Re: Re: Mice May Have Good Reason to Fear Male Pigs 30 September 2004
Previous Rapid Response Next Rapid Response Top
Tony Floyd,
Medical Student
Newcastle University,
Louis Feinberg, Joseph Wardell, Moses Horwitz and Jennifer Hawkins

Send response to journal:
Re: Re: Re: Mice May Have Good Reason to Fear Male Pigs

Certain misrepresentations of research are evident from the abstract alone. Others require looking at the entire paper to see how the author's work has been falsely cited. For example:

> Why is Dr. Bennett concerned about vitamin A harming infants, yet AZT is perfectly acceptable when there is a wealth of data showing it is a teratogen, mutagen and carcinogen, which in turn leads to neurological problems, mitochondrial dysfunction and death? Does Dr. Bennett have proof that AZT is less toxic than vitamin A? Is vitamin A more carginogenic, more strongly oxidising than, and more destructive to mitochondria than AZT (among other body tissues)? This is a critical question when one considers the unequivocal data showing 'the current standard of care' to be potently toxic and harmful to infants. A few examples can best illustrate this: 1. In the study, 'Rapid disease progression in HIV-1 perinatally infected children born to mothers receiving zidovudine monotherapy during pregnancy', reported in May 1999 in AIDS, (13:927-33) de Martino et al. reported that: Comparison of HIV-1-infected children whose mothers were treated with ZDV with children whose mothers were not treated showed that the former [AZT treated] group had a higher probability of developing severe disease (57.3%..versus 37.2%)..or severe immune suppression (53.9%..versus 37.5%..) and a lower survival [rate] (72.2%..versus 81.0%..).

The discussion on page 931 of the article (1) states that:

"Our study suggests that children who fail ZDV prophylaxis are more likely to have a rapid course of HIV-1 infection compared with children born to untreated mothers..."

They were comparing the progression of babies of untreated HIV positive mothers with those who FAILED ZDV prophylaxis. They were NOT suggesting that any baby exposed to ZDV in-utero fared worse (on average) than babies of untreated HIV positive women.

In fact the first sentence of the introduction (p 928) clearly stated that:

"The Pediatric AIDS Clinical Trial Group (PACTG) protocol 076 clearly showed that a three-part regimen of zidovudine (ZDV) during pregnancy, labour and the newborn period decreases the mother-to-child transmission of HIV-1 by about 70%..."

Are the ALT-AIDS Inc members just anti-vax fanatics in disguise? Or did you all go to the same school of how adulterate scientific evidence?

***

References:

(1) Rapid disease progression in HIV-1 perinatally infected children born to mothers receiving zidovudine monotherapy during pregnancy. The Italian register for HIV Infection in Children. AIDS. 1999 May 28;13(8):927-33. PMID: 10371173

Competing interests: None declared