Re: Re: Re: Questions for Christopher Noble & Nicholas Bennett 17 September 2004
Previous Rapid Response Next Rapid Response Top
Christopher J Noble,
postdoc
Australia

Send response to journal:
Re: Re: Re: Re: Questions for Christopher Noble & Nicholas Bennett

Mark Bartlett appears to be using the same type of argument that has previously been used by Peter Duesberg and the Perth Group.

This argument takes the form:

  • All infectious diseases behave like X
  • HIV does not behave like X
  • Therefore HIV is not an infectious disease
So far X has been:
  • All infectious diseases follow Farr's law - FALSE
  • All infectious diseases should be equally spread amongst all subpopulations - FALSE
I said Mark Bartlett's argument appears to be of this form because although he implies that HIV does not behave like an infectious disease he is remarkably vague in saying how an infectious disease should behave. Could Mark Bartlett give us a description of how an STD with a low transmission risk (that varies between risk activity) should behave and how this differs from the observed spread of HIV.

Competing interests: None declared