Questions to Nicholas Bennett and Peter Flegg 11 October 2004
Previous Rapid Response Next Rapid Response Top
Eleni Papadopulos-Eleopulos,
Biophysicist
Department of Medical Physics, Royal Perth Hospital, Western Australia, 6001,
Valendar F Turner, John Papadimitriou, Barry Page, David Causer, Helman Alfonso, Sam Mhlongo, Todd Miller, Christian Fiala

Send response to journal:
Re: Questions to Nicholas Bennett and Peter Flegg

Questions to Nicholas Bennett and Peter Flegg

 

In his rapid response: "Re: "HIV" is not sufficient nor necessary for KS", 8 September, Christopher Noble wrote:  "Nobody is saying that HIV infection is a necessary or sufficient cause of any of the AIDS indicator opportunistic infections or malignancies".

 

1.             Does Nicholas Bennett and Peter Flegg agree with Christopher Noble that "HIV" is not necessary for AIDS?

Yes or no.

2.             If Yes, that is if AIDS can develop in the absence of "HIV", what are the other agents which cause AIDS?

3.             Why for twenty years the "HIV" experts claimed that "HIV" is the only factor necessary for AIDS, that is "HIV" is the only cause of AIDS?

4.             Why for the past twenty years "HIV" has been the only factor considered in the diagnosis, prevention and treatment of AIDS?

Competing interests: None declared