Re: Re: Kaposi's Sarcoma and the Perth Group 17 August 2004
Previous Rapid Response Next Rapid Response Top
Christopher J Noble,
postdoc
Australia

Send response to journal:
Re: Re: Re: Kaposi's Sarcoma and the Perth Group

Alexander Russell wrote:

Regarding 'HIV' and Kaposi's Sarcoma the Perth Group rightly wrote:

"At present it is generally accepted that HIV plays no role, either directly or indirectly, in the causation of KS."

No, the Perth Group are not correct. The generally accepted view is that HIV causes immune suppression which allows HHV-8 an opportunistic infection to cause KS. In addition HIV tat may play a more direct role in increasing the replication of HHV-8. See for instance HIV-1 Tat enhances Kaposi sarcoma-associated (KSHV) infectivity..

What is generally accepted is not necessarily true. The fact that something is universally accepted does not necessarily make it true. People will believe what the 'experts' tell them even after the 'experts' have been deunked.

Which 'experts' are you talking about? The Perth Group and Duesberg? They have certainly been debunked. This has not stopped people like you regurgitating their dogma as if it were fact. Most of what you have posted comes from Duesberg's website. You don't read the basic literature you rely on the distorted versions provided by your 'experts'.

Why does Dr. Noble believe that 'HIV' or HHV-6 causes KS - but seemingly only in a sub-set of homosexuals who snort nitrites (poppers)?

I'm afraid Alex is deeply confused. The virus associated with KS is HHV-8 not HHV-6. This mistake renders much of Alex's argument redundant.

If Dr. Noble believes that HHV-6 causes KS how come it is restricted to this same sub-set of men? Why is KS never found in heterosexuals in India or the Far East?

Again HHV-8 not HHV-6. The incidence of KS neatly follows the prevalence of HHV-8. The prevalence of HHV-8 is much lower in Southeast Asia than in the USA and Africa. Seroprevalence of human herpesvirus-8 (HHV-8) in countries of Southeast Asia compared to the USA, the Caribbean and Africa. The homosexual communities in the US were showing high prevalences of HHV-8 as early as 1978. Prevalence of Kaposi sarcoma-associated herpesvirus infection in homosexual men at beginning of and during the HIV epidemic. The prevalence of HHV-8 in the wider community is much lower.

There are those who suppose that HHV-6 is a universal virus - if that is the case - why does it only seem to cause KS in gay men who take nitrites?

HHV-6 may be ubiquitous but HHV-8 has a very low prevalence in the general community.

At present KS seems to be solely restricted to gay men who snort nitrites (poppers). And remember: of the original early 1980s 'AIDS' cases diagnosed with KS, 100% used nitrites (poppers). Where are all the sex workers in Thailand with KS?

The association of KS with poppers is not 100%. Kaposi's Sarcoma is normally classified into four groups:

  1. Classic - in elderly mediterranean or Jewish men
  2. Endemic - in Africa
  3. HIV related
  4. Organ transplant related
In most of these groups poppers are not a factor. HHV-8 is. It is found in all four types of Kaposi's Sarcoma

The incidence of KS in Thailand matches the prevalence of HHV-8. The seroprevalence of human herpesvirus 8 infection in the Thai population.

Where are all these heterosexual KS in the West? Have the Ashkenazy Jews got HHV-6?

The prevalence of HHV-8 is low in heterosexuals in the West and yes HHV-8 has a high prevalence in the populations that have a high incidence of classic KS. Kaposi's sarcoma and other manifestations of human herpesvirus 8.

Dr. Noble has still not answered my question concerning the fact 'HIV' is considered to be a 'lentivirus' in the West but a rapid virus in Africa? Is 'HIV' a lentivirus' or isn't it? If 'HIV' is a 'lentivirus' why is it the only one considered to be sexually transmitted?

Alex Russell should know that labelling something as a 'fact' does not make it a fact. HIV is considered to be a lentivirus no matter where it is. It is classified according to its genetic and structurall similarities to other lentiviruses. His other 'fact' that HIV is the only sexually transmitted lentivirus is also false.

Also Dr. Noble has not offered me any evidence that 'HIV' is sexually transmitted - it is merely assumed to be without any scientific evidence to support it. The hypothetical 'HIV' is not spreading - merely the non- specific 'HIV' test.

The challenge you gave was for me to 'prove' to you that HIV is sexually transmitted. When I asked Alex to provide evidence that supported his claims that 'Cocaine and other recreational drugs are known to make these spurious wrongly termed 'HIV' tests run 'positive'...' he responded with "My evidence ('reference') is covertly inferred in thousands of scientific papers that make reference to recreational drug-use and 'HIV' positivity. If you deconstruct these texts you will see that 'HIV' positivity is merely a marker for recreational drug-use and/or Malaria,TB, and disease conditions relating to malnutrition and poverty. ". Until Alex makes some attempt to support his own claims I see no point in trying to 'prove' anything to someone that will choose to believe what they want to believe and call it "deconstruction".

My advice to Alex is read less Derrida and Lyotard and buy some basic science books.

Competing interests: None declared