in fact they don’t know how to reason per say, their brains are locked on beliefs. What modern times brought us is that reality is what makes the world click. Science, knowledge’s of all kinds is what we need for making our world better. The proofs that HIV causes AIDS are numerous, obvious, outstanding but we still have believers of the contrary. It is an endless fight against believers … So Sorry! We must not be shy of speaking about HIV-AIDS. WE must repeat over and over the same things. Use condom and new needle. HIV is about getting VERY SICK for the rest of your life and dying of AIDS. Oh Lord! Be creative, speed up evolution and so, deliver us from BELIEVERS!
Posted 04/07/07 at 9:46 AM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Paul C from Toronto, Canada writes: …. and the attacks on science and reason continue.
Posted 04/07/07 at 9:49 AM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Paul Kruger from Vernon, Canada writes: The South African President was ‘forced’ (shamed really) to back-down from his government’s official stance on the HIV link with AIDS, but privately he (they) still hold that view – which is a pity since AIDS in South Africa is an epidemic. It’s only because of Nelson Mandella still being around that they do not make even bigger idiots out of themselves on this (and probably other) issues. However, what really upset me about this article, is the author starts to decide what ‘official views” to ‘force’ upon people. Whenever Governments decide that only they know best and ‘force’ people to ‘toe only their official line’, we will have a much bigger problem than HIV-AIDS! We really have to tolerate ‘those idiots with opposing views to us’ … heck, I meet them all the time right here on the G&M – who, by the way, does a quite bit of it’s own ‘vetting’ of ideas to ensure that the biases of their editors are supported and any detractors are silenced, case in point, their recent interview with the Anglican Bishop in Toronto who supports blessing same-sex marriages, but refused to allow any of the Bishops who opposed him at the recent Anglican synod, equal time or any opportunity to state or explain their beliefs.
Posted 04/07/07 at 10:20 AM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Michael Ellner from New York, United States writes: One need not be a virologist, medical doctor or a rocket scientist to notice that some thing is very wrong with the official line concerning “infectious” AIDS. The AIDS Establishment tells us that HIV/AIDS is a sexually transmitted disease –The Evidence says – Zero Transmission! (Padian, et al., American Journal of Epidemiology, vol. 146, no. 4, p. 350 , 1997) The AIDS Establishment tells us that HIV/AIDS is transmitted via needle use — The Evidence says – “HIV infection remains rare in injecting drug users” — (http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/?newsid=14954) The AIDS Establishment tells us that testing HIV-positive is proof of infection – A comprehensive review concludes, “All positive results are false positives in lieu of viral isolation (Is a Positive Western Blot Proof of Infection, Bio/Technology, 11, 6/93.) The AIDS Establishment tells us that anti-HIV treatments are extending life — The claim that early treatments extend life has been discredited by the St. Mary’s Study, (BMJ 7/96). The AIDS Establishment tells us that AIDS in Africa is caused by sexually transmitted HIV — HIV infections in sub-Saharan Africa not explained by sexual or vertical transmission, (International Journal of STD & AIDS 2002; 13: 657±666) The AIDS Establishment tells us that “Every one is at risk for AIDS” — Public Health Officials, gay AIDS activists and the media misled us! (The Wall Street Journal, Pg 1 and A6, 5/1/96. “AIDS FIGHT IS SKEWED BY FEDERAL CAMPAIGN EXAGGERATING RISKS”, Bennett and Sharpe.)
Posted 04/07/07 at 12:03 PM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Walter Bruno from Calgary, writes: I’ve been a close observer of this question for a couple of decades. Here are my thoughts: a) I’m against banning any theorist of any kind on any college campus; however, in science, everyone is subject to peer review for quality of work. Also, campuses have the right to polemicize against fraudulent claims. b) In the 1980s, the “denialists,” led by a false prophet who was not an epidemiologist, took hold. Basically, they were centred among visible minories and gay males who were the chief victims of AIDS. c) It’s always hard to talk about motivation; however, we do have the right to speculate. Among gays, the denialists wanted to destigmatize themselves, but also to facilitate and promote sexual activity in an age of fear. I have no doubt that they had little worry for public health. There’s also little doubt that this helped spread AIDS among gay men. Among visible minorities, it was always a PR campaign. African nationalists wanted to destigmatize sexual practices in their own countries. On a more general level, this was seen in North America. Recall Tony Brown’s program on national US television, mid-80s, where he attacked the head of the NYC Health Department. The latter’s crime had been to “target AIDS education to poor Blacks in New York City.” In a revolting display of PC, thin-skinned reaction, Brown called that campaign “racist,” even though population profiling is an established and essential epidemiological technique (e.g., it alone helped defeat cholera in the 19th century). The politization of AIDS on the Right is a thing to deplore. However, the fig-leaf constructed by denialists, gay and other, for the past long while, must be exposed as a conspiracy against public health.
Posted 04/07/07 at 12:09 PM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
scott thomas from Canada writes: There is no question that Aids is a disease, and that it is sexually transmitted, and that wearing a condom protects. However, the causal link between HIV and Aids has not been proven, and to jump to that conclusion – to even insist on that argument with legal enforcement – cuts off openminded research that still needs to be done.
Posted 04/07/07 at 10:40 AM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Stringer’s Smarter Cousin from London, Canada writes: scott thomas: “However, the causal link between HIV and Aids has not been proven, and to jump to that conclusion..”
That is just nonsense. There is a tone of evidence that correlates the presence of the HIV virus with AIDS symptoms. People without the virus do not get AIDS. You are being deceptive at the least to suggest otherwise.
Posted 04/07/07 at 12:20 PM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment

Robert Tomas from Toronto, Canada writes: The whole dispute re: HIV/AIDS connection, parallels the other two disputes, namely the global warming and evolution vs. intelligent design, heliocentric vs. geocentric solar system, flat earth etc. Ignorance and at times, plain stupidity dresses in the clock of free speech and plausible alternate explanation, in face of mountains of facts. This is nothing new – the only difference is that Copernicus did not have to put up with the defenders of the heliocentric system posting their “thoughts” and “research” on the Internet. Back to HIV/AIDS – am I the only one noticing, that all the research quoted by the HIV deniers dates from mid 1990’s????
Get with the program, people. As for legal sanction, I’ll be the first one to vote for a government that legislates jail terms for stupidity.
Posted 04/07/07 at 12:32 PM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
scott thomas from Canada writes: Hi Stringer. It’s true that there is a correlation between HIV and Aids, but there is no causation, yet. And I am not being deceptive, I am being open minded. No need for name calling.
People do have Aids while testing negative for HIV. Because Aids is just a bunch of symptoms. And the definition of what and how many symptoms varies from place to place. So that, by definition, you could cure yourself of Aids just by crossing political boundaries where the definition changes.
It is very strange to me the vehemence with which the medical science is debated, and I wonder why that is. However, I am more interested in research moving forward, rather than positions being held stubbornly behind lines drawn in the sand.
The place where we can agree, I think, is that aids is sexually transmitted, and that wearing a condom protects. Where we disagree is also perhaps where a cure might be found.
Posted 04/07/07 at 12:57 PM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Just another Brick In the wall from Northern Ontario, Canada writes: Don’t chalk me up with the crazies (flat earth society) but silly me, i did not even know that there was possibiity the HIV DIDN”T cause AIDS. I must be crazy. I thought it was always a given. Thats what i was taught in school anyway.
Posted 04/07/07 at 1:40 PM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
John Pepper from Toronto, Canada writes: Dear Brick: I don’t suppose you’re crazy, but I assume that you’re very young, and you do have a funny idea of how knowledge works. I’m 61, and when I was already middle-aged (early 1980s) most people had never heard of AIDS and those who knew about it had no idea what caused it. Knowledge isn’t written in stone from eternity to eternity; it’s a continual process of development, including among other things lots of trial and lots of error. Until some centuries ago, it was generally believed that the tomato was poisonous. Imagine a time when Italians avoided eating tomatoes!
Posted 04/07/07 at 2:10 PM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
John Pepper from Toronto, Canada writes: Scott Thomas: ‘deceptive’ isn’t a ‘name’, it’s an attributive referring to an alleged action. The Cousin didn’t accuse you of habitual mendacity, but of speaking deceptively on a point intrinsic to the argument at hand. True or false, such an accusation is not an ad hominem tactic: handsome is as handsome does; if the shoe fits, wear it. Whereas, if one’s opponent, as you have done, had called himself ‘open-minded’, it would be a descent to the level of the schoolyard slanging-match to attribute the openness of his mind to the holes in his head. (I for one would never make such a suggestion!)
Posted 04/07/07 at 2:27 PM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Kathleen Degelder from Ottawa, Canada writes: Montreal hospital–c-difficuli infections {sp?]—Mistaken breast cancer treatments elsewhere—-Tainted blood supply years back—I”m beginning to wonder about the accredation certificates. How long did we have Mohammed or Jihadist in Canada anyways.
Posted 04/07/07 at 2:28 PM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
scott thomas from Canada writes: John, I have no idea what you’re talking about, but I will point out that in Africa, for example, a diagnosis of Aids does not require an HIV test at all. And in any case, the HIV test doesn’t actually test for HIV, but rather for antibodies to it. To jump from correlation to causation -and then threaten prison for those who want to look deeper- is dangerous politics and lazy science. And really John, what we need is less obfuscation on this issue (scientific and, to use your example, written) not more.
I will repeat, what we all agree on is that Aids is sexually transmitted and that a condom protects.
Posted 04/07/07 at 2:43 PM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment

Jennifer Rollison from Canada writes: The HIV-AIDS link denial is a very dangerous tactic. In fact, one may call it a hate crime. Does anyone remember Jim Keegstra? Do you want anyone telling your children lies such as he told. I just don’t understand the motivation behind saying HIV doesn’t cause AIDS. Go to a hospice in Vancouver. Go to the downtown eastside of Vancouver (particularily for the moron Michael Ellner) and ask those people about the link. Go to any urban needle exchange and STD clinic and find out for yourself whether HIV becomes AIDS. It is there, out in the open, for all to see. I believe denying the link between HIV-AIDS is a criminal act.
Posted 04/07/07 at 4:38 PM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
J.C. Davies from Canada writes: “Imagine the scenario: The cafeteria at your child’s high school is frequented by a few individuals telling your children that it’s fine to smoke. They make passionate exhortations that statistics linking cigarettes to cancer, stroke and heart disease are flawed, because many people have smoked regularly without ever suffering ill effects. They say lung cancer is twice as common in women as it was two generations ago because of other causes, such as exposure to jet fuel fumes, a super-poison unleashed by rogue former KGB agents or a shadowy oil-driven cabal. They tell your child that the link between cigarette smoking and cancer is a hoax perpetrated by personal injury lawyers.”
Actually I ‘ve heard people say something like this about marijuana smoke countless times, even in the G&M.
Posted 04/07/07 at 5:38 PM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
David Crowe from Calgary, Canada writes: It is certainly true that most Canadian children are taught that HIV causes AIDS in school. It is probably true that most would consider this belief that they have learned by rote to be scientific. But how can a belief be scientific when the holder has never examined the primary literature?
The fact is that HIV has never been purified, and I challenge any reader to provide a scientific reference showing that this is not true. Purification is necessary not only to prove the existence of HIV but also to validate HIV tests, which are clearly not tests for HIV, but for antibodies or genetic material that has never been proven to be directly associated with HIV.
I don’t understand how people who clearly have never read a single scientific paper regarding the matter of HIV/AIDS causation can support the censorship of research into this area. To me this is the height of ignorance. At least we don’t burn people at the stake any more or I’d be going out and buying an asbestos suit.
Posted 04/07/07 at 5:44 PM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Dee Nicholson from Canada writes: As a health freedom activist, I, along with my thousands of colleagues in dozens of countries, am horrified at the idea of legislation of “truth”, especially when it comes to AIDS. All of you who comment that the HIV/AIDS connection is “undeniable” are merely parroting the mainstream line, and have not done the research on both sides of that argument to learn the following FACTS: 1. Robert Gallo, who was the individual pinning the HIV retrovirus to AIDS, and sex as a means of transmission, NEVER OFFERED HIS RESEARCH FOR PEER REVIEW. Amongst the top researchers in the world, the debate still rages, because the mainstream belief that HIV causes AIDS HAS NEVER BEEN PROVEN SCIENTIFICALLY. 2. Retroviruses typically do NOTHING within the human body. 3. Immune crashes, regardless of cause, are REVERSIBLE with proper supplementation of nutrients, especially Vitamin C; in fact, Double Nobel Laureate Dr. Linus Pauling stated clearly (and has never been rebutted) that “you can trace every disease, every condition in the body to a mineral DEFICIENCY”. As for treatment by pharma drugs, a huge, swelling pile of bodies attests to their FAILURE and TOXICITY. 4. BOTH the Ellisa and Western Blot test packages carry box warnings about their poor accuracy and both are notorious for false positives, especially with pregnant women. 5. AZT, one of the major drugs used in AIDS treatment, is a FAILED CHEMO DRUG which was shelved in 1961 by the FDA because it was considered far too toxic and dangerous even for short, spaced administration for cancer, but now it’s okay to give daily to AIDS patients?????!!!!! These are but a few of the FACTS that the authors have failed to mention. Follow the MONEY, people! AIDS is a multi-billion dollar BUSINESS (check out “AIDS, Inc.” by Pulitzer nominee Jon Rappoport)… and a patient cured is a customer lost. Do not be so blind as to believe that the Pharma companies which benefit from this fraud are in it for your health!
Posted 04/07/07 at 5:56 PM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment

Diane Schweik from EDMONTON, Canada writes: Of course all the evidence shows that infection with HIV leads to AIDS.However,our kids have been taught a load of nonsense for years at public expense.Let’s look at religion based schools for starters.
Posted 04/07/07 at 5:59 PM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
richard kearns from los angeles, United States writes: to the editors: censorship hasn’t worked before. why should it work now? will denialism go away if censored? no. we need a cure. we need a vaccine. those would be excellent responses to denialist “arguments,” if any other need required identifying. why don’t we have a vaccine (which would also be a cure)? frank greeve wrote in the may 22, 2005 charlotte, nc observer: “the basic problem is that vaccines, which typically offer long-term immunity from one battery of shots, aren’t nearly as profitable as drugs that are taken daily. pfizer’s cholesterol-lowering lipitor, for example, with $10 billion in global sales, grosses more than all the world’s vaccines combined.” our lack of a cure is not caused by denialism. nor will or are or were the millions of deaths worldwide excused by greed. caused by it? yes. picking denialism as a major issue is a waste of resources. namaste richard kearns rk@aids-write.org http://aids-write.org los angeles, ca
Posted 04/07/07 at 6:05 PM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment

Jennifer Rollison from Canada writes: So, David and Dee, how long will it be before you begin advocating sex without condoms. You two cannot be serious. While the science may be somewhat flawed, which of you is willing to take the risk? I most certainly am not and I do not expect children to be willing to take that risk either.
Posted 04/07/07 at 6:06 PM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Simon Leigh from Canada writes: But even those who believe that HIV doesn’t cause AIDS must know that infecting someone else with a virus is illegal! If they believe that unprotected intercourse does not spread disease or, for that matter, pregnancy, they should be laughed out of bed. Penetrative sex IS dangerous, and schoolkids should be taught this until they’re clear about what it means. Sex with a condom may not be quite as much fun, but it’s less nerve-wracking.
Posted 04/07/07 at 6:12 PM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Charles Geshekter from Baltimore, United States writes: First of all, everyone should carefully read the thoughtful remarks by Michael Ellner on thgis comments board.
Second, they should wonder why a so-called AIDS case in Africa is so decisively different than one in Canada. If a Zulu, Xhosa, Somali, Kikuyu, or Fulani has a persistent cough, high fever, diarrhea for 14 days, and has lost 10% of their body weight in 8 weeks they have “AIDS.” This is absurd, racist nonsense. Why is that so obviously NOT a case of AIDS in Alberta, Quebec or the Yukon?
Third, the trembling, edgy censorship of Moore and Wainberg – neither of whom are physicians – is evidence of the truly shakey grounds upon which the entire viral theory of AIDS rests.
I have watched those two at public forums and could not stop laughing at their nervousness whenever serious questions about sexual behavior came up.
The key reason why Moore, Wainberg and their fellow true believers will never agree to íeet their critics at an open public forum – but prefer to villify and demonize from their “safe houses” – is because their critics are so easily able to destabilize and discredit their horrific pseudo-science and to point out the flaws, inconsistencies, erroneous predictions, and sheer waste of billions of dollars on their fruitless and barren theories.
If everyone is at risk for “AIDS” via hetersexual contacts, then why has the total cumulative number of “AIDS” cases among heterosexual women in San Francisco amounted to less than ten – 10 – per year for over 25 years?
Posted 04/07/07 at 6:14 PM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
gord winters from Canada writes: people appear to be debatinghte nature of truth without any training.
good luck hicks!
Dee Nicholson from Canada writes: As a health freedom activist,
oh god that’s funny……
Posted 04/07/07 at 6:21 PM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment

Jennifer Rollison from Canada writes: Charles, what does this mean actually? “…If everyone is at risk for “AIDS” via heterosexual contacts, then why has the total cumulative number of “AIDS” cases among heterosexual women in San Francisco amounted to less than ten – 10 – per year for over 25 years?” What about AIDS in 1st Nations communities or with women who have husbands on the ‘down low’. To hold San Francisco up to scrutiny without taking anywhere else or any other factors into consideration is, simply, ignorance. I couldn’t really care less about the two authors of this article. What I do care about are the people I love who have died from or are living a limited life because of HIV-AIDS. For many of us this is not an esoteric argument but a fact of life. How do you account for us and, more specifically, people who have or have died from HIV-AIDS?
Posted 04/07/07 at 6:22 PM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
GlynnMhor of Skywall, Azeroth from Canada writes: Realistically HIV (whatever its role in AIDS) is almost impossible to catch without considerable effort. The issue is, however, useful as a catspaw to promote condom use during sex that protects against far more communicable diseases like syphillis, gonorrhea or chlamydia.
Posted 04/07/07 at 6:27 PM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
West Coast Guy from Canada writes: Many of you folks miss an important point. In fact the moderated discussion here proves that the premise of the editorial is wrong. Discussion must be allowed and people who propagate wrong, hateful, heinous information must be called out by the rest of us who know better. But to limit what someone can say, just because it’s wrong, even if it potentially could cause harm (“potential” being the important distinction between this and yelling “fire” in a theatre), starts us down a horrible slippery slope. Who gets to decide what is OK to say and what should be chargeable? Some moral, or scientific majority? Yikes. I dislike Canada’s anti-hate laws for the same reason. I will stand, vote, write and fight with my Jewish, gay, etc., brothers and sisters to fight the propaganda, to expose the spreaders of it for what they are, but I will never back any law that prevents them from saying what they think.
So, when the authors ask:
“Or would you defend freedom of speech as an important right that must be preserved under all circumstances, even if it might provoke reckless behaviour and even death?”
The answer has to be: “yes, at any cost”.
Posted 04/07/07 at 7:35 PM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
udo schuklenk from Kingston, Canada writes: Quite bemused about Michael Ellner (no medical qualifications, evidence quoted that AIDS is not an infectious disease is only 10 years old, doesn’t even know how to properly cite medical journal articles) and Charles Geshketer, long-suffering HIV dissident and also without any relevant biomedical background, going on about HIV science that by definition they’re not trained to understand. Unlike Mr Geshekter who enjoys travels to Africa every now and then I have lived in southern Africa for 5 years and returned only recently. Anyway, there’s nothing racist about Africans dying in huge numbers of AIDS defining illnesses. Nothing racist about the definition either. Any decent racist would continue denying that there is a massive problem and see the pandemic continue unabated among young Africans.
Posted 04/07/07 at 7:43 PM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
udo schuklenk from Kingston, Canada writes: ps, when I say that there is nothing racist about Africans dying in huge numbers on AIDS defining illnesses I am, of course replying to Mr Geshekter’s claim (made in his posting above) that the disease definition as it is applied to African people was somehow racist.
Posted 04/07/07 at 7:48 PM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
GlynnMhor of Skywall, Azeroth from Canada writes: udo schuklenk from Kingston, Canada writes: “Any decent racist would continue denying that there is a massive problem and see the pandemic continue unabated among young Africans.”
Those who point to promiscuous behaviour typical to many black african cultures as a problematic contributing factor in the spread of HIV-AIDS are, however, routinely castigated as if they were racists.
Posted 04/07/07 at 8:17 PM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
John Bleau from Quebec, Canada writes: As a believer that HIV causes AIDS, I was invited some years ago to look into AIDS dissidence (denialism is an invented term to discredit the dissidents). The first thing I looked for was the studies that established that HIV causes AIDS, and I immediately hit a stumbling block: I could find no such study. Now, when questioning Einstein’s Relativity, I can find a whole rash of studies: measurements of the advance of the perihelion of Mercury, time dilation in cosmic rays, the bending of light by the sun and, of course, the study that started it all, Michelson-Morley. There is no witch hunt against people who would question Relativity which, with so many studies supporting it, is rock solid. People still do question it, though: for example, the Pioneer anomaly may have ramifications on the theory. Now, if theoretical physics were to adopt the mindset Wainberg and Moore are advocating, then today’s string theorists, currently occupying a huge proportion of the important seats in physics departments, could lobby for censorship of their detractors, even though their theory so far has no evidentiary support and is not falsifiable. Rather than produce the following studies: – study establishing HIV as the probable cause of AIDS (as announced by Gallo and Heckler in 1984) – study establishing HIV as THE cause of AIDS (as announced by the CDC shortly after) – study(-ies) establishing that HIV is sexually transmissible, the AIDS establishment calls for the censorship of those who insist on these studies before adopting the HIV/AIDS quasi-religion. (end of part one)
Posted 04/07/07 at 9:36 PM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
John Bleau from Quebec, Canada writes: (part two) Here’s a quote by one of the authors (Moore, recipient of AIDS drug manufacturer Bristol-Myers Squibb’s $500,000 “Freedom To Discover” grant) from the Toronto conference (I invite the reader to Google John P. Moore to gauge the vitriol/sapience ratio in his writings): “Some AIDS denialists [sic] work in bona fide universities. Some even teach students. If this happens in your neighborhood ask the university authorities why they allow this and then write about it. There’s a case in Chicago I know about. Science and health journalists should talk to the editorial desk and letters editors and vice versa to ensure that AIDS denialist [sic] letters are spotted on arrival and spiked, not published.” Now why does AIDS dissidence attract such virulent calls for censorship? Clearly not because HIV/AIDS is well-established. After all, they cannot produce the most fundamental studies, and Relativity is sufficiently well-established to withstand any challenge without calls for censorship. How about to save lives? Here is where the dissidents really touch a nerve. When AZT was prescribed in 1.25 gm daily doses, most patients died within a year or two and all died within three years. AIDS deaths in the USA hovered between 50 and 60 thousand a year. These decreased as a result of reductions in dosage and the advent of combination therapy. However, the former is more responsible for this reduction, since nowadays deaths are under 20 thousand (re: CDC) – a 60-70% drop, though now fewer than ¼ of all patients are taking the medicines (re: Johns Hopkins), which could not, therefore, account for more than a 25% drop in deaths. The ramifications go way beyond this: currently, funds are grossly misappropriated in Africa for a syndrome that, over there, has the crudest of diagnoses. (end of part two)
Posted 04/07/07 at 9:39 PM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
John Bleau from Quebec, Canada writes: (third and last part)
In other words, while accepting grants and throwing themselves laurels for saving lives, these individuals are staunchly defending a paradigm that, while granting one of them half a million dollars, has caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands and seeks to cause more without ever having to look over its shoulder. Talk about casting the first stone.
Posted 04/07/07 at 9:40 PM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
CD W from coldwater, Canada writes: So when will they arrest all of the left intelligencia who got ddt banned and then caused the deaths of 30 million Africans from malaria, and now only reticently agree that nets with ddt might be a good thing? In regards to aids in north america, the specific number ratios of the infected have not really changed significantly since 1986. You can say you wish to educate, but those who are to receive the education always say, “you cant change human nature” , well I suppose then we cannot change human outcomes of human nature. Be sure to wear you gloves and masks and stay celibate.
Posted 04/07/07 at 11:05 PM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Comments are closed

Thanks for your interest in commenting on this article, however we are no longer accepting submissions. If you would like, you may send a letter to the editor.
Report an abusive comment to our editorial staff


Bad Behavior has blocked 1940 access attempts in the last 7 days.