Re: Still no in vivo images of 'HIV'! 15 October 2004
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: Still no in vivo images of 'HIV'!

As I noted previously, there is little I can do to convince Mr Russell of the basic tenets of molecular biology.

If he refuses to accept solid, standardised, tried and tested methods such as virus culture, antigen and nucleic acid testing over "visual confirmation by electronmicroscopy" then there is little I can offer him. I may as well ask Nasa for proof that the moon isn't made of green cheese (or Wensleydale perhaps) by sending up a rocket to bring some back. Where is the evidence that the currently accepted samples of "moon rock" really did come from the moon? There is ample evidence posted on the internet that the initial moon landings were faked: and indeed the issue has probably been given more airtime on mainstream television than the HIV/AIDS dissident views.

I must add that I do not subscribe to that view, before the sparks start flying.

Any reference I supply will not match Mr Russell's criteria: it is clear that he will only accept something akin to a hour-by-hour timecourse study of EM visualisation of seminal or vaginal secretions prior to, during and after intercourse backed up by EM visualisation of blood borne infection, and then a 20 year followup study looking at risk of various OIs and CD4 cell count decline. How far off base am I with that description? I answered the rest of his questions in the last post, but since he refuses to accept modern scientific method (as applied to many hundreds of infectious agents other than HIV) then of course his conclusions based on that data will be incorrect.

Duesberg's points on Lentiviruses are as incorrect today as they were then: as I made clear in my post. MVV, HIV, HTLV - they are all "slow" virus infections, but not all "lentiviruses".

Hans Gelderblom answered the point about in vivo HIV images some time ago, as I passed on. There are many images of HIV in lymph nodes of HIV infected (but not HIV-seronegative) people, as detected by immunofluoresence, EM (with or without immunogold labelling) or RNA/DNA hybridisation. This evidence is more than enough to convince most scientists of the presence of an agent: why not Mr Russell? What do his qualifications as a writer, artist and philosopher grant him that are lacking in an honours degree, PhD and medical degree as regards being able to critque scientific findings? I would have to acknowledge his views on literature and the existence of God...

Nick Bennett

Competing interests: None declared