Re: Re: Re: Re: Request for Peter Flegg 18 November 2004
Previous Rapid Response Next Rapid Response Top
Mark Bartlett,
CD Investigator
Canada

Send response to journal:
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Request for Peter Flegg

To Mr. Nicholas Bennett:

You said: "why not just accept the fact that the prediction was wrong because it made incorrect assumptions about human behaviour...?"

I question that this is the case, assuming I understand your comment correctly. Predictions about human behaviour were not wrong. Human behaviour has remained relatively consistent, particularly with respect to unprotected sex. In fact, there is probably as much now as ever.

I think those who question that HIV = AIDS hypothesis are to be somewhat forgiven for their skepticism. So many of the expert predictions have proven to be wrong, that it has cast a dim light over the entire science of HIV.

There is no doubt that AIDS continues to be associated with certain high risk groups (drug users, those who engage in passive anal sex and countries with horrible poverty) and has never, in any significant way (in the Western world), moved into the heterosexual population. This is one prediction that was terribly wrong.

How can HIV be equally divided among the sexes in Africa and not so in the Western world. Again, another paradox, at least as far as I am concerned, and one that needs to be answered clearly before I am going to be convinced there is not something else at play.

It just seems to me that where you find HIV, you also seem to find other things that might explain/contribute to the immune deficiency -- rarely do you find HIV in the absence of these other risk associations.

As far as infections go, most people are equally susceptible to acquiring a particular bug, notwithstanding things that make all people more susceptible. I have never heard of microbes that discriminate based on geographic location.

I could go on and list more of these inconsistencies, but they have been discussed here many times before. Suffice to say, that perhaps on of the greatest disservices that has ever been done by the AIDS establishment, is the massive politicalization of HIV. Therein lies a huge part of the problem because science seems to have been superceded by politics to such a degree, nobody is now sure where one starts and the other leaves off. We all know the reason why, but IMO it has been VERY damaging to the HIV = AIDS cause and perhaps of the key reasons there is so much skepticism today.

Competing interests: None declared