Re: Analysis: the properness of the HIV hypothesis is a media hype 18 March 2005
Previous Rapid Response Next Rapid Response Top
Nicholas Bennett,
Infectious Disease Postdoc/Clinician
Department of Pediatrics, University Hospital, Syracuse NY

Send response to journal:
Re: Re: Analysis: the properness of the HIV hypothesis is a media hype

The "60 or so reputable experts" can effectively be boiled down to Duesberg, the Perth Group and their followers. Other commentators have chipped in with one or two specific points (Mullis, De Harven, Giraldo) but that's about it. Anyone who studies this sad field for more than a few months will quickly realise that.

If one takes the arguments of Duesberg and the Perth Group out of the dissident literature, there is very little else. Arguably without their underlying framework none of the others would have even said anything at all.

Interestingly, in searching the dissident websites there is almost no mention of any mainstream researchers except for Ho, Montagnier and Gallo. The work of Mellors which neatly shows that HIV viral load predicts progression to AIDS is ignored. That of Pantaleo which states clearly that lymph nodes are the site to judge HIV infection, rather than peripheral blood is nowhere to be found. In fact none of the _thousands_ of reputable orthodox scientists are represented in their arguments or their results explained away according to the dissident logic. Rather they are simply ignored.

When one such as myself attempts to contribute to the dissident forums he is silenced, censored, and eventually banned from contributing. This even when pointing out non-HIV related science such as the link between cervical cancer and HPV infection (greater than 98% last I heard). It's as if the moderators prefer to keep their readers uneducated, because that's the only way the anti-HIV pseudoscience can persist. "Reputable" dissidents such as Duesberg and Bialy choose to ignore or abuse those who attempt to confront them (a recent week-long diatribe by the good Dr Bialy against myself on a public discussion board caused considerable embarrassment to the dissident cause recently for example). The Perth Group of course have been repeatedly shown on this forum to have misrepresented or ignored the literature, and have not accepted or conceded a single criticism of their "science".

HIV causes a single disease, AIDS. How that manifests will naturally depend on what other infectious agents are currently likely to infect the particular individual. It's no different from any other immune deficiency syndrome. Is that really so hard to accept?

Nick Bennett

Competing interests: None declared