Hidden in New Yorker piece, a way of moving on from HIV hysteria

How the top ranks could rationalize flipping reality the right way up again

Can you see it? Hint included

The unstoppable Michael Specter has produced an update review in the New Yorker of the latest thinking on retroviruses, which makes a number of remarkable but somewhat unconvincing claims, if you know anything about the topic.

It has one point of interest for all paradigm war observers in HIV=AIDS, however, which provides what in our view is the answer to the vexed question all informed supporters and promoters of the paradigm HIV-is-the-cause-of-AIDS secretly worry over, namely, How the heck do we get out of this debacle?

The hippopotamus in the AIDS bath

For any admission of what has really been going on in the past twenty years in HIV=AIDS – possibly over a hundred billion dollars spent, much of it public money, on an absurd, unsubstantiated, self-contradicting paradigm dreamed up by a known rascal and perpetrated by a self serving bureaucrat with the scientific grasp of a gnat on a world he prevents from reviewing it by barring respectable reporters from even mentioning the topic of all the excellent papers in the AIDS literature rejecting the tenets of the overarching but hollow belief.

Papers, that is, written not only by Duesberg but also by none other than Anthony Fauci and our heroic debunker basher John P. “I am not a macaque, but a fine scientist who tests microbicide on the nether regions of macaques” Moore of Weill-Cornell – threatens to bring the grand institutions and great names of science into such disrepute that they will never recover their authority.

Imagine if Science and Nature had to admit a failure of peer review so embarrassing that twenty years of study and discussion are revealed to have been based on a very silly and unjustified belief, one that has led to dosing hundreds of thousands of people – potentially millions – with extremely damaging drugs that have not only failed to rescue patients suffering from other, misattributed, real illnesses but actually hurried them to their graves, patients who have included some of the most important cultural figures in America?

Imagine what effect that would have on public and charitable support and funding of these august institutional and personal pillars of the scientific community, most of which is not to blame for this vast fiasco.

Where would that leave the reputation of the Lasker Awards, who have dispensed more than one prize to those who promote this insupportable distortion of science, though they have not been followed by a prize from the Nobel committee in the usual way, a fact that gives one hope that there are those in Stockholm who are better informed on what is going on, and reluctant to give the greatest accolade to such as Robert Gallo.

After all, a Nobel is meant to recognize good done to humanity, not a self serving claim which has been bolstered by artificial support from a censoring NIH and sickened and polished off so many people, including such names as Rock Hudson and Arthur Ashe, and is now threatening the black community in America as well as so many new recruits to AIDS meme thinking in Africa and Asia.

The consequences are so dire that it is almost inconceivable that a public disavowal of HIV will ever take place at the top level, where it should take place, if those perched there were ever to meet their public responsibility in the matter.

This is the hippopotamus in the HIV=AIDS bath, so to speak, the unacknowledged problem all sophisticated observers can see, regardless of which side they fight on in public, that is to say, whether they still promote the now thoroughly debunked paradigm, or whether they are debunkers who struggle to get coverage of its utterly specious and indefensible nature into the mainstream media.

Media, that is, served by science reporters who have absolutely no interest in going up against the solid array of authority figures, scientific institutions, governments and international organizations around the world who have signed on to the paradigm as instructed by Science, Nature and the rest of the supposedly authoritative scientific journals we all know and trust, until we find out how wrong they can be.

A solution appears, hidden in Specter’s piece

But now we have a solution of how to make this transition so no one gets hurt, thanks to the fellow traveling HIV=AIDS reporter Specter, who as usual clearly has no idea at all as to the truth or falsehood of any of the material he covers in this field, but merely acts as an excellent conduit of the claims and interpretations of the fine scientists he talks to into the pages of the indispensable New Yorker, a very fine magazine that we all know and trust.

Trust until, that is, until we find out how wrong it can be if its superb reporters don’t somehow find some way to employ a little investigation on their own when dealing with scientists, who are after all as human as the rest of us, and therefore likely to include one or two bad apples who try to pull the wool over the eyes of unsuspecting, politely uncritical interpreters of their story such as the inimitable Specter.

See if you can detect the exit door to the HIV=AIDS global debacle opened by the presumably unwitting Michael in this story, which was in the December 3 issue and is now available in full at Darwin’s Surprise: Why are evolutionary biologists bringing back extinct deadly viruses?



““The most obvious implication is that we can no longer say that H.I.V. could not become endogenous,’’ John Coffin, of Tufts, told me, though he still considers that unlikely. “It opens the field to a whole new level of examination.” It also considerably alters the phylogenetic tree. RELIK is at least seven million years old, which makes it the oldest known lentivirus. “It is possible that primate lentiviruses such as H.I.V. and S.I.V.’’— its simian cousin —“are much older than people ever thought,” Coffin said.”